William Drake – Forced data localization and barriers to cross-border data flows: toward a multistakeholder approach – Pre 07 2017: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 17:54, 4 December 2020

5 June 2017 | 15:00 - 17:30 | Room Tornimäe I, Swissotel, Tallinn, Estonia
Programme overview 2017

Session teaser

FORCED DATA LOCALIZATION AND BARRIERS TO CROSS-BORDER DATA FLOWS: TOWARD A MULTISTAKEHOLDER APPROACH

Keywords

They will be used as hash tags for easy searching on the wiki

digitaltrade
ECommerce
datalocalization
DataFlows
privacy
InternetFragmentation

Session description

The past few years have witnessed an increasingly intense debate on the world-wide growth of national data localization restrictions and barriers to Cross-Border Data Flows (CBDF). Localization proposals and policies typically involved requirements such as: data must be processed by entities physically within a national territory; data processing must include a specific level of “local content,” or the use of locally provided services or equipment; data must be locally stored or “resident” in a national jurisdiction; data processing and/or storage must conform to national rather than internationally accepted technical and operational standards; or data transfers must be routed largely or solely within a national or regional space when possible. In addition, In some cases, data transfers may require government approval based on certain conditions, or even be prohibited. Governments’ motivations for establishing such policies vary and may include goals such as promoting local industry, technology development, employment, and tax revenue; protecting (nominally, or in reality) the privacy of their citizens, and more broadly their legal jurisdiction; or advancing national security or an expansive vision of “cyber-sovereignty.”

The stakes here are high. For example, it has been estimated that data flows enabled economic activity that boosted global GDP by US $2.8 trillion in 2014 according to McKinsey, and that data flows now have a larger impact on growth than traditional flows of traded goods. The growth of localization measures and barriers to data transfers could reduce these values and significantly impair not only business operations but also many vital social structures that are predicated upon the free flow of data across a relatively open and unfragmented Internet. Accordingly, specific language limiting such policies has been included in a number of proposed trade agreements, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA). While the TPP has been rejected by the new US government and the forecast for other agreements is cloudy at best, it is possible that at least some of the policies in question are inconsistent with certain governments’ existing commitments under the World Trade Organization’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). Even so, the extent to which these issues should be addressed by trade instruments remains a highly controversial issue, with many in the global Internet community and civil society remaining very critical of non-transparent intergovernmental approaches to an increasingly important piece of global Internet governance, and many privacy advocates vehemently opposing the application of trade rules to personal data.

Accordingly, the purposes of this side event are three-fold. First, it will take stock of the growth of data localization measures and barriers to data flows and assess the scope and impacts of this trend. Second, it will consider what can be achieved via international trade instruments in the current geopolitical context. Third, and perhaps most importantly, it will explore the possibility of constructing a parallel track of multistakeholder dialogue and decisionmaking that is balanced and enjoys the support of diverse actors and perspectives. In particular, we will consider whether “soft law” approaches involving sufficient monitoring and reporting could help to ensure that data policies are not applied in a manner that constitutes arbitrary discrimination or disguised digital protectionism; and do not impose restrictions that are greater than are required to achieve legitimate public policy objectives.

The roundtable discussion will provide input to a report on the topic that is being prepared for the World Economic Forum (WEF) by William J. Drake for release in the autumn of 2017. The report will build on a prior report Internet Fragmentation: An Overview by Drake, Vint Cerf, and Wolfgang Kleinwachter that was released by the WEF in January 2016 http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_FII_Internet_Fragmentation_An_Overview_2016.pdf and provided the framework for a session held at the 2016 WSIS Forum https://www.itu.int/net4/wsis/forum/2016/Agenda/Session/169 ; as well as on the outputs of the WEF/ICTSD E15 Initiative on Strengthening the global trade and investment system http://e15initiative.org .

Format

Highlights of the issues outlined in the report will be presented, panelists will dialogue in response, and then the majority of time will be for open interactive discussion with all participants.

People

Please provide name and institution for all people you list here.

William J. Drake [moderator]

 International Fellow & Lecturer 
 Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
 University of Zurich, Switzerland

Roundtable Participants

Anriette Esterhuysen

 Executive Director
 Association for Progressive Communications

Lise Fuhr

 Director General
 European Telecommunications Network Operators' Association (ETNO)

Nigel Hickson

 Vice President for IGO Engagement
 Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Wolfgang Kleinwächter

 Professor Emeritus
 Aarhus University  (& former Board of Directors, ICANN)

Andrei Kolesnikov

 Director
 The Internet of Things Association, Russia

Konstantinos Komaitis

 Director, Policy Development
 The Internet Society

Gonzalo Lopez-Barajas

 Manager, Public Policy and Internet
 Telefónica, S.A.

Marília Maciel

 Digital Policy Senior Researcher 
 DiploFoundation

Erika Mann

 Senior European Policy Advisor
 Covington & Burling LLP (& former Board of Directors, ICANN)

Thomas Schneider

 Vice-Director 
 Federal Office of Communications
 Government of Switzerland

Lee Tuthill

 Counsellor for Trade in Services
 The World Trade Organization

Messages

Please provide a short summary from the outcome of your session. Bullet points are fine.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-[[Programme overview 2017]]
+June 2017 | 15:00 - 17:30 | Room Tornimäe I, Swissotel, Tallinn, Estonia<br />
-{{Sessionadvice01}}
+[[Programme overview 2017|'''Programme overview 2017''']]<br /><br />
 == Session teaser ==
-'''Until 1 April 2017.'''
+FORCED DATA LOCALIZATION AND BARRIERS TO CROSS-BORDER DATA FLOWS: TOWARD A MULTISTAKEHOLDER APPROACH
 == Keywords ==
-'''Until 1 April 2017.''' They will be used as hash tags for easy searching on the wiki
+They will be used as hash tags for easy searching on the wiki
+#digitaltrade
+#ECommerce
+#datalocalization
+#DataFlows
+#privacy
+#InternetFragmentation
 == Session description ==
-'''Until 30 April 2017.'''
+The past few years have witnessed an increasingly intense debate on the world-wide growth of national data localization restrictions and barriers to Cross-Border Data Flows (CBDF). Localization proposals and policies typically involved requirements such as: data must be processed by entities physically within a national territory; data processing must include a specific level of “local content,” or the use of locally provided services or equipment; data must be locally stored or “resident” in a national jurisdiction; data processing and/or storage must conform to national rather than internationally accepted technical and operational standards; or data transfers must be routed largely or solely within a national or regional space when possible.  In addition, In some cases, data transfers may require government approval based on certain conditions, or even be prohibited.  Governments’ motivations for establishing such policies vary and may include goals such as promoting local industry, technology development, employment, and tax revenue; protecting (nominally, or in reality) the privacy of their citizens, and more broadly their legal jurisdiction; or advancing national security or an expansive vision of “cyber-sovereignty.”
-Always use your own words to describe your session. If you decide to quote the words of an external source, give them the due respect and acknowledgement by specifying the source.
+The stakes here are high. For example, it has been estimated that data flows enabled economic activity that boosted global GDP by US $2.8 trillion in 2014 according to McKinsey, and that data flows now have a larger impact on growth than traditional flows of traded goods. The growth of localization measures and barriers to data transfers could reduce these values and significantly impair not only business operations but also many vital social structures that are predicated upon the free flow of data across a relatively open and unfragmented Internet.  Accordingly, specific language limiting such policies has been included in a number of proposed trade agreements, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA).  While the TPP has been rejected by the new US government and the forecast for other agreements is cloudy at best, it is possible that at least some of the policies in question are inconsistent with certain governments’ existing commitments under the World Trade Organization’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS).  Even so, the extent to which these issues should be addressed by trade instruments remains a highly controversial issue, with many in the global Internet community and civil society remaining very critical of non-transparent intergovernmental approaches to an increasingly important piece of global Internet governance, and many privacy advocates vehemently opposing the application of trade rules to personal data.
+Accordingly, the purposes of this side event are three-fold.  First, it will take stock of the growth of data localization measures and barriers to data flows and assess the scope and impacts of this trend. Second, it will consider what can be achieved via international trade instruments in the current geopolitical context.  Third, and perhaps most importantly, it will explore the possibility of constructing a parallel track of multistakeholder dialogue and decisionmaking that is balanced and enjoys the support of diverse actors and perspectives.  In particular, we will consider whether “soft law” approaches involving sufficient monitoring and reporting could help to ensure that data policies are not applied in a manner that constitutes arbitrary discrimination or disguised digital protectionism; and do not impose restrictions that are greater than are required to achieve legitimate public policy objectives.
+The roundtable discussion will provide input to a report on the topic that is being prepared for the World Economic Forum (WEF) by William J. Drake for release in the autumn of 2017.  The report will build on a prior report ''Internet Fragmentation: An Overview'' by Drake, Vint Cerf, and Wolfgang Kleinwachter that was released by the WEF in January 2016 http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_FII_Internet_Fragmentation_An_Overview_2016.pdf and provided the framework for a session held at the 2016 WSIS Forum  https://www.itu.int/net4/wsis/forum/2016/Agenda/Session/169 ; as well as on the outputs of the WEF/ICTSD E15 Initiative on Strengthening the global trade and investment system http://e15initiative.org .
 == Format ==
-'''Until 30 April 2017.''' Please try out new interactive formats. EuroDIG is about dialogue not about statements, presentations and speeches. Workshops should not be organised as a small plenary.
+Highlights of the issues outlined in the report will be presented, panelists will dialogue in response, and then the majority of time will be for open interactive discussion with all participants.
 == Further reading ==
-'''Until 30 April 2017.''' Links to relevant websites, declarations, books, documents. Please note we cannot offer web space, so only links to external resources are possible.
+AccessNow, 2014.
-Example for an external link: [http://www.eurodig.org/ Main page of EuroDIG]
+"The Impact of Forced Data Localization on Fundamental Rights."
+https://www.accessnow.org:443/the-impact-of-forced-data-localisation-on-fundamental-rights/
+Matthias Bauer, Martina F. Ferracane, Hosuk Lee-Makiyama, Erik van der Marel, 2016.
+"Unleashing Internal Data Flows in the EU: An Economic Assessment of Data Localisation Measures in the EU Member States,” ''ECIPE Policy Brief No. 3.''
+http://ecipe.org/publications/unleashing-internal-data-flows-in-the-eu.
+"Brussels Declaration on Trade and the Internet," February 22, 2016.
+https://www.eff.org/files/2016/03/15/brussels_declaration.pdf
+Business Roundtable, 2015.
+''Putting Data to Work: Maximizing the Value of Information in an Interconnected World''
+http://businessroundtable.org/
+Chander, Anupam and Uyen P. Le, 2015.
+“Data Nationalism”, ''Emory Law Journal'', v. 64, pp. 721-722.
+http://law.emory.edu/elj/_documents/volumes/64/3/articles/chander-le.pdf.
+Crosby, Daniel, 2016.
+"Analysis of Data Localization Measures Under WTO Services Trade Rules and Commitments," ''E15 Initiative Policy Brief'',  International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development and The World Economic Forum.
+http://e15initiative.org/publications/analysis-of-data-localization-measures-under-wto-services-trade-rules-and-commitments.
+Drake,  William J.  1993.
+“Territoriality and Intangibility: Transborder Data Flows and National Sovereignty,” ''Beyond National Sovereignty: International Communications in the 1990s'', edited by Kaarle Nordenstreng and Herbert I. Schiller, Ablex, pp. 259-313.
+http://tinyurl.com/wjdrake-tbdf-1993.
+European Commission, 2016.
+"European Free Flow of Data Initiative within the Digital Single Market," Inception Impact Assessment, 3 October.
+http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/roadmaps/docs/2016_cnect_001_free_flow_data_en.pdf
+European Commission, 2016.
+''Facilitating Cross Border Data Flow in the Digital Single Market.''
+https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/facilitating-cross-border-data-flow-digital-single-market
+Force Hill, Jonah, 2014.
+“The Growth of Data Localization Post-Snowden: Analysis and Recommendations for U.S. Policymakers and Industry Leaders,” ''Lawfare Research Paper Series,'' 2, 21 July.
+https://lawfare.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/staging/Lawfare-Research-Paper-Series-Vol2No3.pdf
+Kuner, Christopher, 2015.
+“Data Nationalism and its Discontents”, ''Emory Law Journal,'' v. 64,, pp. 2089 - 2098.
+http://law.emory.edu/elj/_documents/volumes/64/online/kuner.pdf.
+Manyika, James, Susan Lund, Jacques Bughin, Jonathan Woetzel, Kalin Stamenov, and Dhruv Dhringra, 2016.
+''Digital Globalization: The New Era of Global Flows,'' McKinsey Global Institute.
+http://www.mckinsey.com/business- functions/mckinsey
+Manyika, James, Jacques Bughin, Susan Lund, Olivia Nottebohm, David Poulter, Sebastian Jauch, and Sree Ramaswamy, 2014.
+''Global Flows in a Digital Age: How Trade, Finance, People, and Data Connect the World Economy.'' McKinsey Global Institute.
+http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/globalization/global_flows_in_a_digital_ age.
+Joe McNamee, 2016.
+"Free Flow of Data – What is It?"  ''EDRi,'' 30 November.
+https://edri.org/free-flow-of-data/
+Maryant Fernández Pérez, 2016.
+"Corporate-Sponsored Privacy Confusion in the EU on Trade and Data Protection," ''EDRi,'' 12 October.
+https://edri.org/corporate-sponsored-privacy-confusion-eu-trade-data-protection/
+Pepper, Robert, John Garrity, and Connie LaSalle, 2016.
+“Cross-Border Data Flows, Digital Innovation, and Economic Growth,” in ''The Global Information Technology Report 2016: Innovating in the Digital Economy,'' edited by Silja Baller, Soumitra Dutta, and Bruno Lanvin, The World Economic Forum, pp. 39-40.
+https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-information-technology-report-2016.
+Schaake, Marietje, et al., 2015.
+“Statement on 'Digital Protectionism,’” European Parliament, Brussels, 22 September.
+http://www.marietjeschaake.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/2015-09-22-MEPs-Statement-on-Digital-Protectionism.pdf.
 == People ==
 '''Please provide name and institution for all people you list here.'''
-*'''Focal Point'''
-Focal Points take over the responsibility and lead of the session organisation. Focal Points are kindly requested to observe [http://www.eurodig.org/get-involved/organising-a-session/#jfmulticontent_c2865-1 EuroDIG's session principles]. Focal Points work in close cooperation with the respective Subject Matter Expert (SME) and the EuroDIG Secretariat.
-*'''Key Participants (for workshop) or Panellists (for plenary)'''
-'''Until 15 May 2017.''' Key Participants (workshop) are experts willing to provide their knowledge during a session – not necessarily on stage. Key Participants should contribute to the session planning process and keep statements short and punchy during the session. Panellist (plenary) will be selected and assigned by the org team, ensuring a stakeholder balanced dialogue also considering gender and geographical balance. Panellists should contribute to the session planning process and keep statements short and punchy during the session.
-Please provide short CV’s of the Key Participants involved in your session at the Wiki or link to another source.
-*'''Moderator'''
-'''Until 15 May 2017.'''
-The moderator is the facilitator of the session at the event. Moderators are responsible for including the audience and encouraging a lively interaction among all session attendants. Please make sure the moderator takes a neutral role and can balance between all speakers.
-Please provide short CV of the moderator of your session at the Wiki or link to another source.
-*'''Organising Team (Org Team)'''
-'''As they sign up''' The Org Team is a group of people shaping the session. Org Teams are open and every interested individual can become a member.
-*'''Reporter'''
-'''Until 15 May 2017.''' The Reporter takes notes during the session and formulates 3 (max. 5) bullet points at the end of each session that:
-*are summarised on a slide and  presented to the audience at the end of each session
-*relate to the particular session and to European Internet governance policy
-*are forward looking and propose goals and activities that can be initiated after EuroDIG (recommendations)
-*are in (rough) consensus with the audience
-*are to be submitted to the secretariat within 48 hours after the session took place
-Please provide short CV of the reporter of your session at the Wiki or link to another source and contact the [mailto:office@eurodig.org EuroDIG secretariat] if you need help to find a reporter.
-== Current discussion, conference calls, schedules and minutes ==
-See the [[{{TALKPAGENAME}} | discussion]] tab on the upper left side of this page. Please use this page to publish:
-*dates for virtual meetings or coordination calls
+*William J. Drake   [moderator]
-*short summary of calls or email exchange
+  International Fellow & Lecturer
-Please be as open and transparent as possible in order to allow others to get involved and contact you. Use the wiki not only as the place to publish results but also to summarize the discussion process.
+  Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
+  University of Zurich, Switzerland
+''Roundtable Participants''
+*Anriette Esterhuysen
+  Executive Director
+  Association for Progressive Communications
+*Lise Fuhr
+  Director General
+  European Telecommunications Network Operators' Association (ETNO)
+*Nigel Hickson
+  Vice President for IGO Engagement
+  Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
+*Wolfgang Kleinwächter
+  Professor Emeritus
+  Aarhus University  (& former Board of Directors, ICANN)
+*Andrei Kolesnikov
+  Director
+  The Internet of Things Association, Russia
+*Konstantinos Komaitis
+  Director, Policy Development
+  The Internet Society
+*Gonzalo Lopez-Barajas
+  Manager, Public Policy and Internet
+  Telefónica, S.A.
+* Marília Maciel
+  Digital Policy Senior Researcher
+  DiploFoundation
+*Erika Mann
+  Senior European Policy Advisor
+  Covington & Burling LLP (& former Board of Directors, ICANN)
+*Thomas Schneider
+  Vice-Director
+  Federal Office of Communications
+  Government of Switzerland
+*Lee Tuthill
+  Counsellor for Trade in Services
+  The World Trade Organization
 == Messages ==

William Drake – Forced data localization and barriers to cross-border data flows: toward a multistakeholder approach – Pre 07 2017: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 17:54, 4 December 2020

Contents

Session teaser

Keywords

Session description

Format

Further reading

People

Messages

Navigation menu

William Drake – Forced data localization and barriers to cross-border data flows: toward a multistakeholder approach – Pre 07 2017: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 17:54, 4 December 2020

Session teaser

Keywords

Session description

Format

Further reading

People

Messages

Navigation menu

Search