It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
In an era of digitalization, governments often turn to digital solutions for pressing policy issues, and the use of digital contact tracing and quarantine enforcement for COVID-19 is no exception. The long-term impacts of the digital solutions, however, cannot be taken for granted. The development and use of data tools for pandemic control, for example, may have potentially detrimental and irreversible impacts on data governance and, more broadly, society, in the long run. In this paper, we aim to explore the extent to which COVID-19 and digital contact tracing have led to policy change in data governance, if at all, and what the implications of such change would be for a post-COVID world. We compare the use of contact tracing and monitoring applications across mainland China, Hong Kong, and Singapore to illustrate both the enormous benefits and potential risks arising from the design of contact tracing applications and the involvement of stakeholders in the various stages of the policy cycle to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. We argue that, while COVID-19 has not changed the nature of issues, such as public trust in data governance, the increasing involvement of big tech in data policies, and data privacy risks, it has exacerbated those issues through the accelerated adoption of data technologies.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Department of Science, Technology, Engineering and Public Policy, University College London , London, UK
2 School of Public Administration and Policy, Renmin University of China , Beijing, China
3 Division of Public Policy, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology , Hong Kong SAR, China