Privacy Decisionmaking in Administrative Agencies

Administrative agencies increasingly rely on technology to promote the substantive goals they are charged to pursue. The digitization of administration, then, raises the question of how to ensure that decisions about the use of technology in public management reflect the political and social commitm...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe University of Chicago law review Vol. 75; no. 1; pp. 75 - 107
Main Authors Bamberger, Kenneth A., Mulligan, Deirdre K.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Chicago University of Chicago Law School 01.12.2008
University of Chicago, acting on behalf of the University of Chicago Law Review
Subjects
Administrative agencies
Administrative law
Decision making
Government budgets
Information legislation
Information technology
National Environmental Policy Act
National security
Privacy
Privacy rights
Public administration
Radio frequency identification
Regulatory legislation
Statutory law
Studies
Symposium: Surveillance
United States > US
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Administrative agencies increasingly rely on technology to promote the substantive goals they are charged to pursue. The digitization of administration, then, raises the question of how to ensure that decisions about the use of technology in public management reflect the political and social commitments to universal privacy concerns. Having suggested limits to traditional means of external oversight in the privacy context, the authors explore what factors might, by contrast, promote the consideration of privacy. To that end, they examine the implementation of the PIA requirement by two different federal agencies considering the adoption of a single technology: radio frequency identification (RFID). The RFID case studies suggest three areas of significant variance between the agencies that the authors identify as potentially contributing to the disparate levels of compliance with the PIA mandate: 1. the status and independence of a privacy expert embedded within the agency, 2. the decentralized distribution, disciplinary diversity, prior experience, and expertise of the privacy staff; and 3. the creation of an alternative external oversight structure.
ISSN:0041-9494
1939-859X