Advertisement

Understanding the Cloud: The Social Implications of Cloud Computing and the Need for Accountability

  • Maartje G. H. Niezen
  • Wouter M. P. Steijn
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8937)

Abstract

Five years ago, cloud computing was one of the top emerging new technologies, nowadays it is almost common place. This rapid introduction of cloud business models in our society coincides with critical questions on the cloud’s risks, such as security and privacy. Moreover, there seems to be an increased demand for accountable behaviour in the cloud. This paper explores how society understands the cloud, its related risks and the need for accountability in the cloud. This exploration provides insight in the social implications of cloud and future Internet services and the way cloud and accountability tools will be adopted in society.

Keywords

Cloud computing Accountability Public understanding 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement no: 317550 The Cloud Accountability Project (A4Cloud).

References

  1. 1.
    Fenn, J.: Inside the Hype Cycle: What’s Hot and What’s Not in 2009 (2009). http://my.gartner.com/it/content/1101800/1101817/august12_hype_cycle_final_jfenn.pdf
  2. 2.
    Jasanoff, S.: In the democracies of DNA: ontological uncertainty and political order in three states. New Genet. Soc. 24, 139–156 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marris, C., Wynne, B., Simmons, P., Weldon, S.: Public perceptions of agricultural biotechnologies in Europe. Final report of the PABE research project funded by the Commission of European Communities. Contract Number FAIR CT98-3844 DG12-SSMI (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mulkay, M.: The Embryo Research Debate: Science and the Politics of Reproduction. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beck, U.: From industrial society to the risk society: questions of survival, social structure and ecological enlightenment. Theory Cult. Soc. 9, 97–123 (1992). doi: 10.1177/026327692009001006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hood, C.: Accountability and transparency: siamese twins, matching parts, awkward couple? West Eur. Polit. 33, 989–1009 (2010). doi: 10.1080/01402382.2010.486122 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Raab, C.: The meaning of the word “accountability” in the information privacy context. In: Managing Privacy through Accountability, p. 15 (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Macoubrie, J.: Nanotechnology: public concerns, reasoning and trust in government. Public Underst. Sci. 15, 221–241 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stoker, G.: Governance as theory: five propositions. Int. Soc. Sci. J. 50, 17–28 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Renn, O., Klinke, A., Asselt, M.: Coping with complexity, uncertainty and ambiguity in risk governance: a synthesis. AMBIO 40, 231–246 (2011). doi: 10.1007/s13280-010-0134-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alnemr, R.: Reputation Object Representation Model for Enabling Reputation Interoperability. Potsdam University, Potsdam (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Svantesson, D., Clarke, R.: Privacy and consumer risks in cloud computing. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 26, 391–397 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Almorsy, M., Grundy, J., Müller, I.: An analysis of the cloud computing security problem. Presented at the Proceedings of APSEC 2010 Cloud Workshop, Sydney, Australia, 30 November 2010Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    KPMG: Embracing the cloud. Global cloud survey (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    KPMG: The cloud takes shape. Global cloud survey (2013)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Niezen, M., Prüfer, P., Leenes, R.E., Nuñez, D., Agudo, I., Fernandez Gago, C., Koulouris, T., Alnemr, R.: A4Cloud D:B-4.1 Interim report. Tilburg University, TILT (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    De Oliviera, A., Garaga, A., Martucci, L.A., Felici, M., Alnemr, R., Stefanatou, D., Niezen, M., Fernandez, C., Nuñez, D., Hasnain, B., Vranaki, A., Cayirci, E.: D:C-6.1: Risk and trust accountability in the cloud. SAP (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    ENISA: Cloud Computing: Benefits, risks and recommendation for information security (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wright, D.: The state of the art in privacy impact assessment. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 28, 54–61 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Purtova, N., Kosta, E., Koops, B.J.: Laws and reputation for digital health. In: Requirements Engineering for Digital Health and Care. Springer, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rip, A., Misa, T.J., Schot, J.: Managing Technology in Society. Pinter Publishers London, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Castells, M.: Informationalism, networks, and the network society: a theoretical blueprint. In: Castells, M. (ed.) The Network Society: A Cross-Cultural Perspective, pp. 3–45. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Buyya, R., Yeo, C.S., Venugopal, S., Broberg, J., Brandic, I.: Cloud computing and emerging IT platforms: vision, hype, and reality for delivering computing as the 5th utility. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 25, 599–616 (2009). doi: 10.1016/j.future.2008.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Smith, M.: Concerns about surveillance ‘fanciful,’ British official says. CNN (2013). http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/09/world/nsa-data-mining/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
  25. 25.
    Jain, V.: The Snowden effect, changing the course of cloud security. PandoDaily (2013). http://pando.com/2013/09/11/the-snowden-effect-changing-the-course-of-cloud-security/
  26. 26.
    Marshall, C., Tang, J.C.: That syncing feeling: early user experiences with the cloud, p. 544. ACM Press (2012). doi: 10.1145/2317956.2318038
  27. 27.
    Leenes, R., Oomen, I.: The role of citizens: what can Dutch, Flemish and English students teach us about privacy? In: Gutwirth, S., Poullet, Y., Hert, P., Terwangne, C., Nouwt, S. (eds.) Reinventing Data Protection?, pp. 139–153. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Beldad, A.D.: Trust and Information Privacy Concerns in Electronic Government. University of Twente, Enschede (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hoffman, D.L., Novak, T.P., Peralta, M.: Building consumer trust online. Commun. ACM 42, 80–85 (1999). doi: 10.1145/299157.299175 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Olivero, N., Lunt, P.: Privacy versus willingness to disclose in e-commerce exchanges: the effect of risk awareness on the relative role of trust and control. J. Econ. Psychol. 25, 243–262 (2004). doi: 10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00172-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wynne, B.: Elephants in the rooms where publics encounter science?: A response to Darrin Durant, Accounting for expertise: Wynne and the autonomy of the lay public. Public Underst. Sci. 17, 21–33 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Beck, U.: The terrorist threat world risk society revisited. Theory Cult. Soc. 19, 39–55 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jasanoff, S.: The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2009)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jasanoff, S.: Governing innovation. Presented at the Knowledge in Question–A Symposium on Interrogating Knowledge and Questioning Science (2009)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Guston, D.H., Fisher, E., Grunwald, A., Owen, R., Swierstra, T., van der Burg, S.: Responsible innovation: motivations for a new journal. J. Responsible Innov. 1, 1–8 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bovens, M.: Analysing and assessing public accountability: a conceptual framework (2006)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bovens, M.: Two concepts of accountability: accountability as a virtue and as a mechanism. West Eur. Polit. 33, 946–967 (2010). doi: 10.1080/01402382.2010.486119 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bovens, M.: Analysing and assessing public accountability: a conceptual framework. European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) No. C-06-01 (2006)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bovens, M.A.P., Schillemans, T.: Handboek Publieke Verantwoording. LEMMA, Den Haag (2009)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mulgan, R.: “Accountability”: an ever-expanding concept? Public Adm. 78, 555–573 (2000). doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00218 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hughes, O.E.: Public Management and Administration: An Introduction, 4th edn. England Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke (2012)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Romzek, B., Dubnick, M.: Accountability in the public sector: lessons from the Challenger tragedy. Public Adm. Rev. 47, 227–238 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Romzek, B.S., Dubnick, M.J.: Issues of accountability in flexible personnel systems. In: Ingraham, P.W., Romzek, B.S. (eds.) New Paradigms for Government, pp. 263–294. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (1994)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Koenig-Archibugi, M.: Transnational corporations and public accountability. Gov. Oppos. 39, 234–259 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pearson, S.: Toward accountability in the cloud. In: IEEE Internet Computing, pp. 2–7 (2011)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bennett, C.J.: International privacy standards: can accountability be adequate? Priv. Laws Bus. Int. 106, 21–23 (2010)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Bennett, C.J.: The accountability approach to privacy and data protection: assumptions and caveats. In: Guagnin, D., et al. (eds.) Managing Privacy Through Accountability, pp. 33–48. Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke (2012)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    The Working Party on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data: Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, Opinion 3/2010 on the concept of accountability. 00062/10/EN WP 173 (2010)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Gray, R.: Accounting and environmentalism: an exploration of the challenge of gently accounting for accountability, transparency and sustainability. Account. Organ. Soc. 17, 399–425 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): Classifying educational programmes: Manual for ISCED-97 implementation in OECD countries (1999)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sjoberg, L., Fromm, J.: Information technology risks as seen by the public. Risk Anal. 21, 427–442 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Warren, M.E.: Citizen participation and democratic deficits: considerations from the perspective of democratic theory. In: De Bardeleben, J., Pammett, J.H. (eds.) Activating the Citizen: Dilemmas of Participation in Europe and Canada, pp. 17–40. Palgrave Macmillan, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
  54. 54.
    Apple: Report on Government Information Requests (2013). https://www.apple.com/pr/pdf/131105reportongovinforequests3.pdf

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology and Society (TILT)Tilburg UniversityTilburgThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations