Advertisement

A Conceptualization of Accountability as a Privacy Principle

  • Christian ZimmermannEmail author
  • Johana Cabinakova
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 228)

Abstract

While accountability is increasingly discussed as a privacy principle, it is far from clear how to achieve privacy protection through accountability. Moreover, it is even unclear how to define accountability in this context. This paper provides a conceptualization of accountability for the context of privacy protection based upon a review of the literature. The presented literature review aims at identifying a minimal core of accountability for the context of privacy protection to provide a foundation for requirements analysis for accountability-centric privacy protection mechanisms.

Keywords

Accountability Privacy Transparency Privacy dashboards 

References

  1. 1.
    McAfee, A., Brynjolfsson, E.: Big data: the management revolution. Harv. Bus. Rev. 90(10), 60–68 (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    OECD: OECD guidelines on the protection of privacy and transborder flows of personal data (1980)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    OECD: The 2013 OECD Privacy Guidelines (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Article 29 Data Protection Working Party: Opinion 3/2010 on the principle of accountability (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Madrid Resolution: International Standards on the Protection of Personal Data and Privacy (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Koppell, J.G.: Pathologies of accountability: ICANN and the challenge of multiple accountabilities disorder. Publ. Adm. Rev. 65(1), 94–108 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Raab, C.: The meaning of ‘accountability’ in the information privacy context. In: Managing Privacy Through Accountability, pp. 15–32. Palgrave Macmillan (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Müller, G., Flender, C., Peters, M.: Vertrauensinfrastruktur und Privatheit als konomische Fragestellung. Internet Privacy: Eine Multidisziplinäre Bestandsaufnahme/A Multidisciplinary Analysis. acatech Studie, pp. 143–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mulgan, R.: Accountability: an ever-expanding concept. Publ. Adm. 78(3), 555–573 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bovens, M.A.P.: Public accountability. In: The Oxford Handbook of Public Management, pp. 182–208 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Greiling, D., Spraul, K.: Accountability and the challenges of information disclosure. Publ. Adm. Q. 34(3), 338–377 (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jaatun, M.G., Pearson, S., Gittler, F., Leenes, R.: Towards strong accountability for cloud service providers. In: Proceedings of the CloudCom, pp. 1001–1006. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nuñez, D., Fernandez-Gago, C., Agudo, I., Pannetrat, A., Luna, J., Berthold, S., Pearson, S., Felici, M., Cayirci, E., TaheriMonfared, A., Chakravorty, A., Wlodarczyk, T.W.: D:C-5.1 Metrics for Accountability. Project Deliverable D35.1, Cloud Accountability Project (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bennett, C.J.: The accountability approach to privacy and data protection: assumptions and caveats. In: Managing Privacy Through Accountability, pp. 33–48. Palgrave Macmillan (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bovens, M.: Analysing and assessing accountability: a conceptual framework. Eur. Law J. 13(4), 447–468 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dubnick, M.: Accountability and the promise of performance: in search of the mechanisms. Public Perform. Manag. Rev. 28(3), 376–417 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Feigenbaum, J., Jaggard, A.D., Wright, R.N.: Towards a formal model of accountability. In: Proceedings of the NSPW 2011, pp. 45–56. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Grant, R.W., Keohane, R.O.: Accountability and abuses of power in world politics. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 99(1), 29–43 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lupia, A.: Delegation and its perils. In: Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies. Comparative Politics, pp. 33–54. Oxford University Press (2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pearson, S., Charlesworth, A.: Accountability as a way forward for privacy protection in the cloud. In: Jaatun, M.G., Zhao, G., Rong, C. (eds.) Cloud Computing. LNCS, vol. 5931, pp. 131–144. Springer, Heidelberg (2009) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rubenstein, J.: Accountability in an unequal world. J. Politics 69(3), 616–632 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schedler, A.: Conceptualizing accountability. In: Schedler, A., Diamond, L.J., Plattner, M.F. (eds.) The Self-restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies, pp. 13–28. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Boulder (1999) Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Strom, K.: Parliamentary democracy and delegation. In: Delegation and Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies. Comparative Politics, pp. 55–106. Oxford University Press (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Weitzner, D.J., Abelson, H., Berners-Lee, T., Hanson, C., Hendler, J., Kagal, L., McGuinness, D.L., Sussman, G.J., Waterman, K.K.: Transparent accountable data mining: New strategies for privacy protection. Technical Report MIT-CSAIL-TR-2006-007, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Westin, A.: Privacy and Freedom. Atheneum, New York (1967) Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Commission, E.: Directive 95/46/EC of the european parliament and of the council of 24th october 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. Off. J. Eur. Commun. L281(38), 31–50 (1995)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Westin, A.: Social and political dimensions of privacy. J. Soc. Issues 59(2), 431–453 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Accorsi, R., Zimmermann, C., Müller, G.: On taming the inference threat in social networks. In: 1st International Workshop on Privacy and Data Protection Technology (PDPT), Amsterdam (2012)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pennacchiotti, M., Popescu, A.M.: Democrats, republicans and starbucks afficionados: user classification in twitter. In: Proceedings of the SIGKDD 2011, pp. 430–438. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schermer, B.W.: The limits of privacy in automated profiling and data mining. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 27(1), 45–52 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zimmermann, C., Accorsi, R., Müller, G.: Privacy dashboards: reconciling data-driven business models and privacy. In: Proceedings of the ARES 2014, pp. 152–157. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Computer Science and Social StudiesUniversity of FreiburgFreiburg im BreisgauGermany

Personalised recommendations