Reuben Kirkham
ABSTRACT
Addressing human values in design has become an increasingly important consideration in the design of interactive systems. Within HCI, this trend is perhaps best emphasized by the increased volume of work that follows a Value Sensitive Design (VSD) approach. This trend is mirrored in human rights, especially in Europe, where individual values have been increasingly incorporated into the jurisprudence on the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). There are a number of striking similarities between VSD and recent ECHR jurisprudence. This paper explores those similarities and how ECHR jurisprudence may be used to help with Values in Design problems and vice versa, thereby enabling VSD and similar approaches to be considered from a human rights perspective, whilst contributing to debates about the future of Values in Design.
- Adler, Michael. 2010. Social Security and Social Welfare. In The Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Research, Peter Cane and Kritzer, Herbert M. (eds.).Google Scholar
- Rex Ahdar and Ian Leigh. 2013. Religious freedom in the liberal state. OUP Oxford.Google Scholar
- Taghreed Alshehri, Reuben Kirkham, and Patrick Olivier. 2020. Scenario Co-Creation Cards: A Culturally Sensitive Tool for Eliciting Values. In CHI 2020.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tamara Alsheikh, Jennifer A Rode, and Siân E Lindley. 2011. (Whose) value-sensitive design: a study of longdistance relationships in an Arabic cultural context. In Proceedings of the ACM 2011 conference on Computer supported cooperative work, 75--84.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Eric Barendt. 2005. Freedom of speech. OUP Oxford.Google Scholar
- Louise Barkhuus. 2012. The mismeasurement of privacy: using contextual integrity to reconsider privacy in HCI. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 367--376.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 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.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Philip Brey. 2010. Values in technology and disclosive computer ethics. The Cambridge handbook of information and computer ethics: 41--58.Google Scholar
- Philip AE Brey. 2012. Anticipatory ethics for emerging technologies. Nano Ethics 6, 1: 1--13.Google Scholar
- Bo Brinkman, Don Gotterbarn, Keith Miller, and Marty J Wolf. 2016. Making a positive impact: updating the ACM code of ethics.communications of the ACM 59, 12: 7--13.Google Scholar
- Paul Chippendale. 2001. On Values, Ethics, Morals & Principles. A Values Inventory.Google Scholar
- Paul Chynoweth and others. 2008. Legal research. Advanced research methods in the built environment: 28--38.Google Scholar
- Jarlath Clifford. 2011. The UN disability convention and its impact on European equality law. The Equal Rights Review 6: 11--25.Google Scholar
- Gilbert Cockton. 2009. When and why feelings and impressions matter in interaction design. Proceedings of the Conference: Interfejs użytkownika - Kansei w praktyce (pp. 7--31).Google Scholar
- Court of Appeal (UK). 2014. Maistry v BBC [2014] EWCA Civ 1116.Google Scholar
- Janet Davis and Lisa P Nathan. 2015. Value sensitive design: Applications, adaptations, and critiques. Handbook of ethics, values, and technological design: Sources, theory, values and application domains: 11--40.Google Scholar
- Magali A Delmas and Vanessa Cuerel Burbano. 2011. The drivers of greenwashing. California management review 54, 1: 64--87.Google Scholar
- Christian Detweiler, Koen Hindriks, and Catholijn Jonker. 2011. Principles for value-sensitive agentoriented software engineering. In Agent-Oriented Software Engineering XI. Springer, 1--16.Google Scholar
- Paul Dourish and Scott D Mainwaring. 2012. Ubicomp's colonial impulse. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, 133--142.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Employment Appeal Tribunal (UK). 2007. McClintock v Department of Constitutional Affairs [2007] UKEAT 0223/07/3110.Google Scholar
- Employment Appeal Tribunal (UK). 2009. Grainger plc v Nicholson [2010] IRLR 4.Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 1972. X v Austria. (App no 4982/71).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 1978. Arrowsmith v United Kingdom (App no. 7050/75).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 1979. X. and Church of Scientology v. Sweden (App no. 7805/77).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 1982. Campbell and Cosans v. United Kingdom (App nos. 7511/76 & 7743/76).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 1983. C v United Kingdom (App no. 10358/83).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 1987. Leander v Sweden (App no. 9248/81).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 1997. Kalac v. Turkey (App no. 20704/92).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 1999. Chassagnou and others v. France (App nos. 25088/94, 28331/95 and 28443/95).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2000. Chr'are Shalon Ve Tsedek v. France. (App no. 27417/95) .Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2001. Pichon and Sajous v. France (App no. 49853/99).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2005. Rainys and Gasparavicius v. Lithuania (App nos. 70665/01 and 74345/01).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2007. Copland v United Kingdom (App. no 62617/00).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2008. Leela Förderkreis E.V. and Others v. Germany (App no. 58911/00).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2008. Alexandridis v. Greece (App no. 19516/06).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2009. Glor v Switzerland (App no. 13444/04).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2010. Jakobski v Poland (App no 18429/06).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2011. MGN Ltd v United Kingdom (App no. 39401/04).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2011. Bayatyan v. Armenia (App no. 23459/03).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2012. Von Hannover v. Germany (no. 2) [GC], (App nos. 40660/08 and 60641/08).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2012. Axel Springer AG v. Germany [GC] (App no. 39954/08).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2013. Eweida and Others v. the United Kingdom (app nos. 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10 and 36516/10).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2013. Vartic v. Romania (no. 2) (App no. 14150/08).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2016. Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary (App no. 18030/11).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2017. Osmanolu and Kocabas v. Switzerland (App no 29086/12);Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2018. Benedik v. Slovenia (App no. 62357/14).Google Scholar
- European Court of Human Rights. 2019. Factsheet -- New technologies. Retrieved September 7, 2019 from https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/FS_New_technol ogies_ENG.pdfGoogle Scholar
- European Court on Human Rights. 1978. X v United Kingdom (App No: 7992/77).Google Scholar
- Daniel Fallman. 2011. The new good: exploring the potential of philosophy of technology to contribute to human-computer interaction. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 1051--1060.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Maria Angela Ferrario, Will Simm, Jon Whittle, Christopher Frauenberger, Geraldine Fitzpatrick, and Peter Purgathofer. 2017. Values in Computing. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '17), 660--667. https://doi.org/10.1145/3027063.3027067Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mary Flanagan, Daniel C Howe, and Helen Nissenbaum. 2005. Values at play: Design tradeoffs in socially-oriented game design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 751--760.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mary Flanagan, Daniel C Howe, and Helen Nissenbaum. 2008. Embodying values in technology: Theory and practice. Information technology and moral philosophy 322.Google Scholar
- Mary Flanagan and Helen Nissenbaum. 2007. A game design methodology to incorporate social activist themes. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, 181--190.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kenneth R. Fleischmann. 2013. Information and Human Values. Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services 5, 5: 1--99. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00545ED1V01Y201310ICR0Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sandra Fredman. 2016. Emerging from the shadows: Substantive equality and article 14 of the European convention on human rights. Human Rights Law Review 16, 2: 273--301.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Batya Friedman and David G Hendry. 2019. Value sensitive design: Shaping technology with moral imagination. Mit Press.Google Scholar
- Batya Friedman, Kristina Hook, Brian Gill, Lina Eidmar, Catherine Sallmander Prien, and Rachel Severson. 2008. Personlig integritet: A comparative study of perceptions of privacy in public places in Sweden and the United States. In Proceedings of the 5th Nordic conference on Human-computer interaction: building bridges, 142--151.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Batya Friedman and Peter H Kahn Jr. 2003. Human values, ethics, and design. The human-computer interaction handbook: 1177--1201.Google Scholar
- Batya Friedman, Peter H Kahn, and Alan Borning. 2008. Value sensitive design and information systems. The Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics: 69--101.Google Scholar
- David Hamer. 2012. Discussion paper: the R v T controversy: forensic evidence, law and logic. Law, Probability and Risk 11, 4: 331--345.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Michael D. Hills. 2002. Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck's Values Orientation Theory. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture 4, 4. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1040Google ScholarCross Ref
- Steven Hitlin and Jane Allyn Piliavin. 2004. Values: Reviving a Dormant Concept. Annual Review of Sociology 30, 1: 359--393. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.30.012703.110640Google ScholarCross Ref
- House of Lords (UK). 2005. Williamson & Ors, R (on the application of) v. Secretary of State for Education and Employment & Ors [2005] UKHL 15.Google Scholar
- House of Lords (UK). 2006. R (on the application of Begum (by her Litigation Friend Sherwas Rahman)) v The Headteacher and Governors of Denbigh High School [2006] UKHL 15.Google Scholar
- Waqar Hussain, Davoud Mougouei, and Jon Whittle. 2018. Integrating social values into software design patterns. In 2018 IEEE/ACM International Workshop on Software Fairness (FairWare), 8--14.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Terry Hutchinson and Nigel Duncan. 2012. Defining and describing what we do: Doctrinal legal research. Deakin L. Rev. 17: 83.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Giovanni Iachello and Gregory D. Abowd. 2005. Privacy and proportionality: adapting legal evaluation techniques to inform design in ubiquitous computing. In CHI 2005, 91--100. https://doi.org/10.1145/1054972.1054986Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ole Sejer Iversen, Kim Halskov, and Tuck Wah Leong. 2010. Rekindling values in participatory design. In Proceedings of the 11th biennial participatory design conference, 91--100.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 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.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nassim Jafari Naimi, Lisa Nathan, and Ian Hargraves. 2015. Values as hypotheses: design, inquiry, and the service of values. Design issues 31, 4: 91--104.Google Scholar
- Ralph H. Kilmann. 1981. Toward a Unique/Useful Concept of Values for Interpersonal Behavior: A Critical Review of the Literature on Value. Psychological Reports 48, 3: 939--959. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1981.48.3.939Google ScholarCross Ref
- Reuben Kirkham. 2015. Can Disability Discrimination Law Expand the Availability of Wearable Computers? Computer 48, 6: 25--33.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Reuben Kirkham. 2018. How long is a piece of string? The appropriateness of search time as a measure of 'burden'in Access to Information regimes. Government Information Quarterly 35, 4: 657--668.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Reuben Kirkham and Chris Greenhalgh. 2015. Social Access vs. Privacy in Wearable Computing. Pervasive Computing, IEEE 14, 1: 26--33.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cory Knobel and Geoffrey C Bowker. 2011. Values in design. communications of the ACM 54, 7: 26--26.Google Scholar
- Vasiliki Kosta and Bruno De Witte. 2019. Human Rights Norms in the Court of Justice of the European Union. In Human Rights Norms in "Other'' International Courts,' Martin Editor Scheinin (ed.). Cambridge University Press, 263--286. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108584623.009Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jonathan Lazar, Julio Abascal, Simone Barbosa, Jeremy Barksdale, Batya Friedman, Jens Grossklags, Jan Gulliksen, Jeff Johnson, Tom McEwan, Loïc Martínez Normand, and others. 2016. Human--Computer Interaction and International Public Policymaking: A Framework for Understanding and Taking Future Actions. Foundations and Trends® Human--Computer Interaction 9, 2: 69--149.Google Scholar
- Christopher A Le Dantec, Erika Shehan Poole, and Susan P Wyche. 2009. Values as lived experience: evolving value sensitive design in support of value discovery. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 1141--1150.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Annabelle Lever. 2015. Privacy, democracy and freedom of expression. Social dimensions of privacy: Interdisciplinary perspectives: 162--180.Google Scholar
- Ravi Mahamuni, Kejul Kalyani, and Piyush Yadav. 2015. A simplified approach for making human values central to interaction design. Procedia Manufacturing 3: 874--881.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Paul Mahoney. 2019. The Acceptability of the Rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. In The Art of Judicial Reasoning. Springer, 105--124.Google Scholar
- Noëmi Manders-Huits. 2011. What values in design? The challenge of incorporating moral values into design. Science and engineering ethics 17, 2: 271--287.Google Scholar
- Noëmi Manders-Huits and Michael Zimmer. 2013. Values and pragmatic action: the challenges of engagement with technical communities in support of value-conscious design. In Design and Ethics. Routledge, 73--89.Google Scholar
- Giuseppe Martinico. 2012. Is the European Convention going to be "Supreme'? A comparative-constitutional overview of ECHR and EU law before national courts. European Journal of International Law 23, 2: 401--424.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joseph A McKinney, Tisha L Emerson, and Mitchell J Neubert. 2010. The effects of ethical codes on ethical perceptions of actions toward stakeholders. Journal of Business Ethics 97, 4: 505--516.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andrew McNamara, Justin Smith, and Emerson Murphy-Hill. 2018. Does ACM's code of ethics change ethical decision making in software development? In Proceedings of the 2018 26th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, 729--733.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Colin McRoberts. 2019. Tinfoil Hats and Powdered Wigs: Thoughts on Pseudolaw. Washburn Law Journal 58, 3.Google Scholar
- Danuta Mendelson. 2000. Disciplinary powers of medical practice boards and the rule of law. Journal of Law and Medicine 8: 142--152.Google Scholar
- Michael I Meyerson and William Meyerson. 2009. Significant Statistics: The Unwitting Policy Making of Mathematically Ignorant Judges. Pepperdine Law Review 37: 771.Google Scholar
- Milton Rokeach. 1973. The nature of human values. Free Press, New York, NY, US.Google Scholar
- James H Moor. 1985. What is computer ethics? Metaphilosophy 16, 4: 266--275.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andrew Moravcsik. 2000. The origins of human rights regimes: Democratic delegation in postwar Europe. International Organization: 217--252.Google Scholar
- Davoud Mougouei, Harsha Perera, Waqar Hussain, Rifat Shams, and Jon Whittle. 2018. Operationalizing human values in software: A research roadmap. In Proceedings of the 2018 26th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, 780--784.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Samuel Moyn. 2018. Not enough: human rights in an unequal world. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Michael Muller. 2014. Whose Values? Whose Design? In Proc. CSCW 2014 Workshop on Co-creating and Identity-Making in CSCW.Google Scholar
- Donald J Netolitzky. 2018. Lawyers and Court Representation of Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument [OPCA$}$ Litigants in Canada. UBCL Rev. 51: 419.Google Scholar
- Rory O'Connell. 2009. Cinderella comes to the ball: Art 14 and the right to non-discrimination in the ECHR. Legal Studies 29, 2: 211--229.Google ScholarCross Ref
- BM Oomen. 2016. A serious case of Strasbourgbashing? An evaluation of the debates on the legitimacy of the European Court of Human Rights in the Netherlands. The International Journal of Human Rights 20, 3: 407--425.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Leysia Palen and Paul Dourish. 2003. Unpacking privacy for a networked world. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, 129--136.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bernadette Rainey, Elizabeth Wicks, and Clare Ovey. 2014. Jacobs, White and Ovey: the European convention on human rights. Oxford University Press (UK).Google Scholar
- Pamela Samuelson. 2012. Oracle v. Google: are APIs copyrightable? Communications of the ACM 55, 11.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pamela Samuelson. 2015. Three Fundamental Flaws in CAFC's Oracle v. Google Decision. European Intellectual Property Review, October.Google Scholar
- Nadia N Sawicki. 2010. Character, competence, and the principles of medical discipline. J. Health Care L. & Pol'y 13: 285.Google Scholar
- Shalom H. Schwartz. 2012. An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture 2, 1. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1116Google ScholarCross Ref
- Phoebe Sengers, Kirsten Boehner, Shay David, and Joseph'Jofish' Kaye. 2005. Reflective design. In Proceedings of the 4th decennial conference on Critical computing: between sense and sensibility, 49--58.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Katie Shilton. 2015. Anticipatory ethics for a future internet: analyzing values during the design of an Internet infrastructure. Science and engineering ethics 21, 1: 1--18.Google Scholar
- Katie Shilton. 2018. Values and ethics in humancomputer interaction. Foundations and Trends® Human--Computer Interaction 12, 2: 107--171.Google Scholar
- Katie Shilton. 2018. Engaging values despite neutrality: Challenges and approaches to values reflection during the design of internet infrastructure. Science, Technology, & Human Values 43, 2: 247--269.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jessica Sorenson. 2019. Toward a pragmatic and social engineering ethics. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics 10, 1: 207--218.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jeroen Van den Hoven, Pieter Vermaas, and Ibo Van de Poel. 2015. Handbook of ethics, values and technological design. Springer.Google Scholar
- Dawn Whitaker. 2014. Social justice for safeguarded adults deprived of their liberty in the United Kingdom? Disability & Society 29, 9: 1491--1495.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Emily Winter, Stephen Forshaw, Lucy Hunt, and Maria Angela Ferrario. 2019. Advancing the study of human values in software engineering. In Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering, 19--26.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fahri Yetim. 2011. Bringing discourse ethics to value sensitive design: pathways toward a deliberative future. AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction 3, 2: 133--155.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Meg Young, Lassana Magassa, and Batya Friedman. 2019. Toward inclusive tech policy design: a method for underrepresented voices to strengthen tech policy documents. Ethics and Information Technology 21, 2: 89--103.Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Using European Human Rights Jurisprudence for Incorporating Values into Design
Recommendations
State surveillance of the internet: human rights infringement or e-security mechanism?
Crime has always existed in the physical world. However, the transition of crime to an electronic medium brought about new challenges that had hitherto been unknown in the physical world. Besides the problems experienced in cyber crime prevention and ...
Human rights as a topic and guide for LIS research and practice
In this global information age, accessing, disseminating, and controlling information is an increasingly important aspect of human life. Often, these interests are expressed in the language of human rights-for example, rights to expression, privacy, and ...
Trouble at Sea: Data and digital technology challenges for maritime human rights concerns
FAccT '24: The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and TransparencyRecent years have revealed the severity and scale of human rights abuses at sea. Yet maritime human rights investigations remain challenging due to an array of difficulties, including physical inaccessibility and a complex legal environment. Improving ...
Comments