Risk-based ethics—myth or reality?

Bruno  Zeller; Mirella Atherton

doi:10.55092/let20250003

Article

Open Access

Expand

Risk-based ethics—myth or reality?

download PDF

Bruno Zeller¹, Mirella Atherton²^,∗

¹ Sir Zelman Cowen Centre, Victoria University, Melbourne, Australia

² School of Law and Justice, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia

* Mirella.Atherton@newcastle.edu.au

Volume
Volume 2 Issue 1, 2025
Citation
Zeller B, Atherton M. Risk-based ethics—myth or reality? . Law Ethics Technol. 2025(1):0003, https://doi.org/10.55092/let20250003.
DOI
10.55092/let20250003
Copyright
Copyright2025 by the authors. Published by ELSP.

Abstract

It is abundantly clear that the digital revolution involves changes in every corner of our lives. It is affecting the economy by increasing efficiency and hence profitability, but these new developments have also affected everyday transactions of the traditional middle class. The changes have given rise to global and multinational shifts which increasingly affect sectors of our domestic economic structure. The technology giants control the digital systems and hence control our personal information, that is the way we live and interact in a social setting. This has changed the very fabric of society. It is important to recognise these changes as the inevitable fact is that the digital revolution is here to stay and indeed it has not run its course yet. New institutional frameworks have emerged and these are untested. We are experiencing changes to our existing social reality but without all the necessary understandings of our new reality. This paper will ask how and importantly whether a risk based ethical construct can protect our personal security and our privacy.

Keywords

digital revolution, ethics, data, security, privacy

Preview

view pdf

References

[1]Hasselbalch G. Data ethics of power, 1st ed. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 202 pp. 15,31,33,36,39,46,73,78,90.
[2]Meng R. Who rules the world. Available: https://www.frankfurter-hefte.de/aktuelle-ausgabe/ (accessed on 25 October 2024).
[3]Saul JR. The Collapse of globalism and the reinvention of the world, 1st ed. Toronto: Viking Canada, 2005. p. 35.
[4]De Tocqueville A. Democracy in America, 1st ed. New York: Vintage Books, 1945. p. 6.
[5]Timmers P. Ethics of AI and cybersecurity when sovereignty is at stake. Mines Mach. 2019, 29(4):635–64
[6]Zuboff S. The age of surveillance capitalism: the fight for a human future at the new frontier of power, 1st ed. New York: PublicAffairs, 2019. pp. 127,203–213.
[7]Rawls J. A theory of justice, Rev. ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999. p. 21.
[8]Bauman Z, Lyon D. Liquid surveillance: a conversation, 1st ed. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2013. p. 20.
[9]Gellert R. The role of the risk-based approach in the General Data Protection Regulation and in the European Commission’s proposed Artificial Intelligence Act: business as usual? J. Ethics Legal Technol. 2021, 3(2):15,16,27.
[10]Le Coze JC, Antonsen S. Safety in the digital age: sociotechnical perspectives on algorithms and machine learning, 1st ed. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2023. p. 137.
[11]Florackis C, Louca C, Michaely R, Weber M, Goldstein I. Cybersecurity risk. Rev. Financ. Stud. 2023, 36(1):351–407.
[12]Priyadarshini I, Cotton C. Cybersecurity: ethics, legal, risks, and policies, 1st ed. Palm Bay: Apple Academic Press, 2022.
[13]Shoemaker D, Kohnke A, Laidlaw G. Ethics and cybersecurity are not mutually exclusive. EDPACS 2019, 60(1):1–10.
[14]Posner R. The problem of jurisprudence, 1st ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993. p. 76.
[15]Macnish K, Van der Ham J. Ethics in cybersecurity research and practice. Technol. Soc. 2020, 63:101382,101387.
[16]Australian Government. Financial sector (collection of data) (reporting standard) determination No. 5 of 2024. 2024. Available: https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2024L00434/asmade/text (accessed on 17 October 2024).
[17]Vallor S. An introduction to cybersecurity ethics. 2018, pp. 2,3,8–10,15–16. Available: https://www.scu.edu/media/ethics-center/technology-ethics/IntroToCybersecurityEthics.pdf (accessed on 25 October 2024).
[18]Andrew J, Baker M. The general data protection regulation in the age of surveillance capitalism. J. Bus. Ethics 168,3:565–578.
[19]Williams AD. The revisionist difference principle. Can. J. Philos. 1995, 25(2):257–281.
[20]European Union. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) (Text with EEA relevance). Available: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/search.html?scope=EURLEX&text=GDPR&lang=en&type=quick&qid=1748482409106 (accessed on 25 October 2024).
[21]European Commission. Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and Amending Certain Union Legislative Act. 2021, pp. 1–26. Available: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52021PC0206 (accessed on 2 October 2024).
[22]Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. What is the economic function of a bank? 2001. Available: https://www.frbsf.org/education/publications/doctor-econ/2001/july/bank-economic-function (accessed on 20 October 2024).
[23]Hess A. Ulrich Beck: pioneer in cosmopolitan sociology and risk society, 1st ed. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2014. pp. 1–193.
[24]Bernard R. Precautionary principle, pluralism and deliberation: science and ethics, 1st ed. London: ISTE Ltd & Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2016. pp. 1–298.
[25]Bourguignon D. The precautionary principle: definitions, applications and governance. 2015, pp. 1–12. Available: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2015/573876/EPRS_IDA%282015%29573876_EN.pdf (accessed on 28 October 2024).
[26]Shackelford SJ. Seeking a safe harbour in a widening sea: unpacking the schrems saga and what it means for the transatlantic relations and global cybersecurity. Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 2021, 30:320.
[27]PwC India. A comparison of cybersecurity regulations: India. 2022. https://www.pwc.com/id/en/pwc-publications/services-publications/legal-publications/a-comparison-of-cybersecurity-regulations/india.html (accessed on 5 November 2024).
[28]Abilock R, Abilock D. I agree, but do I know? Privacy and student data. Knowl. Quest 2016, 44(4):10–21.
[29]Swiss Cyber Institute. A holistic approach to ethical issues in cyber security. 2021. Available: https://swisscyberinstitute.com/blog/a-holistic-approach-to-ethical-issues-in-cyber-security (accessed on 22 October 2024).
[30]Delaney K. A practical guide: introduction to horizon scanning in the public sector. 2014. pp. 1–62. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264534064_INNOVATION_TOOL_KIT_-_Horizon_Scanning (accessed on 6 November 2024).
[31]Cuhls K. Horizon scanning in foresight–why horizon scanning is only a part of the game. Futures Foresight Sci. 2020, 2(1):2.
[32]Publications Office of the EU. Models of horizon scanning: how to integrate horizon scanning into european research and innovation policies. 2016. Available: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/88ea0daa-0c3c-11e6-ba9a-01aa75ed71a1 (accessed on 25 October 2024).
[33]Pawlicka A, Choraś M, Kozik R, Pawlicki M. First broad and systematic horizon scanning campaign and study to detect societal and ethical dilemmas and emerging issues spanning over cybersecurity solutions. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 2023:1–10,173–202.
[34]Kant I. Groundwork for the metaphysics of morals: with an updated translation, introduction, and notes, Reprint ed. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2018. p. 393.
[35]Formosa P, Wilson M, Richards D. A principlist framework for cybersecurity ethics. Comput. Secur. 2021, 109:102382,102385–102387.
[36]Sheth R. Steering the right course for AI. 2018. Available: https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/ai-machine-learning/steering-the-right-course-for-ai (accessed on 10 October 2024).
[37]Winfield AFT, Jirotka M. Ethical governance is essential to building trust in robotics and artificial intelligence systems. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 2018, 376(2133):20180085.
[38]Pawlicka A, Pawlicki M, Kozik R, Choraś RS. A systematic review of recommender systems and their applications in cybersecurity. Sensors 2021, 21(15):5248.
[39]Berger P, Luckmann T. The social construction of reality, 1st ed. Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1966. p. 86.
[40]European Data Protection Supervisor. 2013 Annual report−−a single set of rules for all: EU data protection reform can support businesses and protect citizens. 2013. Available: https://www.edps.europa.eu/data-protection/our-work/publications/annual-reports/2013-single-set-rules-all-eu-data-protection_en (accessed on 17 October 2024).
[41]United Nations. Universal declaration of human rights. 1948. pp. 1–8. Available: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights (accessed on 21 December 2024).
[42]Rajamäki J, Hämäläinen H. Ethics of cybersecurity and biomedical ethics: case shapes. Inf. Secur.: Int. J. 2021, 50(1):106–107.
[43]Christen M, Loi M. Ethical frameworks for cybersecurity. In The Ethics of Cybersecurity, 1st ed. Cham: Springer Nature, 2020. pp. 73–93.
[44]Narayanan A, Zevenbergen B. No encore for encore? Ethical questions for web-based censorship measurement. 2015, pp. 1–23. Available: https://bdes.datasociety.net/council-output/case-study-no-encore-for-encore (accessed on 25 October 2024).
[45]Wagner DN. Economic patterns in a world with artificial intelligence. Evol. Inst. Econ. Rev. 2020, 17(1):111.
[46]Boyd T. CEOs pour money into cybersecurity protection. 2023. Available: https://www.afr.com/technology/ceos-pouring-money-into-cybersecurity-protection-20230103-p5ca3w (accessed on 11 April 2024).
[47]Spring T. Researchers: MedSec, muddy waters set bad precedent with St. Jude medical short. 2016. https://threatpost.com/researchers-medsec-muddy-waters-set-bad-precedent-with-st-jude-medical-short/120266/ (accessed on 20 December 2024).
[48]Oxford English Dictionary. Available: https://www.oed.com/search/dictionary/?scope=Entries&q=ethics (accessed on 18 October 2024).
[49]European Data Protection Supervisor. 2016. Available: nullnullhttps://www.edps.europa.eu/general-data-protection-regulation_ennull (accessed on 12 March 2025).
[50]Pasquale F. New laws of robotics: defending human expertise in the age of AI, 1st ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2020. p. 330.
[51]Bridgewater R, O’Neil C. Weapons of math destruction, how big data increases inequality and threatens democracy, 1st ed. New York: Penguin Random House, 2016. p. 5.