Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
Please note that all times are shown in the time zone of the conference. The current conference time is: 2nd May 2025, 12:03:52am CEST
Digital Governance 01: Emerging Technologies and Evolving Accountability Settings in the European Union
Time:
Monday, 02/Sept/2024:
2:00pm - 3:30pm
Session Chair: Hartmut Aden Discussant: Paul Stephenson
Location:Sociology: Aula 9BM
Via Giuseppe Verdi
Capacity: 44
Presentations
Emerging Technologies and Evolving Accountability Settings in the European Union
Chair(s): Paul Stephenson (Maastricht University), Hartmut Aden (Berlin Institute for Safety and Security Research (FÖPS Berlin))
Discussant(s): Paul Stephenson (Maastricht University)
Emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence or brain data mining lead to new risks for the citizens’ fundamental rights. When the European Union starts regulating such technologies, the establishment of accountability forums is one of the core regulatory strategies for the protection of fundamental rights. The panel looks at the accountability settings established in these areas and combines this with perspectives on well-established accountability forums such as the European Ombudsman, the European Data Protection Supervisor and the European Data Protection Board.
Presentations of the Symposium
Accountability of Brain Data Mining and the EU: the Emergence of Neuro-Rights
Maria-Luisa Sanchez-Barrueco Deusto Law School, Bilbao
This paper takes stock of recent developments in the emergence of fundamental rights associated with neural data privacy at the international level and the European Union.
Recent years have witnessed an upsurge in our understanding of how the human brain works. Brain imaging techniques have long helped understanding many brain processes, revealing individuals' attitudes and preferences, and responses to stimuli. Yet, the convergence between neuro-technology, big data and artificial intelligence creates a disruptive scenario whose consequences we only begin to fathom. Smart Neural Implants offer custom-tailored solutions for persons suffering from incapacitating conditions (such as lockdown syndrome or epilepsy), thereby contributing to a more inclusive society.
At the same time, the technologies of smart neural implants are being explored for cognitive enhancement. We assist to the mushrooming of companies aimed at developing or distributing devices enabling the acquisition of new sense by those who can afford it: an inner compass, infrared sight, solving complex calculations using the mind, or accessing online databases. On top of that, successful animal testing has proved the feasibility of surgically implanting artificial memories in mice or removing memories in snails, a human application being not so distant.
The paper introduces the main regulatory efforts to affirm core neuro-rights facing smart neural implants, which remain largely sparse (Chile, the Netherlands, Spain) and ineffective to date. National regulators seem badly equipped to enforce limitations and constraints on foreign companies. The EU emerges as the right level to foster supranational regulation protective of citizens' (fundamental) rights in this field, due to its broad competences under the Treaties; likewise, its claimed role as a global power has earned the EU leverage to broke new international treaties, acting as a pole of attraction for others to follow suit. Through literature review and mapping the legal/political risks of a generalized use of smart neural implants, the paper takes stock of the steps taken in the EU to tackle the emerging need to foster the regulation and enforcement of fundamental rights considering these devices.
Accountability and Artificial Intelligence – Approaches of the European Union’s “Artificial Intelligence Act”
Hartmut Aden, Steven Kleemann Berlin Institute for Safety and Security Research (FÖPS Berlin)
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is renowned to be a black box. This is a particular challenge in the perspective of accountability and fundamental rights. In December 2023, the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission reached a compromise in the Trilogue negotiations for a Regulation on Artificial Intelligence (“Articficial Intelligence Act”), based on a proposal published by the Commission in 2021 (COM(2021) 206 final). The paper analyses the accountability mechanisms that the AI Regulation introduces and discusses how far these mechanism can contribute to the accountable use of AI in a democratic rule of law context with respect to the requirements of fairness, transparency and explainability. The paper also looks at the relationship between additional accountability settings for AI and well-established accountability forums such as the European Data Protection Supervisor, the European Data Protection Board and the European Ombudsman.
The EU Cybersecurity Strategy: Promise and Paradox of a Human-Centred Approach.
Claudia Barbosa
University of Minho, Portugal
Cybersecurity and digitalisation have become a central subject of debate and concern in the European Union (EU). Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic compelled the migration of daily activities (such as education, healthcare, and work) to the online sphere, resulting in a proliferation of digital threats. This underscored the difficulty of safeguarding individuals and their security in the digital realm. The EU is facing a major dilemma in how to remain relevant in the digital realm while safeguarding its core values. In this vein, in March 2021, the Commission presented the 2030 Digital Compass with a vision for the digital economy and society’s future. The EU has adopted a cybersecurity strategy under the label of a human-centred approach in the digital domain, aspiring to be a human-centric digital development model, albeit often with an emphasis on frames such as "strategic autonomy", "geopolitical Commission" and “digital sovereignty”. However, what does ‘human-centred’ mean? Employing the human security concept as our analytical framework, this contribution offers an analysis of the EU's approach in the cyber and digital domains. We undertake a frame analysis to scrutinise whether and to what extent human security has been diffused in the EU's cybersecurity strategies. While identifying an overarching framework conveying the EU core values, the present study also uncovers certain paradoxes within the cybersecurity strategy that compromise the human-centric approach to cybersecurity.
