David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Business Ethics 22 (1):27 - 38 (1999)
Privacy is a relational and relative concept that has been defined in a variety of ways. In this paper we offer a systematic discussion of potentially different notions of privacy. We conclude that privacy as the freedom or immunity from the judgement of others is an extremely useful concept to develop ways in which to understand privacy claims and associated risks. To this end, we develop a framework of principles that explores the interrelations of interests and values for various stakeholders where privacy concerns have risen or are expected to rise. We argue that conflicts between the interests and values of different stakeholders may result in legitimate claims of privacy/transparency being ignored or underrepresented. Central to this analysis is the notion of a stakeholder. We argue that stakeholders are persons or groups with legitimate interests, of intrinsic value, in the procedural and/or substantive aspects of the privacy/transparency claim and subsequent judgements on that basis. Using the principles of access, representation, and power, which flow from our framework of analysis, we show how they can facilitate the identification of potential privacy/transparency risks using examples from the British National Health Service.
|Keywords||confidentiality of patient data interests power privacy stakeholders values|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Leigh A. Clark & Sherry J. Roberts (2010). Employer's Use of Social Networking Sites: A Socially Irresponsible Practice. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 95 (4):507 - 525.
Irene Pollach (2011). Online Privacy as a Corporate Social Responsibility: An Empirical Study. Business Ethics 20 (1):88-102.
Similar books and articles
Elin Palm (2009). Privacy Expectations at Work—What is Reasonable and Why? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (2):201 - 215.
Lars Oystein Ursin (2010). Privacy and Property in the Biobank Context. HEC Forum 22 (3):211-224.
Julie David & Marilyn Prosch (2010). Extending the Value Chain to Incorporate Privacy by Design Principles. Identity in the Information Society 3 (2):295-318.
Anders J. Persson & Sven Ove Hansson (2003). Privacy at Work – Ethical Criteria. Journal of Business Ethics 42 (1):59 - 70.
Lawrence O. Gostin (2001). Health Information: Reconciling Personal Privacy with the Public Good of Human Health. [REVIEW] Health Care Analysis 9 (3):321-335.
Alan L. Lockwood (1977). Values Education and the Right to Privacy. Journal of Moral Education 7 (1):9-26.
David Meeler (2008). Is Information All We Need to Protect? The Monist 91 (1):151-169.
Lars Øystein Ursin (2008). Biobank Research and the Right to Privacy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (4):267-285.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads26 ( #104,520 of 1,699,596 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #206,271 of 1,699,596 )
How can I increase my downloads?