2022
DOI: 10.1080/14650045.2022.2050070
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contested Spatialities of Digital Sovereignty

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The term digital sovereignty is used in different ways and has been described as a largely rhetorical device (Pohle & Thiel, 2020). Yet, when understood as referring generally to attempts of ensuring control and independence in shaping a digital ecosystem (Celeste, 2021; Glasze et al, 2022; Roberts et al, 2021), the described building blocks of a resource regime clearly redeem the EU's idea of digital sovereignty.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The term digital sovereignty is used in different ways and has been described as a largely rhetorical device (Pohle & Thiel, 2020). Yet, when understood as referring generally to attempts of ensuring control and independence in shaping a digital ecosystem (Celeste, 2021; Glasze et al, 2022; Roberts et al, 2021), the described building blocks of a resource regime clearly redeem the EU's idea of digital sovereignty.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The idea of digital sovereignty is often employed to described nation-states’ control over the Internet. Claims of digital sovereignty differ within the context of specific implementations: some scholars argue that digital sovereignty has been emphasised by state with strict approaches to control data policies and where Internet protection agreements are formulated within physical territorial boundaries (Glasze et al, 2022). Others contend that digital sovereignty represents independent decisions and autonomous actions against digital infrastructure and development strategies taken by governments (Pohle & Thiel, 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It became an increasingly relevant concept under the rise of geopolitical context, particularly under the circumstances of data ownership, privacy and national security concerns. Interpretations of digital sovereignty vary under different scenarios, for instance, Glasze et al (2022) unpacks this seemingly complicated idea into several dimensions and then employed them in real-world cases. It involves physical data storage, technological or infrastructural innovations, and legislations introduced to regulate digital platforms.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several countries, most notably China and Russia, have purposefully invested in the development and acquisition of locally owned digital platforms and imposed restrictions on the use of transnational platforms owned by Western corporations (Musiani, 2022; Plantin & de Seta, 2019). State regulation of digital platforms is also increasingly common in liberal democracies of the West, where concerns over security and privacy have led several countries, including the UK and EU member states, to embrace ideals of digital sovereignty (Glasze et al, 2022). The Russian invasion of Ukraine gave an additional boost to these ideals, as several Western countries imposed a ban on media outlets controlled by the Russian state (Sisu et al, 2022).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%