skip to main content
10.1145/3544549.3585834acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Work in Progress

Digital Sovereignty: What it is and why it matters for HCI

Published: 19 April 2023 Publication History

Abstract

In recent years, digital sovereignty has become a central term in digital policy discourses. Both authoritarian and democratic states use digital sovereignty as a base for their digital policy, although, the individual interpretation and resulting policy and power balance might be quite different. Given the importance of this term, the HCI community and the users as the core of our research would benefit from taking up the discussion by finding own definitions of human-centred digital sovereignty, contributing to policy discourses, and to strengthening the position of users under non-sovereign conditions. This paper aims to initiate and provoke such discourse within the community by (1) introducing the policy term to HCI and providing an overview of how it is used, (2) arguing for the relevancy of the term, and (3) proposing possible ways forward.

Supplementary Material

MP4 File (3544549.3585834-talk-video.mp4)
Pre-recorded Video Presentation

References

[1]
Amir Shayan Ahmadian, Jan Jürjens, and Daniel Strüber. 2018. Extending Model-Based Privacy Analysis for the Industrial Data Space by Exploiting Privacy Level Agreements. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (Pau, France) (SAC ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1142–1149. https://doi.org/10.1145/3167132.3167256
[2]
Arno Appenzeller, Ewald Rode, Erik Krempel, and Jürgen Beyerer. 2020. Enabling Data Sovereignty for Patients through Digital Consent Enforcement. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (Corfu, Greece) (PETRA ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 33, 4 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3389189.3393745
[3]
Simona Autolitano and Agnieszka Pawlowska. 2021. Europe’s quest for digital sovereignty: GAIA-X as a case study. IAI Papers 21, 14 (2021), 1–22.
[4]
Renata Avila Pinto. 2018. Digital sovereignty or digital colonialsim. SUR-Int’l J. on Hum Rts. 27 (2018), 15.
[5]
Jeffrey Bardzell, Shaowen Bardzell, Carl DiSalvo, William Gaver, and Phoebe Sengers. 2012. The humanities and/in HCI. In CHI’12 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1135–1138.
[6]
Shaowen Bardzell. 2010. Feminist HCI: taking stock and outlining an agenda for design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1301–1310.
[7]
Ansgar Baums. 2016. Digitale Standortpolitik in der Post-Snowden-Welt. In Digitale Souveränität. Springer, 223–235.
[8]
Marciele Berger Bernardes, Francisco Pacheco de Andrade, and Paulo Novais. 2018. Smart Cities, Data and Right to Privacy: A Look from the Portuguese and Brazilian Experience. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (Galway, Ireland) (ICEGOV ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 328–337. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209415.3209451
[9]
Marciele Berger Bernardes, Francisco Pacheco de Andrade, Paulo Novais, and Nuno Vasco Lopes. 2018. Participatory Governance of Smart Cities: A Study upon Portuguese and Brazilian Government Portals. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (Galway, Ireland) (ICEGOV ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 526–536. https://doi.org/10.1145/3209415.3209464
[10]
Michael S Bernstein, Mark S Ackerman, Ed H Chi, and Robert C Miller. 2011. The trouble with social computing systems research. In CHI’11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 389–398.
[11]
Bolotbek Biibosunov, Saltanat Biibosunova, and Marat Kozhonov. 2020. Development of Digital Platform for Social Media Creating in the Kyrgyz Republic. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Vision, Image and Signal Processing (Vancouver, BC, Canada) (ICVISP 2019). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 33, 5 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3387168.3387215
[12]
Pascal Birnstill and Jürgen Beyerer. 2018. Building Blocks for Identity Management and Protection for Smart Environments and Interactive Assistance Systems. In Proceedings of the 11th PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments Conference (Corfu, Greece) (PETRA ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 292–296. https://doi.org/10.1145/3197768.3201563
[13]
Kirsten Boehner, Rogério DePaula, Paul Dourish, and Phoebe Sengers. 2007. How emotion is made and measured. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 65, 4 (2007), 275–291.
[14]
Alan Borning and Michael Muller. 2012. Next steps for value sensitive design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1125–1134.
[15]
Danny Bradbury. 2011. Routing around censorship. Network Security 2011, 5 (2011), 5–8.
[16]
Arnaud Braud, Gaël Fromentoux, Benoit Radier, and Olivier Le Grand. 2021. The road to European digital sovereignty with Gaia-X and IDSA. IEEE Network 35, 2 (2021), 4–5.
[17]
Francesca Bria. 2017. Public policies for digital sovereignty. Ours to Hack and to Own: The Rise of Platform Cooperativism, A New Vision for the Future of Work and a Fairer Internet.(1a ed. p. 218-222). New York/London: OR Books (2017).
[18]
Maik Brinkmann. 2021. The Realities of Blockchain-Based New Public Governance: An Explorative Analysis of Blockchain Implementations in Europe. Digit. Gov.: Res. Pract. 2, 3, Article 29 (jul 2021), 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3462332
[19]
Matt Burgess. 2020. Why the NHS Covid-19 contact tracing app failed. Retrieved November 16, 2022 from https://www.wired.co.uk/article/nhs-tracing-app-scrapped-apple-google-uk
[20]
Dan Calacci, Jeffrey J Shen, and Alex Pentland. 2022. The Cop In Your Neighbor’s Doorbell: Amazon Ring and the Spread of Participatory Mass Surveillance. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 6, CSCW2 (2022), 1–47.
[21]
Anupam Chander and Uyên P Lê. 2014. Data nationalism. Emory LJ 64 (2014), 677.
[22]
Jean-Marie Chenou. 2014. From cyber-libertarianism to neoliberalism: Internet exceptionalism, multi-stakeholderism, and the institutionalisation of internet governance in the 1990s. Globalizations 11, 2 (2014), 205–223.
[23]
Theodore Christakis. 2020. ’European Digital Sovereignty’: Successfully Navigating Between the’Brussels Effect’and Europe’s Quest for Strategic Autonomy. Available at SSRN 3748098 (2020).
[24]
Niël Henk Conradie and Saskia K Nagel. 2022. Digital sovereignty and smart wearables: Three moral calculi for the distribution of legitimate control over the digital. Journal of Responsible Technology 12 (2022), 100053.
[25]
Stephane Couture and Sophie Toupin. 2019. What does the notion of “sovereignty” mean when referring to the digital?new media & society 21, 10 (2019), 2305–2322.
[26]
Rogier Creemers. 2019. The Chinese cyber-sovereignty agenda. In Connectivity Wars: Why Migration, Finance and Trade are the Geo-Economic Battlegrounds of the Future. JSTOR.
[27]
Longo di Alessandro. 2020. L’app Immuni cambia. Seguirà il modello decentralizzato di Apple e Google. Retrieved November 16, 2022 from https://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/l-app-immuni-cambia-seguira-modello-decentralizzato-apple-e-google-ADcBF4L
[28]
Trinh Viet Doan, Roland van Rijswijk-Deij, Oliver Hohlfeld, and Vaibhav Bajpai. 2022. An Empirical View on Consolidation of the Web. ACM Trans. Internet Technol. 22, 3, Article 70 (feb 2022), 30 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3503158
[29]
Tobias Fiebig and Doris Aschenbrenner. 2022. 13 Propositions on an Internet for a "Burning World". In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Joint Workshops on Technologies, Applications, and Uses of a Responsible Internet and Building Greener Internet (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (TAURIN+BGI ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3538395.3545312
[30]
Luciano Floridi. 2020. The fight for digital sovereignty: What it is, and why it matters, especially for the EU. Philosophy & Technology 33, 3 (2020), 369–378.
[31]
David Franquesa and Leandro Navarro. 2018. Devices as a Commons: Limits to Premature Recycling. In Proceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Computing within Limits (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) (LIMITS ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 8, 10 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3232617.3232624
[32]
Dieter Grimm. 2015. Sovereignty: The origin and future of a political and legal concept. Columbia University Press.
[33]
Rafael Grohmann. 2022. Beyond Platform Cooperativism: Worker-Owned Platforms in Brazil. Interactions 29, 4 (jun 2022), 87–89. https://doi.org/10.1145/3540251
[34]
Sara Heitlinger, Nick Bryan-Kinns, and Rob Comber. 2019. The Right to the Sustainable Smart City. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300517
[35]
Jonah Hill. 2014. The growth of data localization post-snowden: Analysis and recommendations for us policymakers and business leaders. In The Hague Institute for Global Justice, Conference on the Future of Cyber Governance.
[36]
Harry Hochheiser and Jonathan Lazar. 2007. HCI and societal issues: A framework for engagement. International Journal of Human [# x02013] Computer Interaction 23, 3 (2007), 339–374.
[37]
Steven J Jackson, Tarleton Gillespie, and Sandy Payette. 2014. The policy knot: Re-integrating policy, practice and design in CSCW studies of social computing. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing. 588–602.
[38]
Timo Jakobi, Maximilian von Grafenstein, Christine Legner, Clément Labadie, Peter Mertens, Ayten Öksüz, and Gunnar Stevens. 2020. The role of IS in the conflicting interests regarding GDPR. Business & Information Systems Engineering 62, 3 (2020), 261–272.
[39]
Jeff Jarvis. 2020. A Society Relearning How to Talk with Itself. Digital Government: Research and Practice 1, 1 (2020), 1–10.
[40]
Jofish Kaye, Casey Fiesler, Neha Kumar, and Bryan Semaan. 2017. Policy Impacts on the HCI Research Community. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1300–1302.
[41]
Dr Keller and Clara Iglesias. 2019. Exception and Harmonization: Three Theoretical Debates on Internet Regulation. (2019).
[42]
Ekaterina Kharitonova, Natalia Kharitonova, Valentina Pulyaeva, and Venera Shaidullina. 2021. Revealing Best Practices in Legal Regulation in the Sphere of Blockchain Technology. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Scientific Conference on Innovations in Digital Economy (Saint, Petersburg, Russian Federation) (SPBPU IDE ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 1, 8 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3444465.3444475
[43]
Hans Klein. 2002. ICANN and Internet governance: Leveraging technical coordination to realize global public policy. The Information Society 18, 3 (2002), 193–207.
[44]
Daniel Lambach and Kai Oppermann. 2022. Narratives of digital sovereignty in German political discourse. Governance (2022).
[45]
Marvin Landwehr, Alan Borning, and Volker Wulf. 2021. Problems with surveillance capitalism and possible alternatives for IT infrastructure. Information, Communication & Society (2021), 1–16.
[46]
Jonathan Lazar, Julio Abascal, Simone Barbosa, Jeremy Barksdale, Batya Friedman, Jens Grossklags, Jan Gulliksen, Jeff Johnson, Tom McEwan, Loïc Martínez-Normand, 2016. Human–computer interaction and international public policymaking: a framework for understanding and taking future actions. Foundations and Trends® in Human–Computer Interaction 9, 2 (2016), 69–149.
[47]
Silvia Lips, Rozha K. Ahmed, Khayyam Zulfigarzada, Robert Krimmer, and Dirk Draheim. 2021. Digital Sovereignty and Participation in an Autocratic State: Designing an e-Petition System for Developing Countries. In DG.O2021: The 22nd Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (Omaha, NE, USA) (DG.O’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 123–131. https://doi.org/10.1145/3463677.3463706
[48]
Natasha Lomas. 2020. Germany ditches centralized approach to app for COVID-19 contacts tracing. Retrieved November 16, 2022 from https://techcrunch.com/2020/04/27/germany-ditches-centralized-approach-to-app-for-covid-19-contacts-tracing/
[49]
Robert Luzsa, Susanne Mayr, Emmanuel Syrmoudis, Jens Grossklags, Sophie Kübler-Wachendorff, and Johann Kranz. 2022. Online Service Switching Intentions and Attitudes towards Data Portability – The Role of Technology-Related Attitudes and Privacy. In Proceedings of Mensch Und Computer 2022 (Darmstadt, Germany) (MuC ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3543758.3543762
[50]
Daithí Mac Síthigh and Mathias Siems. 2019. The Chinese social credit system: A model for other countries?The Modern Law Review 82, 6 (2019), 1034–1071.
[51]
Sebastián Marichal, Andrea Rosales, Gustavo Sansone, Ana Cristina Pires, Ewelina Bakala, Fernando Gonzalez Perilli, and Josep Blat. 2017. CETA: Open, Affordable and Portable Mixed-Reality Environment for Low-Cost Tablets. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (Vienna, Austria) (MobileHCI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 47, 7 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3098279.3125435
[52]
Tim Maurer, Isabel Skierka, Robert Morgus, and Mirko Hohmann. 2015. Technological sovereignty: missing the point?. In 2015 7th International Conference on Cyber Conflict: Architectures in Cyberspace. IEEE, 53–68.
[53]
Norma Möllers. 2021. Making digital territory: Cybersecurity, techno-nationalism, and the moral boundaries of the state. Science, technology, & human values 46, 1 (2021), 112–138.
[54]
Francesca Musiani. 2022. Infrastructuring digital sovereignty: a research agenda for an infrastructure-based sociology of digital self-determination practices. Information, Communication & Society (2022), 1–16.
[55]
Morten Meyerhoff Nielsen. 2016. Digitising a Small Island State: A Lesson in Faroese. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (Montevideo, Uruguay) (ICEGOV ’15-16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 54–59. https://doi.org/10.1145/2910019.2910042
[56]
Liv Marte Nordhaug and Lucy Harris. 2021. Digital public goods: Enablers of digital sovereignty. (2021).
[57]
Midas Nouwens and Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose. 2021. A Survey of Digital Working Conditions of Danish Knowledge Workers. In Proceedings of 19th European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work. European Society for Socially Embedded Technologies (EUSSET). https://doi. org/10.18420/ecscw2021_.
[58]
Marianna Pavlyutenkova and Polina Ksenz. 2015. New Conditions of Electronic Government in Russia. In Proceedings of the 2015 2nd International Conference on Electronic Governance and Open Society: Challenges in Eurasia (St. Petersburg, Russian Federation) (EGOSE ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 77–81. https://doi.org/10.1145/2846012.2846027
[59]
Dominik Pins, Timo Jakobi, Gunnar Stevens, Fatemeh Alizadeh, and Jana Krüger. 2022. Finding, getting and understanding: the user journey for the GDPR’S right to access. Behaviour & Information Technology (2022), 1–27.
[60]
Katharina Pistor. 2020. Statehood in the digital age 1. Constellations 27, 1 (2020), 3–18.
[61]
Marie-Therese Png. 2022. At the Tensions of South and North: Critical Roles of Global South Stakeholders in AI Governance. In 2022 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (FAccT ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1434–1445. https://doi.org/10.1145/3531146.3533200
[62]
Julia Pohle. 2020. Digital sovereignty. A new key concept of digital policy in Germany and Europe. (2020).
[63]
Julia Pohle. 2020. Digitale Souveränität. Handbuch Digitalisierung in Staat und Verwaltung (2020), 1–13.
[64]
Julia Pohle, Thorsten Thiel, 2021. Digital sovereignty. Practicing Sovereignty: Digital Involvement in Times of Crises (2021), 47–67.
[65]
Laura Schelenz, Ivano Bison, Matteo Busso, Amalia de Götzen, Daniel Gatica-Perez, Fausto Giunchiglia, Lakmal Meegahapola, and Salvador Ruiz-Correa. 2021. The Theory, Practice, and Ethical Challenges of Designing a Diversity-Aware Platform for Social Relations. In Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (Virtual Event, USA) (AIES ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 905–915. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461702.3462595
[66]
Phoebe Sengers and Bill Gaver. 2006. Staying open to interpretation: engaging multiple meanings in design and evaluation. In Proceedings of the 6th conference on Designing Interactive systems. 99–108.
[67]
Maria Siapera, Konstantinos Douloudis, and Andriana Prentza. 2022. A Common Data Model for Once-Only Cross-Border Data Exchanges in Europe. In 14th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (Athens, Greece) (ICEGOV 2021). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 223–230. https://doi.org/10.1145/3494193.3494224
[68]
Hannah Snyder. 2019. Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of business research 104 (2019), 333–339.
[69]
Sarah Spiekermann, Hanna Krasnova, Oliver Hinz, Annika Baumann, Alexander Benlian, Henner Gimpel, Irina Heimbach, Antonia Köster, Alexander Maedche, Björn Niehaves, 2022. Values and Ethics in Information Systems: A State-of-the-Art Analysis and Avenues for Future Research. Business & Information Systems Engineering 64, 2 (2022), 247–264.
[70]
Ilona Stadnik. 2019. Internet governance in Russia–sovereign basics for independent Runet. In TPRC47: The 47th Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy.
[71]
Richard Stallman. 2009. Viewpoint Why" open source" misses the point of free software. Commun. ACM 52, 6 (2009), 31–33.
[72]
Stefan Steiger, Wolf J Schünemann, and Katharina Dimmroth. 2017. Outrage without consequences? Post-Snowden discourses and governmental practice in Germany. Media and Communication 5, 1 (2017), 7–16.
[73]
Angeliki Tzouganatou and Jennifer Krueckeberg. 2021. FROM MONOPOLIZING MEMORY TO CO-CREATING IT: OPENNESS AND EQUITY IN THE DIGITAL ECOSYSTEM. AoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research (2021).
[74]
Morgan Vigil, Matthew Rantanen, and Elizabeth Belding. 2015. A First Look at Tribal Web Traffic. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web (Florence, Italy) (WWW ’15). International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Republic and Canton of Geneva, CHE, 1155–1165. https://doi.org/10.1145/2736277.2741645
[75]
Max von Grafenstein, Timo Jakobi, and Gunnar Stevens. 2022. Effective data protection by design through interdisciplinary research methods: The example of effective purpose specification by applying user-Centred UX-design methods. Computer Law & Security Review 46 (2022), 105722.
[76]
Annalu Waller. 2013. Public policy issues in augmentative and alternative communication technologies a comparison of the UK and the US. Interactions 20, 3 (2013), 68–75.
[77]
Daniel Wessel, Sandra Claudy, Karlson Hanke, Christian Herzog, Robin Preiß, Christiane Wegner, and Moreen Heine. 2022. Prototypes for E-Government Websites to Support the Digital Sovereignty of Citizens. In Proceedings of Mensch Und Computer 2022 (Darmstadt, Germany) (MuC ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 615–617. https://doi.org/10.1145/3543758.3547514
[78]
Zhanat Zakiyeva. 2020. Problems and Perspectives of Digital Silk Road in Central Asia. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Engineering & MIS 2020 (Almaty, Kazakhstan) (ICEMIS’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 11, 4 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3410352.3410741
[79]
Raul Zambrano and Jenny Marcela Sanchez-Torres. 2022. AI Public Policies in Latin America: Disruption or More of the Same?. In 14th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (Athens, Greece) (ICEGOV 2021). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/3494193.3494294

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)"You Can either Blame Technology or Blame a Person..." --- A Conceptual Model of Users' AI-Risk Perception as a Tool for HCIProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36869968:CSCW2(1-25)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
  • (2024)The Challenges of New Central Banks Crypto-Currencies: CDBCTechnology: Toward Business Sustainability10.1007/978-3-031-54009-7_2(10-20)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2024
  • (2023)Human-Centred Digital Sovereignty: Explorative Conceptual Model and Ways ForwardComputer-Human Interaction Research and Applications10.1007/978-3-031-49368-3_6(84-103)Online publication date: 23-Dec-2023

Index Terms

  1. Digital Sovereignty: What it is and why it matters for HCI

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    CHI EA '23: Extended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    April 2023
    3914 pages
    ISBN:9781450394222
    DOI:10.1145/3544549
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 19 April 2023

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Consumer Protection
    2. Digital Sovereignty
    3. Individual Empowerment
    4. Policy
    5. Privacy

    Qualifiers

    • Work in progress
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    CHI '23
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 6,164 of 23,696 submissions, 26%

    Upcoming Conference

    CHI 2025
    ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
    April 26 - May 1, 2025
    Yokohama , Japan

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)179
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)27
    Reflects downloads up to 25 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)"You Can either Blame Technology or Blame a Person..." --- A Conceptual Model of Users' AI-Risk Perception as a Tool for HCIProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36869968:CSCW2(1-25)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
    • (2024)The Challenges of New Central Banks Crypto-Currencies: CDBCTechnology: Toward Business Sustainability10.1007/978-3-031-54009-7_2(10-20)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2024
    • (2023)Human-Centred Digital Sovereignty: Explorative Conceptual Model and Ways ForwardComputer-Human Interaction Research and Applications10.1007/978-3-031-49368-3_6(84-103)Online publication date: 23-Dec-2023

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Full Text

    View this article in Full Text.

    Full Text

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format.

    HTML Format

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media