Balancing data privacy and usability in the federal statistical system

Author:

Hotz V. Joseph1ORCID,Bollinger Christopher R.2ORCID,Komarova Tatiana3ORCID,Manski Charles F.4ORCID,Moffitt Robert A.5ORCID,Nekipelov Denis6ORCID,Sojourner Aaron7ORCID,Spencer Bruce D.8ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Economics, Duke University, Durham, NC 27708

2. Department of Economics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40503

3. The London School of Economics and Political Science, London WC2A 3PH, United Kingdom

4. Department of Economics, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208

5. Department of Economics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD 21211

6. Department of Economics, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904

7. W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Policy, Kalamazoo, MI 49007

8. Department of Statistics and Data Science, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208

Abstract

The federal statistical system is experiencing competing pressures for change. On the one hand, for confidentiality reasons, much socially valuable data currently held by federal agencies is either not made available to researchers at all or only made available under onerous conditions. On the other hand, agencies which release public databases face new challenges in protecting the privacy of the subjects in those databases, which leads them to consider releasing fewer data or masking the data in ways that will reduce their accuracy. In this essay, we argue that the discussion has not given proper consideration to the reduced social benefits of data availability and their usability relative to the value of increased levels of privacy protection. A more balanced benefit–cost framework should be used to assess these trade-offs. We express concerns both with synthetic data methods for disclosure limitation, which will reduce the types of research that can be reliably conducted in unknown ways, and with differential privacy criteria that use what we argue is an inappropriate measure of disclosure risk. We recommend that the measure of disclosure risk used to assess all disclosure protection methods focus on what we believe is the risk that individuals should care about, that more study of the impact of differential privacy criteria and synthetic data methods on data usability for research be conducted before either is put into widespread use, and that more research be conducted on alternative methods of disclosure risk reduction that better balance benefits and costs.

Publisher

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Reference65 articles.

1. N. Eberstadt, R. Nunn, D. W. Schanzenbach, M. R. Strain, ‘In Order That They Might Rest Their Arguments on Facts’: The Vital Role of Government-Collected Data (Brookings Institution, 2017).

2. Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking “The promise of evidence-based policymaking: Report of the Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking” (Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking 2017).

3. Wealth Inequality in the United States since 1913: Evidence from Capitalized Income Tax Data *

4. The SOI Databank: A case study in leveraging administrative data in support of evidence-based policymaking

5. 115th Congress  Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018: H. R. 4174 (US Congress 2019).

Cited by 18 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3