2023
Kamphorst, Bart; Verweij, Marcel; van Zeben, Josephine
On the voluntariness of public health apps: a European case study on digital contact tracing Journal Article
In: Law, Innovation and Technology, vol. 15, pp. 107-123, 2023.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Digital contract tracing, Liberty, Smart phone apps, Stigmatisation, Voluntariness
@article{nokey,
title = {On the voluntariness of public health apps: a European case study on digital contact tracing},
author = {Bart Kamphorst and Marcel Verweij and Josephine van Zeben},
url = {https://www.esdit.nl/on-the-voluntariness-of-public-health-apps-a-european-case-study-on-digital-contact-tracing/},
doi = {10.1080/17579961.2023.2184137},
year = {2023},
date = {2023-03-03},
urldate = {2023-03-03},
journal = {Law, Innovation and Technology},
volume = {15},
pages = {107-123},
abstract = {As evidenced during the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a growing reliance on smartphone apps such as digital contact tracing apps and vaccination passports to respond to and mitigate public health threats. In light of the European Commission's guidance, Member States typically offer such apps on a voluntary, ‘opt-in’ basis. In this paper, we question the extent to which the individual choice to use these apps – and similar future technologies – is indeed a voluntary one. By explicating ethical and legal considerations governing the choice situations surrounding the use of smartphone apps, specifically those related to the negative consequences that declining the use of these apps may have (e.g. loss of opportunities, social exclusion, stigma), we argue that the projected downsides of refusal may in effect limit the liberty to decline for certain subpopulations. To mitigate these concerns, we recommend three categories of approaches that may be employed by governments to safeguard voluntariness.},
keywords = {Digital contract tracing, Liberty, Smart phone apps, Stigmatisation, Voluntariness},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
As evidenced during the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a growing reliance on smartphone apps such as digital contact tracing apps and vaccination passports to respond to and mitigate public health threats. In light of the European Commission's guidance, Member States typically offer such apps on a voluntary, ‘opt-in’ basis. In this paper, we question the extent to which the individual choice to use these apps – and similar future technologies – is indeed a voluntary one. By explicating ethical and legal considerations governing the choice situations surrounding the use of smartphone apps, specifically those related to the negative consequences that declining the use of these apps may have (e.g. loss of opportunities, social exclusion, stigma), we argue that the projected downsides of refusal may in effect limit the liberty to decline for certain subpopulations. To mitigate these concerns, we recommend three categories of approaches that may be employed by governments to safeguard voluntariness.
2021
Klenk, Michael; Duijf, Hein
Ethics of digital contact tracing and COVID-19: who is (not) free to go? Journal Article
In: Ethics and Information Technology, vol. 23, pp. 69-77, 2021.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: Active responsibility, COVID-19, Digital contract tracing, Digital Ethics, Fairness
@article{nokey,
title = {Ethics of digital contact tracing and COVID-19: who is (not) free to go? },
author = {Michael Klenk and Hein Duijf},
url = {https://www.esdit.nl/s10676-020-09544-0/},
doi = {10.1007/s10676-020-09544-0 },
year = {2021},
date = {2021-11-01},
urldate = {2021-11-01},
journal = {Ethics and Information Technology},
volume = {23},
pages = {69-77},
abstract = {Digital tracing technologies are heralded as an effective way of containing SARS-CoV-2 faster than it is spreading, thereby allowing the possibility of easing draconic measures of population-wide quarantine. But existing technological proposals risk addressing the wrong problem. The proper objective is not solely to maximise the ratio of people freed from quarantine but to also ensure that the composition of the freed group is fair. We identify several factors that pose a risk for fair group composition along with an analysis of general lessons for a philosophy of technology. Policymakers, epidemiologists, and developers can use these risk factors to benchmark proposal technologies, curb the pandemic, and keep public trust.},
keywords = {Active responsibility, COVID-19, Digital contract tracing, Digital Ethics, Fairness},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Digital tracing technologies are heralded as an effective way of containing SARS-CoV-2 faster than it is spreading, thereby allowing the possibility of easing draconic measures of population-wide quarantine. But existing technological proposals risk addressing the wrong problem. The proper objective is not solely to maximise the ratio of people freed from quarantine but to also ensure that the composition of the freed group is fair. We identify several factors that pose a risk for fair group composition along with an analysis of general lessons for a philosophy of technology. Policymakers, epidemiologists, and developers can use these risk factors to benchmark proposal technologies, curb the pandemic, and keep public trust.