Seventeenth Global Studies Conference

Abstract

While data decolonization marks significant shift in global power traditional models of decolonization would not fit this new wave of data decolonization. Reparations for data decolonization would mean that data colonizers would pay the territory and at end the individual monetary value for their data. Repatriation would not be ideal as this would mean giving the data back- to the individual or the territory from which it was collected. This paper considers two unique perspectives set forth in India -data ownership and data localization. The concepts of data ownership as under the GDPR doesn’t exist as data protection is a fundamental right. However, in India data is considered to be a natural resource like oil and similar to any natural resource, and tendered accordingly. The second concept is data localisation. Under the GDPR, data localization laws are often seen as protectionist. Data localization or data residency law requires data about a nation’s citizens or residents to be collected, processed, and/or stored inside the country, often before being transferred internationally. Data ownership and localisation could carve a pathway to data decolonization. Arguments are presented in this paper as to whether these concepts would in fact have the opposite effect of placing a price on data by providing data ownership and fractured data sets by localizing the data. However, to the contrary, data ownership and localization could create more power and control for the individual and the territory in which the data is collect to determine the consequences of their own data.