King's College London

Research portal

Big data governance needs more collective responsibility: The role of harm mitigation in the governance of data use in medicine and beyond

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Big data governance needs more collective responsibility : The role of harm mitigation in the governance of data use in medicine and beyond . / McMahon, Aisling; Buyx, Alena; Prainsack, Barbara.

In: Medical Law Review, 11.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

McMahon, A, Buyx, A & Prainsack, B 2019, 'Big data governance needs more collective responsibility: The role of harm mitigation in the governance of data use in medicine and beyond ', Medical Law Review.

APA

McMahon, A., Buyx, A., & Prainsack, B. (Accepted/In press). Big data governance needs more collective responsibility: The role of harm mitigation in the governance of data use in medicine and beyond . Medical Law Review.

Vancouver

McMahon A, Buyx A, Prainsack B. Big data governance needs more collective responsibility: The role of harm mitigation in the governance of data use in medicine and beyond . Medical Law Review. 2019 Jan 11.

Author

McMahon, Aisling ; Buyx, Alena ; Prainsack, Barbara. / Big data governance needs more collective responsibility : The role of harm mitigation in the governance of data use in medicine and beyond . In: Medical Law Review. 2019.

Bibtex Download

@article{60d8336ca7b94a368047b93beda26015,
title = "Big data governance needs more collective responsibility: The role of harm mitigation in the governance of data use in medicine and beyond",
abstract = "Harms arising from digital data use in the big data context are often systemic and cannot always be captured by linear cause and effect. Individual data subjects and third parties can bear the main downstream costs arising from increasingly complex forms of data uses – without being able to trace the exact data flows. Because current regulatory frameworks do not adequately address this situation, we propose a move towards harm mitigation tools to complement existing legal remedies. In this article, we make a normative and practical case for why individuals should be offered support in such contexts and how harm mitigation tools can achieve this. We put forward the idea of ‘Harm Mitigation Bodies’ (HMBs) which people could turn to who feel they were harmed by data use but do not qualify for legal remedies, or that existing legal remedies do not address their specific circumstances. HMBs would help to obtain a better understanding of the nature, severity, and frequency of harms occurring from both legal and illegal data use, and they could also provide financial support in some cases. We set out the role and form of these HMBs for the first time in this article.",
author = "Aisling McMahon and Alena Buyx and Barbara Prainsack",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "11",
language = "English",
journal = "Medical Law Review",
issn = "0967-0742",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - Big data governance needs more collective responsibility

T2 - Medical Law Review

AU - McMahon, Aisling

AU - Buyx, Alena

AU - Prainsack, Barbara

PY - 2019/1/11

Y1 - 2019/1/11

N2 - Harms arising from digital data use in the big data context are often systemic and cannot always be captured by linear cause and effect. Individual data subjects and third parties can bear the main downstream costs arising from increasingly complex forms of data uses – without being able to trace the exact data flows. Because current regulatory frameworks do not adequately address this situation, we propose a move towards harm mitigation tools to complement existing legal remedies. In this article, we make a normative and practical case for why individuals should be offered support in such contexts and how harm mitigation tools can achieve this. We put forward the idea of ‘Harm Mitigation Bodies’ (HMBs) which people could turn to who feel they were harmed by data use but do not qualify for legal remedies, or that existing legal remedies do not address their specific circumstances. HMBs would help to obtain a better understanding of the nature, severity, and frequency of harms occurring from both legal and illegal data use, and they could also provide financial support in some cases. We set out the role and form of these HMBs for the first time in this article.

AB - Harms arising from digital data use in the big data context are often systemic and cannot always be captured by linear cause and effect. Individual data subjects and third parties can bear the main downstream costs arising from increasingly complex forms of data uses – without being able to trace the exact data flows. Because current regulatory frameworks do not adequately address this situation, we propose a move towards harm mitigation tools to complement existing legal remedies. In this article, we make a normative and practical case for why individuals should be offered support in such contexts and how harm mitigation tools can achieve this. We put forward the idea of ‘Harm Mitigation Bodies’ (HMBs) which people could turn to who feel they were harmed by data use but do not qualify for legal remedies, or that existing legal remedies do not address their specific circumstances. HMBs would help to obtain a better understanding of the nature, severity, and frequency of harms occurring from both legal and illegal data use, and they could also provide financial support in some cases. We set out the role and form of these HMBs for the first time in this article.

M3 - Article

JO - Medical Law Review

JF - Medical Law Review

SN - 0967-0742

ER -

View graph of relations

© 2018 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454