When GDPR-principles blind each other: Accountability, not transparency, at the heart of algorithmic governance

Paul de Hert, Guillermo Lazcoz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Transparency has been at the centre of the debate on algorithmic governance. However, when the GDPR was adopted in 2016, the legislator preferred to establish accountability as the core of the Regulation's principles, rather than transparency. Unfortunately, accountability does not yet seem to be playing the role it was assigned in the data protection ecosystem, at least when it comes to algorithmic decision-making. To turn this scenario around, we propose a reflective exercise in which we look at the concept of accountability and how it was introduced in the GDPR. By emphasising on the human element in algorithmic decision-making, we find a systematic and process-oriented accountability present in the GDPR. Following arguments already made in the literature, we hold that this kind of accountability is well suited for algorithmic governance. Moreover, we argue that it could be strengthened by the Commission's proposal for a Regulation on Artificial Intelligence.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)31-40
Number of pages10
JournalEuropean Data Protection Law Review
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'When GDPR-principles blind each other: Accountability, not transparency, at the heart of algorithmic governance'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this