Cited by 40Digitalization, Law, and RegulationBlockchain Technology Applications and SecurityDigital Transformation in Law

“The margin between the edge of the world and infinite possibility”: Blockchain, GDPR and information governance

Hofman, Darra, Lemieux, Victoria Louise, Joo, Alysha, Batista, Danielle Alves·2019·Records Management Journal

Abstract

Purpose: This paper aims to explore a paradoxical situation, asking whether it is possible to reconcile the immutable ledger known as blockchain with the requirements of the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR), and more broadly privacy and data protection. Design/methodology/approach: This paper combines doctrinal legal research examining the GDPR’s application and scope with case studies examining blockchain solutions from an archival theoretic perspective to answer several questions, including: What risks are blockchain solutions said to impose (or mitigate) for organizations dealing with data that is subject to the GDPR? What are the relationships between the GDPR principles and the principles of archival theory? How can these two sets of principles be aligned within a particular blockchain solution? How can archival principles be applied to blockchain solutions so that they support GDPR compliance? Findings: This work will offer an initial exploration of the strengths and weaknesses of blockchain solutions for GDPR compliant information governance. It will present the disjunctures between GDPR requirements and some current blockchain solution designs and implementations, as well as discussing how solutions may be designed and implemented to support compliance. Immutability of information recorded on a blockchain is a differentiating positive feature of blockchain technology from the perspective of trusted exchanges of value (e.g. cryptocurrencies) but potentially places organizations at risk of non-compliance with GDPR if personally identifiable information cannot be removed. This work will aid understanding of how blockchain solutions should be designed to ensure compliance with GDPR, which could have significant practical implications for organizations looking to leverage the strengths of blockchain technology to meet their needs and strategic goals. Research limitations/implications: Some aspects of the social layer of blockchain solutions, such as law and business procedures, are also well understood. Much less well understood is the data layer, and how it serves as an interface between the social and the technical in a sociotechnical system like blockchain. In addition to a need for more research about the data/records layer of blockchains and compliance, there is a need for more information governance professionals who can provide input on this layer, both to their organizations and other stakeholders. Practical implications: Managing personal data will continue to be one of the most challenging, fraught issues for information governance moving forward; given the fairly broad scope of the GDPR, many organizations, including those outside of the EU, will have to manage personal data in compliance with the GDPR. Blockchain technology could play an important role in ensuring organizations have easily auditable, tamper-resistant, tamper-evident records to meet broader organizational needs and to comply with the GDPR. Social implications: Because the GDPR professes to be technology-neutral, understanding its application to novel technologies such as blockchain provides an important window into the broader context of compliance in evolving information governance spaces. Originality/value: The specific question of how GDPR will apply to blockchain information governance solutions is almost entirely novel. It has significance to the design and implementation of blockchain solutions for recordkeeping. It also provides insight into how well “technology-neutral” laws and regulations actually work when confronted with novel technologies and applications. This research will build upon significant bodies of work in both law and archival science to further understand information governance and compliance as we are shifting into the new GDPR world.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/rmj-12-2018-0045

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Research has begun exploring DLT for auditing purposes in organizational contexts, and first results indicate feasibility of DLT for auditing AI.

    “Owing to DLTs characteristics (e.g., decentralization, high tamper resistance), research has recently begun exploring the application of DLT for auditing purposes in organizational contexts (Hofman et al. 2019), while first research results also indicate the feasibility of DLT for the auditing of AI (Dillenberger et al. 2019).”

    From Trustworthy artificial intelligence (2021) · cites this paper as Hofman et al. 2019

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hofman, D., Lemieux, V. L., Joo, A., & Batista, D. A.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Venue
Records Management Journal
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2019-03-11
Volume
29
Issue
1/2
Pages
240-257
ISSN
0956-5698 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2911357324
Cited by
40
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4
FWCI
54.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Records Management Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › General Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Digital Transformation in Law
Keywords
blockchain, General Data Protection Regulation, GDPR compliance, data protection, privacy, archival theory, immutability, information governance, personal data, data deletion, records management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review