@techreport{DariusStockmannBrysonetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Darius, Philipp and Stockmann, Daniela and Bryson, Joanna and Cingolani, Luciana and Griffin, Rachel and Hammerschmid, Gerhard and Kupi, Maximilian and Mones, Haytham and Munzert, Simon and Riordan, R{\´o}n{\´a}n and Stockreiter, Simona}, title = {Implementing Data Access of the Digital Services Act: Collaboration of European Digital Service Coordinators and Researchers in Building Strong Oversight over Social Media Platforms}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-4947}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-49479}, pages = {11}, abstract = {The EU Digital Service Acts signals a move away from self-regulation towards co-regulation of social media platforms within the European Union. To address online harms and rising platform power the DSA clarifies responsibilities of platforms and outlines a new technology regulatory framework to increase oversight. One key oversight instrument constitutes Article 40 of the DSA, which lays out data access for vetted researchers, who add value to regulators and the broader public as creators of knowledge, educators, advisors, innovators, and watchdogs. Currently, the EU Commission and national governments make important decisions regarding Digital Service Coordinators (DSCs) that play a key role in implementation. Based on expertise on European public administration and political science we lay out key challenges and success factors of DSCs that will play a role in promoting successful cooperation between DSCs and researchers. We provide three recommendations: First, we recommend to strengthen transfer of scientific knowledge into policy-making by processing publicly accessible publications within public administrative bodies. To this end, capacities of DSCs need to be increased. In addition, we also point towards the database of vetted researchers collected by the Board of DSCs as important resource in order to strengthen knowledge transfer. Second, the DSC network requires agile institutions with fast response time in order to enable researchers to play a constructive role in implementation. This also includes institutional procedures between DSCs and the Intermediary Body and Data Protection Agencies. To avoid delay in implementation agile institution-building needs to start now. Finally, institutional safeguards will help to avoid strategic choice of companies of the DSC of establishment. At the same time, the Irish DSC's capacity should be strengthened compared to other national DSCs since most large intermediary services providers have their European headquarters in Ireland.}, language = {en} } @article{DariusUrquhart, author = {Darius, Philipp and Urquhart, Michael}, title = {Disinformed social movements: A large-scale mapping of conspiracy narratives as online harms during the COVID-19 pandemic}, series = {Online Social Networks and Media}, volume = {26}, journal = {Online Social Networks and Media}, doi = {10.1016/j.osnem.2021.100174}, abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic caused high uncertainty regarding appropriate treatments and public policy reactions. This uncertainty provided a perfect breeding ground for spreading conspiratorial anti-science narratives based on disinformation. Disinformation on public health may alter the population's hesitance to vaccinations, counted among the ten most severe threats to global public health by the United Nations. We understand conspiracy narratives as a combination of disinformation, misinformation, and rumour that are especially effective in drawing people to believe in post-factual claims and form disinformed social movements. Conspiracy narratives provide a pseudo-epistemic background for disinformed social movements that allow for self-identification and cognitive certainty in a rapidly changing information environment. This study monitors two established conspiracy narratives and their communities on Twitter, the anti-vaccination and anti-5G communities, before and during the first UK lockdown. The study finds that, despite content moderation efforts by Twitter, conspiracy groups were able to proliferate their networks and influence broader public discourses on Twitter, such as \#Lockdown in the United Kingdom.}, language = {en} } @unpublished{DempseyMcBrideHaatajaetal., author = {Dempsey, Mark and McBride, Keegan and Haataja, Meeri and Bryson, Joanna}, title = {Transnational digital governance and its impact on artificial intelligence}, doi = {10.31235/osf.io/xu3jr}, pages = {20}, abstract = {The rapid pace of technological advancement and innovation has put governance and regulatory mechanisms to the test. There is a clear need for new and innovative regulatory mechanisms that enable governments to successfully manage the integration of such technologies into our societies and ensure that such integration occurs in a sustainable, beneficial, and just manner. Artificial Intelligence stands out as one of the most debated such innovations. What exactly is it, how should it be built, how can it be used, and how and should it be regulated? Yet, in this debate, AI is becoming widely utilized within both existing, evolving, and bespoke regulatory contexts. The present chapter explores in particular what is arguably the most successful AI regulatory approach to date, that of the European Union. We explore core definitional concepts, shared understandings, values, and approaches currently in play. We argue that due to the so-called 'Brussels effect', regulatory initiatives within the European Union have a much broader global impact and, therefore, warrant close inspection.}, language = {en} } @incollection{DempseyMcBrideHaatajaetal., author = {Dempsey, Mark and McBride, Keegan and Haataja, Meeri and Bryson, Joanna}, title = {Transnational Digital Governance and Its Impact on Artificial Intelligence}, series = {The Oxford Handbook of AI Governance}, booktitle = {The Oxford Handbook of AI Governance}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, address = {Oxford}, isbn = {9780197579329}, doi = {10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197579329.013.16}, publisher = {Hertie School}, abstract = {The rapid pace of technological advancement and innovation has put existing governance and regulatory mechanisms to the test. There is a clear need for new and innovative regulatory mechanisms that enable governments to successfully manage the integration of digital technologies into our societies, and to ensure that such integration occurs in a sustainable, beneficial, and just manner. Artificial Intelligence (AI) stands out as one of the most debated of such innovations. What exactly is it, how should it be built and deployed, how can it be used, and how should it be regulated? Yet across the period of this debate, AI is becoming widely used and addressed within existing, evolving, and bespoke regulatory contexts. The present chapter explores the extant governance of AI and, in particular, what is arguably the most successful AI regulatory approach to date, that of the European Union. The chapter explores core definitional concepts, shared understandings, values, and approaches currently in play. It argues that not only are the Union's regulations locally effective, but, due to the so-called "Brussels effect," regulatory initiatives within the European Union also have a much broader global impact. As such, they warrant close consideration.}, language = {en} } @article{DrapalovaWegrich, author = {Drapalova, Eliska and Wegrich, Kai}, title = {Who Governs 4.0? Varieties of Smart Cities}, series = {Public Management Review}, volume = {22}, journal = {Public Management Review}, number = {5}, doi = {10.1080/14719037.2020.1718191}, abstract = {Research on smart cities is still at an early stage. The conjecture of this article is that smart city strategies and their impacts will inevitably vary across contexts; however, the debate still lacks an analytical toolkit that guides the exploration of such varieties (and similarities) of smart cities. Combining existing research on the governance of smart cities with theories of business-state relations from political economy, this article develops an analytical framework and typology that captures varieties (and similarities) of smart city policies and governance. We apply this framework to four illustrative cases: Prague, Barcelona, Berlin, and Rio de Janeiro.}, language = {en} } @article{ElstonRackwitzBel, author = {Elston, Thomas and Rackwitz, Maike and Bel, Germ{\`a}}, title = {Going separate ways: ex-post interdependence and the dissolution of collaborative relations}, series = {International Public Management Journal}, journal = {International Public Management Journal}, doi = {10.1080/10967494.2023.2271468}, abstract = {Interdependence is typically regarded as the cause of inter-organizational collaboration. But it is also a consequence. Collaboration itself creates new interdependence as partners become more entwined in one another's operations and experience the vetoes, compromises, delays, and risks inherent in joint working. This paradox - mitigating one set of interdependencies by creating another - renders collaborative relations inherently unstable. Dissolution may occur if "ex-post" interdependence becomes more troublesome than the original "ex-ante" trigger for the partnership. We test this proposition through comparative analysis of 13 sustained, aborted, and dissolved inter-municipal cooperations in English local government. Ex-post interdependence was most pronounced in those partnerships that ended in dissolution, and informed the design of replacement arrangements. It was also a contributory factor in the abortive cases. But ex-post interdependence was minimized in the group of sustained collaborations by management actions that streamlined the coordination burden imposed by joint working. These findings have implications for partnership design, the collaborator's skillset, and theories of collaborative public management.}, language = {en} } @article{Garten, author = {Garten, Felix}, title = {The challenge of Chinese digital payment networks}, series = {9Dashline}, journal = {9Dashline}, language = {en} } @article{GibsonBonDariusetal., author = {Gibson, Rachel and Bon, Esmeralda and Darius, Philipp and Smyth, Peter}, title = {Are Online Political Influencers Accelerating Democratic Deconsolidation?}, series = {Media and Communication}, volume = {11}, journal = {Media and Communication}, number = {3}, issn = {2183-2439}, doi = {10.17645/mac.v11i3.6813}, abstract = {Social media campaigning is increasingly linked with anti-democratic outcomes, with concerns to date centring on paid adverts, rather than organic content produced by a new set of online political influencers. This study systematically compares voter exposure to these new campaign actors with candidate-sponsored ads, as well as established and alternative news sources during the US 2020 presidential election. Specifically, we examine how far higher exposure to these sources is linked with key trends identified in the democratic deconsolidation thesis. We use data from a national YouGov survey designed to measure digital campaign exposure to test our hypotheses. Findings show that while higher exposure to online political influencers is linked to more extremist opinions, followers are not disengaging from conventional politics. Exposure to paid political ads, however, is confirmed as a potential source of growing distrust in political institutions.}, language = {en} } @techreport{GoldzweigWachingerStockmannetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Goldzweig, Rafael and Wachinger, Marie and Stockmann, Daniela and R{\"o}mmele, Andrea}, title = {Beyond Regulation: Approaching the challenges of the new media environment}, series = {Dahrendorf Forum IV}, volume = {Working Paper No. 06}, journal = {Dahrendorf Forum IV}, pages = {19}, abstract = {The spread of false information and hate speech has increased with the rise of social media. This paper critically examines this phenomenon and the reactions of governments and major corporations in Europe. Policymakers have turned towards national regulation as a means to manage false information and hate speech. This article looks into the legislative frameworks on the issue in Germany, France, the UK, the Czech Republic, and Italy and compares them. In response to such regulatory pressure, tech companies have been changing aspects of their platforms to deal with this trend, for example through content moderation. We propose tentative alternatives to this current approach towards reinforcing boundaries for freedom of expression.}, language = {en} } @techreport{Griffin, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Griffin, Rachel}, title = {Climate Breakdown as a Systemic Risk in the Digital Services Act}, doi = {10.48462/opus4-5075}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-50755}, pages = {18}, abstract = {Digital technologies have substantial environmental impacts. The EU's 2022 Digital Services Act (DSA) requires the largest platforms and search engines to regularly assess "systemic risks" to various social interests - including public health, physical wellbeing, security, and fundamental rights - and to reasonably and proportionately mitigate these risks. Climate change and other escalating environmental crises severely threaten these interests. Accordingly, this policy brief argues that the DSA requires these companies to take reasonable measures to reduce their environmental impacts. This should notably include following best practices to minimise energy and water usage, including "sustainability by design" obligations to pursue less energy- and resource-intensive technologies, design choices, and business practices wherever possible. It should also include measures addressing platforms' indirect environmental impacts, such as the facilitation of environmentally-damaging behaviour by third-party businesses. Since the DSA's risk mitigation obligations apply specifically to the largest platforms - which exercise significant influence over broader technological and commercial ecosystems - regulatory pressure on these companies to take such measures could have outsized environmental benefits. This policy brief by Rachel Griffin, PhD candidate at Sciences Po Law School, offers a legal analysis of the DSA's relevance to environmental policy and explains why environmental risks are within its scope. It then outlines appropriate measures to mitigate platforms' direct and indirect environmental impacts. It concludes with recommendations for platform companies, regulators, and civil society on how to realise the Digital Services Act's potential to help secure a more sustainable tech industry.}, language = {en} }