Cited by 422Digitalization, Law, and RegulationEthics and Social Impacts of AISecurity, Politics, and Digital Transformation

Data sovereignty: A review

Open access
Hummel, Patrik, Braun, Matthias, Tretter, Max, Dabrock, Peter·2021·Big Data & Society

Abstract

New data-driven technologies yield benefits and potentials, but also confront different agents and stakeholders with challenges in retaining control over their data. Our goal in this study is to arrive at a clear picture of what is meant by data sovereignty in such problem settings. To this end, we review 341 publications and analyze the frequency of different notions such as data sovereignty, digital sovereignty, and cyber sovereignty. We go on to map agents they concern, in which context they appear, and which values they allude to. While our sample reveals a considerable degree of divergence and an occasional lack of clarity about intended meanings of data sovereignty, we propose a conceptual grid to systematize different dimensions and connotations. Each of them relates in some way to meaningful control, ownership, and other claims to data articulated by a variety of agents ranging from individuals to countries. Data sovereignty alludes to a nuanced mixture of normative concepts such as inclusive deliberation and recognition of the fundamental rights of data subjects.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2053951720982012

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Human Value Alignment concentrates on harmonizing AI models with human ethics and values to ensure decisions and actions mirror societal norms and ethical standards, involving integration of ethical decision-making and adaptation of AI outputs to conform with human moral values.

    “This emerging aspect concentrates on harmonizing AI models with human ethics and values to ensure that their decisions and actions mirror societal norms and ethical standards, involving the integration of ethical decision-making processes and the adaptation of AI outputs to conform with human moral values [265], [89], [266].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Hoffmann A, Wagner A, Huyeng T, et al. (2019) Distributed manufacturer services to provide product data on the web. In: CEUR workshop proceedings, EG-ICE 2019 Workshop on Intelligent Computing in Engineering, Leuven, Belgium, 30 June-3 July 2019.
  2. Hummel P, Braun M, Augsberg S, et al. (2018) Sovereignty and data sharing. ITU Journal: ICT Discoveries 2.
  3. Kukutai T and Cormack D (2018) Census 2018 and implica- tions for M aori. New Zealand Population Review 44: 131-151.
  4. Woods AK (2018) Litigating data sovereignty. Yale Law Journal 128(2): 328-406.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hummel, P., Braun, M., Tretter, M., & Dabrock, P.
Affiliations
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE)
Corresponding author
Hummel, Patrik
Venue
Big Data & Society
Published
2021-01
Volume
8
Issue
1
ISSN
2053-9517 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3124662721
Cited by
422
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 105 · 2025: 101 · 2024: 73 · 2023: 63 · 2022: 58 · 2021: 22
FWCI
352.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Big Data & Society (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • OPUS FAU (Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund Berlin-Brandenburg (KOBV), on behalf of the Universitätsbibliothek Erlangen-Nürnberg) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Bundesministerium für Gesundheit ((ZMV/1–2517 FSB 013))
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung ((01GP1905B))
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Security, Politics, and Digital Transformation
Keywords
data sovereignty, digital sovereignty, cyber sovereignty, data ownership, data control, data subject rights, stakeholder perspectives, data governance, inclusive deliberation

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