Search

Technology giants, bolstered by weak regulatory oversight, have expanded capacities for personal data collection and analysis. This has resulted in a new set of power dynamics and logics of accumulation collectively referred to as surveillance capitalism. In response, the EU and China have adopted major policies on big data with implications for future social and economic development. Europe's General Data Protection Regulation is a reactive response, asserting individual privacy and placing limits on corporate use of personal data. In contrast, China's social credit system is a proactive response, combining surveillance architectures and AI technologies for purposes of statecraft. Using a comparative approach, this paper analyses the social and economic implications of two societies attempting to move beyond surveillance capitalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the course of the 20th century, the chemicals industry developed various strategies to engage in regulatory processes with the apparent goal of preventing, delaying, or weakening government regulation of their products. Today, the industry continues to employ these strategies to counter efforts to regulate endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), achieving success by exploiting weaknesses and vulnerabilities in existing regulatory structures. This article asserts that industry efforts to counter the regulation of EDCs is comprised of three different forms of engagement, including (1) engagement with science, (2) engagement with the public, and (3) engagement with politics. By demonstrating how individual strategies build off each other and are combined to achieve desired policy outcomes, this article demonstrates how the chemical industry's current strategy on EDCs follows a dynamic playbook that has been developed and improved over years of regulatory engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]