Leading the Charge on Digital Regulation: The More, the Better, or Policy Bubble?

in Digital Society (2023), 2(4), 1-25

For about a decade, the concept of ‘digital sovereignty’ has been prominent in the European policy discourse. In the quest for digital sovereignty, the European Union has adopted a constitutional approach ... [more ▼]

For about a decade, the concept of ‘digital sovereignty’ has been prominent in the European policy discourse. In the quest for digital sovereignty, the European Union has adopted a constitutional approach to protect fundamental rights and democratic values, and to ensure fair and competitive digital markets. Thus, ‘digital constitutionalism’ emerged as a twin discourse. A corollary of these discourses is a third phenomenon resulting from a regulatory externalisation of European law beyond the bloc’s borders, the so-called ‘Brussels Effect’. The dynamics arising from Europe’s digital policy and regulatory activism imply increasing legal complexities. This paper argues that this phenomenon in policy-making is a case of a positive ‘policy bubble’ characterised by an oversupply of policies and legislative acts. The phenomenon can be explained by the amplification of values in the framing of digital policy issues. To unpack the policy frames and values at stake, this paper provides an overview of the digital policy landscape, followed by a critical assessment to showcase the practical implications of positive policy bubbles. [less ▲]

Transition Pathways towards Design Principles of Self-Sovereign Identity

in Proceedings of the 43rd International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS) (2022, October)

Society’s accelerating digital transformation during the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted clearly that the Internet lacks a secure, efficient, and privacy-oriented model for identity. Self-sovereign identity ... [more ▼]

Society’s accelerating digital transformation during the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted clearly that the Internet lacks a secure, efficient, and privacy-oriented model for identity. Self-sovereign identity (SSI) aims to address core weaknesses of siloed and federated approaches to digital identity management from both users’ and service providers’ perspectives. SSI emerged as a niche concept in libertarian communities, and was initially strongly associated with blockchain technology. Later, when businesses and governments began to invest, it quickly evolved towards a mainstream concept. To investigate this evolution and its effects on SSI, we conduct design science research rooted in the theory of technological transition pathways. Our study identifies nine core design principles of SSI as deployed in relevant applications, and discusses associated competing political and socio-technical forces in this space. Our results shed light on SSI’s key characteristics, its development pathway, and tensions in the transition between regimes of digital identity management. [less ▲]

The Social Construction of Self-Sovereign Identity: An Extended Model of Interpretive Flexibility

in Proceedings of the 55th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (2022, January)

User-centric identity management systems are gaining momentum as concerns about Big Tech and Big Government rise. Many of these systems are framed as offering Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI). Yet, competing ... [more ▼]

User-centric identity management systems are gaining momentum as concerns about Big Tech and Big Government rise. Many of these systems are framed as offering Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI). Yet, competing appropriation and the social embedding of SSI have resulted in diverging interpretations. These vague and value-laden interpretations can damage the public discourse and risk misrepresenting values and affordances that technology offers to users. To unpack the various social and technical understandings of SSI, we adopt an ‘interpretive flexibility’ lens. Based on a qualitative inductive interview study, we find that SSI’s interpretation is strongly mediated by surrounding institutional properties. Our study helps to better navigate these different perceptions and highlights the need for a multidimensional framework that can improve the understanding of complex socio-technical systems for digital government practitioners, researchers, and policy-makers. [less ▲]