网络主权视角下的数据治理比较研究

A Comparative Study of Data Governance from the Perspective of Cyber-sovereignty

从上个世纪末起,网络主权就成为互联网治理的重点议题,它经历从无到有,从领土主权转向功能主权,从以物理层、内容层为中心转向以代码层为中心三个层次的演化。时至今日,一方面数据已演变成互联网基础架构代码层的核心要素,另一方面网络主权又越发依赖基础架构;两相结合,使得数据治理成为当下各国行使网络主权的重要手段。在此背景之下,美国和欧盟采取截然不同的数据治理模式:促进数据流通模式和限制数据流通模式。二者分别对应积极网络主权和消极网络主权。通过分析和比较两种模式可知,一国究竟采取哪种模式,取决于该国对互联网基础架构和相关技术平台的控制程度。面对当前以数据为核心要素的网络主权国际博弈,我国在数据治理方面,不能“一刀切”地照搬欧盟限制数据流通模式,仅强调防御性的消极网络主权;而需结合自身基础架构特征和产业发展动向,适时借鉴美国促进数据流通模式,转变为更加主动的积极网络主权,以期在基础架构层面进一步提升国家的网络主权能力。

Since the end of the last century,cyber-sovereignty has become a key topic of Internet governance,which has experienced an evolution from nothing to something,from territorial sovereignty to functional sovereignty,and from centering on the physical layer and content layer to centering on the code layer.Today,on the one hand,data has evolved into the core element of the code layer of the Internet infrastructure,and on the other hand,cyber-sovereignty is more and more dependent on the infrastructure;the combination of the two makes data governance an important means for countries to exercise cyber-sovereignty.Under this background,the United States and the European Union have adopted very different data governance models:the model of facilitating data flow and the model of restricting data flow.The two correspond to positive cyber-sovereignty and negative cyber-sovereignty respectively.By analyzing and comparing the two models,it can be seen that which model a country adopts depends on the degree of control it has over the Internet infrastructure and relevant technology platforms.Facing the current international game of cyber-sovereignty which concentrates on the data,China,in terms of data governance,should not copy the EU model of restricting data flow in a“one-size-fits-all”approach and emphasize merely defensive negative cyber-sovereignty.Instead,China needs to combine its own infrastructure characteristics and industrial development trends,learn from the U.S.model of facilitating data flow in due course,and change to a more proactive cyber-sovereignty,with a vision to further enhancing the national cyber-sovereignty capacity at the infrastructure level.