Are ‘pseudonymised’ data always personal data? Implications of the GDPR for administrative data research in the UK

There has naturally been a good deal of discussion of the forthcoming General Data Protection Regulation. One issue of interest to all data controllers, and of particular concern for researchers, is whether the GDPR expands the scope of personal data through the introduction of the term ‘pseudonymisation’ in Article 4(5). If all data which have been ‘pseudonymised’ in the conventional sense of the word (e.g. key-coded) are to be treated as personal data, this would have serious implications for research. Administrative data research, which is carried out on data routinely collected and held by public authorities, would be particularly affected as the sharing of de-identified data could constitute the unconsented disclosure of identifiable information.Instead, however, we argue that the definition of pseudonymisation in Article 4(5) GDPR will not expand the category of personal data, and that there is no intention that it should do so. The definition of pseudonymisation under the GDPR is not intended to determine whether data are personal data; indeed it is clear that all data falling within this definition are personal data. Rather, it is Recital 26 and its requirement of a ‘means reasonably likely to be used’ which remains the relevant test as to whether data are personal. This leaves open the possibility that data which have been ‘pseudonymised’ in the conventional sense of key-coding can still be rendered anonymous. There may also be circumstances in which data which have undergone pseudonymisation within one organisation could be anonymous for a third party. We explain how, with reference to the data environment factors as set out in the UK Anonymisation Network's Anonymisation Decision-Making Framework.     

Obstruction in parliaments: a cross-national perspective

ABSTRACT

In legislative institutions, disruptions to the agenda and delays in processing legislation can have a significant impact on the ability of legislative majorities to realise success. Few previous studies have systematically examined parliamentary obstruction in non-U.S. settings. In this article, I investigate the extent to which obstruction occurs in parliaments around the world. The evidence, drawn from a 2016 survey of members of the Association of Secretaries General of Parliaments (ASGP) and supplemented with documentary evidence and interviews with parliamentary clerks and members of parliament in several countries demonstrates that obstructive behaviour occurs in a variety of types of national legislatures and across different political systems and institutional settings.     

Reactions to Dating Violence Research: Do Difficulties with Distress Tolerance Increase Negative Reactions?

Recent research has begun to examine whether participants in dating violence studies perceive any benefit from the research and/or experience emotional distress as a result of having participated. Such information is important for Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) and researchers in determining ethical and appropriate protections for participants. In the current study, we examined participants’ reactions to answering questions on dating violence victimization and perpetration utilizing a sample of female college students (N?=?282). We also examined whether distress tolerance was associated with research reactions and moderated the relation between reports of victimization/perpetration and negative emotional reactions to the research. Findings demonstrated that negative emotional reactions to the research did not differ between individuals with or without previous dating violence. Further, distress tolerance had a main effect, but not a moderating effect, on negative emotional reactions to research participation. Implications of these findings for future research and IRBs are discussed.     

Using Cost Analysis to Examine Variability in Replications of an Efficacious Child Neglect Prevention Program

This article reports on a program- and case-level cost analysis of five replication sites of an efficacious child neglect prevention program. Approximately one-third of all sites' total labor hours were expended on direct family services and casework support for a specific family, with the remainder spent on indirect implementation support and program administration activities. Including non-personnel costs, the all-site mean total cost per family was $6,276, ranging across sites from $2,245 to $10,260. Costs varied greatly among individual families within sites. More research is needed to understand factors associated with differences in cost.     

Narcolepsy mimicking suicidal carbon monoxide poisoning

We present a case of narcolepsy mimicking suicidal carbon monoxide poisoning. The signs and symptoms of narcolepsy in this previously undiagnosed man were initially missed, which emphasizes the importance of extracting a detailed history of a decedent's behavior prior to his or her death. Narcoleptics are often involved in motor vehicle accidents. This report again demonstrates that narcolepsy and driving don't mix, even when the vehicle is stationary. We also briefly review the various sleep disorders.     

How can Political Liberals be Environmentalists?

It is often assumed that neutralist liberalism and environmentalism are incompatible because promoting environmentally friendly policies involves endorsing a particular conception of the good life. This paper questions that assumption by showing that one important version of neutralist liberalism, John Rawls's 'justice as fairness', can allow two kinds of justification for environmental policies. First, public reason arguments can be used to justify conceptions of sustainability and environmental justice. Second, comprehensive ideals (including non-anthropocentric ideals) can be used to justify more ambitious environmental policies when two conditions are met, namely, the issue under discussion does not concern constitutional essentials or matters of basic justice; and the policy is endorsed by a majority of citizens. Rawls's willingness to allow this second kind of justification for environmental (and other) policies is defended against two objections, which claim that Rawls's 'democratic liberalism' is incoherent. The first objection – the 'justice' objection – is that to spend public money promoting comprehensive (environmental) ideals is inconsistent with the 'difference principle'. The 'justice' objection depends on a common misunderstanding of the difference principle. The second objection – the 'neutrality' objection – claims that 'democratic liberalism' is inconsistent with Rawls's commitment to neutrality. The 'neutrality' objection is unconvincing because 'democratic liberalism' is 'fundamentally neutral' whereas the leading alternative is not.