Accountability
Governance should identify who is answerable for system design, deployment and data handling. Distributed infrastructure should not become a reason for leaving harms without an accountable actor.
AI governance & regulation IWIB4AI session Needs review
AI & Blockchain Summit (Nordic Tech Week) – Systems, Ethics & Global Governance
Governing AI, blockchain and quantum technologies to clarify responsibility, protect data rights and serve the public interest.
Draft – legal and case law references not yet verified
Summary
This use case concerns governance arrangements for AI, blockchain and quantum technologies: who sets the rules, whose interests they serve and who controls data. It examines how responsibility and individual rights can be protected across organisations, technical infrastructures and jurisdictions. The central challenge is translating broad governance commitments into enforceable duties without treating personal data as simply property to be owned.
The Problem
Decision-making power, technical control and legal responsibility may sit with different actors, making accountability difficult to establish. Governance must reconcile innovation and cross-border coordination with meaningful individual control over data and protection against concentrated power.
Ethical Grounds
Privacy
Questions about who data belongs to should address lawful use, access, security and individual rights. Blockchain persistence and quantum-related security risks require attention to how protection can be maintained throughout the data lifecycle.
Autonomy
Individuals need understandable information and practical ways to exercise control over uses of their personal data. Technical complexity should not make rights impossible to exercise.
Fairness
Governance should examine whose interests shape technical standards and how benefits and risks are distributed. People affected by these technologies should have meaningful opportunities to influence governance rather than leaving decisions solely to powerful technology providers.
Legal Compliance
| Framework | Provision | Relevance |
|---|---|---|
| GDPR | Arts. 5–6 | Where personal data are processed, claims of data ownership do not replace the requirements for a lawful basis, purpose limitation, data minimisation and accountability. |
| GDPR | Arts. 17, 25 and 32 | Architectures involving personal data must support applicable erasure rights, data protection by design and risk-appropriate security, including where persistent records or evolving technical threats complicate compliance. |
| EU AI Act | Arts. 16 and 26 | For high-risk AI systems within scope, these provisions allocate obligations to providers and deployers, helping translate general governance commitments into defined responsibilities. |
| EU Charter of Fundamental Rights | Arts. 7–8 and 51(1) | Privacy and personal-data protection provide a rights-based foundation for governance within the Charter’s scope, including when Member States implement EU law. |
Sources
Court & Regulator Decisions
Meta Platforms v Bundeskartellamt (opens in a new tab)
Scrutiny of cross-service data combination connects concentrated platform power with lawful processing and illustrates coordination between competition and data-protection oversight.
Data Protection Commissioner v Facebook Ireland and Schrems (Schrems II) (opens in a new tab)
The invalidation of a cross-border transfer framework demonstrates that international coordination must deliver enforceable individual protections, not merely facilitate data flows.
Google Spain v AEPD and Costeja González (opens in a new tab)
Recognising a search engine as a controller shows how legal responsibility and individual data rights attach to intermediary activities rather than data ownership.
Key Takeaways
- Map decision-making authority, data flows and legal responsibilities across participating organisations and jurisdictions.
- Replace vague data-ownership claims with explicit rules on access, lawful use, individual rights and remedies.
- Assess whether technical architectures can sustain privacy, security and enforceable rights over time.
- Include affected communities in governance and distinguish AI-specific duties from rules governing other technologies.
Related Use Cases
From the Session
AI & Blockchain Summit (Nordic Tech Week) – Systems, Ethics & Global Governance
Note: A second listing for the same summit is dated 2026-09-15 19:00–23:00
Speakers
