刍议大数据治理的三大基础思维

doi:10.11959/j.issn.2096-0271.2022077

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

尝试抽象出既有大数据治理规则背后的逻辑和思维基础。具体而言，梳理了3种性质不同的基础思维，即简单类比、法律移植和规范想象。3种思维在某一特定历史阶段或多或少都存在，并非对立或者排斥关系，而是处于连续的谱系中。为了增进理解，将“路径依赖”作为参考概念。前两种基础思维属于路径依赖式思维，最后一种强调对既有路径的脱离和超越。基于对大数据治理基础思维的梳理和分析，进一步提出关于治理的顶层设计建议。首先，对传统物权（所有权）的依赖已经走到逻辑终点，如果脱离这一认知轨道，如何通过深入触及数据实践的方式设计治理规则是目前最主要的挑战。其次，法律移植是近十几年来大数据治理规则发展的主要引擎，但移植不同于翻译，移植本身也不是最终目的。审慎对待选择性借鉴的问题，以及规则和理论一体两面的问题，是目前移植实践的瓶颈和突破口。最后，与前两种路径依赖式思维对立，尝试提出规范想象的理念，指出适时脱离既有的历史轨迹和思维惯性的必要性。规范想象力的构建是一个复杂且持续的事业，需要同时跨越学科的藩篱，超越纯概念层面的认知，并形成有效的规则-理论互动。

关键词: 大数据治理, 路径依赖, 简单类比, 法律移植, 规范想象

Abstract:

The modus operandi of big data governance was considered, and a typology was provided, which included simple analogies, legal transplantation, and regulatory imagination.Neither contradictory nor mutually exclusionary, all these modus may co-exist at a certain period on a continuous spectrum.To aid the reader’s understanding, the concept of path dependence was used as a point of reference.The first two modus operandi was essentially path-dependent whereas the third was characterized by detaching from any existing paths or inertial thinking.Based on this quasi-methodological account, some high-level recommendations were provided for big data governance.Firstly, as a means of governance, property thinking had been stretched to the logical point of exhaustion.It was of prime importance when and how derails from it while genuinely designing rules around data practices distinct from tangible goods exchange.Secondly, legal transplantation has been the engine for big data governance.Yet, transplantation was far more sophisticated than mere legal translation, and the former was more of a means rather than an end.Lastly, in contrast to the previous two path-dependent methods, a third modus operandi i.e., “regulatory imagination” was proposed, which stressed the urgent need to detach from any outdated paths or thinking.Building imaginative capacity was a complex and lengthy process, requiring interdisciplinary thoughts, cognition rooted in practices rather than concepts, and effective rule-theory interaction.

Key words: big data governance, path dependence, simple analogy, legal transplant, regulatory imaginary

中图分类号:

李汶龙, 袁媛, 安筱鹏. 刍议大数据治理的三大基础思维[J]. 大数据, 2022, 8(4): 34-45.

Wenlong LI, Yuan YUAN, Xiaopeng AN. Modus operandi of big data governance: some preliminary observations[J]. Big Data Research, 2022, 8(4): 34-45.

图/表 1

参考文献 44

[1]	EVANS A C . European data protection law[J]. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 1981,29(4): 571.
[2]	LADLEY J . Data governance:how to design,deploy and sustain an effective data governance program[M]. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., 2012.
[3]	SCHIERMEIER Q . Data management made simple[J]. Nature, 2018,555(7696): 403-405.
[4]	PIERSON P . Positive feedback and path dependence[M]// Politics in time. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004: 17-53.
[5]	BANCHOFF T . Path dependence and value-driven issues:the comparative politics of stem cell research[J]. World Politics, 2005,57(2): 200-230.
[6]	RUBIN A . The promises and pitfalls of path dependence frameworks for analyzing penal change[J]. CrimRxiv, 2021.
[7]	EPP C R . Law’s allure and the power of path-dependent legal ideas[J]. Law ＆Social Inquiry, 2010,35(4): 1041-1051.
[8]	HATHAWAY O A . Path dependence in the law:the course and pattern of legal change in a common law system[J]. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2003.
[9]	SWEET A S . Path dependence,precedent,and judicial power[M]// On law,politics,and judicialization. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002: 112-135.
[10]	MCAUSLAN P . Path dependency,law and development[J]. Journal of Commonwealth Law and Legal Education, 2001,1(1): 51-68.
[11]	BELL J . Path dependence and legal development[J]. Tulane Law Review, 2013,87(4): 787.
[12]	HUSA J . Developing legal system,legal transplants,and path dependence:reflections on the rule of law[J]. The Chinese Journal of Comparative Law, 2018,6(2): 129-150.
[13]	LIEBOWITZ S J , MARGOLIS S E . Path dependence,lock-in,and history[J]. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1995.
[14]	HOFSTADTER D , SANDER E . Surfaces and essence:analogy as the fuel and fire of thinking[M]. New York: Basic Books, 2013.
[15]	SCHWAB K . The global competitiveness report 2011-2012[R]. 2012.
[16]	MARR B . Here’s why data is not the new oil[Z]. 2018.
[17]	STARK L , HOFFMANN A . Data is the new what? Popular metaphors ＆professional ethics in emerging data culture[J]. Journal of Cultural Analytics, 2019,4(1): 1-22.
[18]	COHEN J E . Examined lives:informational privacy and the subject as object[J]. Stanford Law Review, 2000,52(5): 1373.
[19]	WALDRON J . Property and ownership[Z]. 2004.
[20]	SAMUELSON P . Privacy as intellectual property?[J]. Stanford Law Review, 2000,52(5): 1125.
[21]	WATSON A . Legal transplants:an approach to comparative law[M]. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1974.
[22]	CAIRNS J . Watson,Walton,and the history of legal transplants[J]. The Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, 2014,41:637.
[23]	MILLER J M . A typology of legal transplants:using sociology,legal history and argentine examples to explain the transplant process[J]. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 2003,51(4): 839-886.
[24]	WATSON A . Aspects of reception of law[J]. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 1996,44(2): 335.
[25]	CHEN J F , . Modernisation,westernisation,and globalisation:legal transplant in China[C]// Proceedings of the One Country,Two Systems,Three Legal Orders - Perspectives of Evolution. Heidelberg:Springer, 2009: 91-114.
[26]	WANG L . Legal transplant and cultural transfer:the legal translation in Hong Kong[J]. Across Languages and Cultures, 2010,11(1): 83-91.
[27]	?RüCü E . Law as transposition[J]. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 2002,51(2): 205-223.
[28]	LEGRAND P . The impossibility of “legal transplants”[J]. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 1997,4(2): 111-124.
[29]	马剑银 . 法律移植的困境:现代性、全球化与中国语境[J]. 政法论坛, 2008,26(2): 54-69.
	MA J Y . The dilemma of legal transplantation:modernity,globalization and Chinese context[J]. Tribune of Political Science and Law, 2008,26(2): 54-69.
[30]	NG M . Legal transplantation in early twentieth-century China[M]. London: Routledge, 2014.
[31]	ZHANG T S . The development of comparative law in modern China[M]// The Oxford handbook of comparative law. New York: Oxford University Press, 2019: 227-251.
[32]	STEPANOV I . Introducing a property right over data in the EU:the data producer’s right - an evaluation[J]. International Review of Law,Computers ＆Technology, 2020,34(1): 65-86.
[33]	ZECH H . A legal framework for a data economy in the European digital single market:rights to use data[J]. Journal of Intellectual Property Law ＆ Practice, 2016,11(6): 460-470.
[34]	KERBER W . Rights on data:the EU communication “building a European data economy” from an economic perspective[J]. Magks Papers on Economics, 2017.
[35]	HARTZOG W , RICHARDS N M . Privacy’s constitutional moment and the limits of data protection[J]. Boston College Law Review, 2019.
[36]	SARTRE J P . The imaginary[M]. London: Librarie Gallimard, 1940.
[37]	MILLS C W . The sociological imagination[M]. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.
[38]	BECKERT J . Imagined futures[M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2016.
[39]	JASANOFF S , KIM S H . Containing the atom:sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and south Korea[J]. Minerva, 2009,47(2): 119-146.
[40]	MAFFESOLI M . The time of the tribes:the decline of individualism in mass society[M]. London: SAGE Publications Ltd., 1996.
[41]	LIPPENS R , KEARSON T . Emerging imaginaries of regulation,control,and oppression[J]. Social Justice, 2005,32(1): 1-4.
[42]	DRAKOPOULOU M , PARSLEY C . The imaginary:an undervalued,yet precious,method of assessing our legal traditions[D]. Kent:University of Kent, 2017.
[43]	P?IBá? J . Constitutional imaginaries[M]. London: Routledge, 2021.
[44]	FLEAR M L , ASHCROFT R . Law,biomedical technoscience,and imaginaries[J]. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 2021,8(2).

对比项	对初始条件的敏感性	提高效率	低效、可救济
第一度路径依赖	有	无	无关
第二度路径依赖	有	是	否
第三度路径依赖	有	是	是