- Home >
- Services >
- Access to Knowledge >
- Trend Monitor >
- Source of threat >
- Trend snippet: Digitization heightens risk of losing digital autonomy
Trends in Security Information
The HSD Trendmonitor is designed to provide access to relevant content on various subjects in the safety and security domain, to identify relevant developments and to connect knowledge and organisations. The safety and security domain encompasses a vast number of subjects. Four relevant taxonomies (type of threat or opportunity, victim, source of threat and domain of application) have been constructed in order to visualize all of these subjects. The taxonomies and related category descriptions have been carefully composed according to other taxonomies, European and international standards and our own expertise.
In order to identify safety and security related trends, relevant reports and HSD news articles are continuously scanned, analysed and classified by hand according to the four taxonomies. This results in a wide array of observations, which we call ‘Trend Snippets’. Multiple Trend Snippets combined can provide insights into safety and security trends. The size of the circles shows the relative weight of the topic, the filters can be used to further select the most relevant content for you. If you have an addition, question or remark, drop us a line at info@securitydelta.nl.
visible on larger screens only
Please expand your browser window.
Or enjoy this interactive application on your desktop or laptop.
Digitization heightens risk of losing digital autonomy
institutions face a heightened risk of losing their digital autonomy. As social identities become more defined by online identities, users will be increasingly at risk of exposure to
targeted political manipulation, invasion of privacy, cybercrime, financial loss, and psychological or physical harm. However, the responding regulatory “techlash” risks internet restriction, information censorship and cut communications.
User disenfranchisement and governance challenges
At a time when a growing number of human activities are going digital, individuals and institutions face a heightened risk of losing their digital autonomy. Power is becoming more concentrated in markets such as online retail, online payments and communication services (see Chapter Chapter 5, Imperfect Markets). “Digital power concentration”—the sixth most likely long-term risk according to GRPS respondents—could confine political and societal discourse to a limited number of platforms that have the capability of filtering information and further reducing the already limited agency of individuals and organizations over how their data are used. Stretched budgets will limit consumers’ options as they choose digital services and providers that best suit their new needs. Lack of competition between providers by way of offering stricter data privacy policies could prevent users from gaining more control over how their data are collected, used and monetized. Users and consumers could also lose the power to negotiate or revoke the use and storage of data they have already shared, willingly or unwillingly. As social identities become more defined by online identities, users will be increasingly at risk of exposure to targeted political manipulation, invasion of privacy, cybercrime, financial loss, and psychological or physical harm.
Regulatory techlash
Governments across the world are ramping up protection for consumers and increasing regulatory pressures on digital markets in response to the potentially deleterious societal impacts of digital dependency and influence. The European Union signalled, in its draft Digital Markets Act, that it would be clamping down on anti-competitive behaviours. In the United States, a congressional report on the risk of monopolization in digital markets also portends growing pressures on tech companies. Meanwhile, regulations are tightening around providers’ responsibility for illegal activities on their platforms— such as the spread of misinformation and malicious content. A regulatory “techlash” could confront major tech companies with large fines—up to 10% of global revenues in Europe—along with more governmental control and the possibility of breaking them up. Stronger government intervention in digital markets can empower consumers and users by fostering more competition and regulating anti-competitive practices, but breaking up major platforms can also reduce services overall. Without platform benefits, smaller companies may not be able to reach less profitable markets, which would widen digital inequality. In more authoritarian contexts, a distinct threat remains that governments will attempt to take over major platforms and service providers—thus consolidating their power to restrict internet access, censor information and cut communications. Pathways to future economic and societal gains under these conditions would be severely imperilled.