비정부행위자에 의한 브뤼셀 효과의 증폭: 소송을 통한 규범확산
Revisiting the Brussels Effects: Transnational Norm Diffusion through Litigation* Assistant Professor, Department of International Relations, University of Seoul
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
데이터 역외이전 관련 거버넌스를 둘러싼 각국의 법규범 경쟁이 치열하다. 데이터의 자유로운 이동을 주창하는 미국과 데이터주권을 강조하는 중국의 경쟁 속에 오히려 인권을 강조하는 EU의 권리중심모델의 영향이 커지고 있다. ‘브뤼셀 효과’의 대표적 사례이다. 그러나 브뤼셀 효과에 대한 선행연구들은 EU 시장의 규모, 공동체의 규제역량 등에 집중하면서 EU 규제권력과 규범권력의 시너지효과에 대해서는 상대적으로 간과하는 모습을 보인다. 본 연구는 규범확산에 대한 선행연구와 전략적 소송에 대한 선행연구에 기반하여 소송을 통한 규범의 초국가적 확산 가능성에 대해 살펴본다. 특히, 슈렘스 I, II 재판을 살펴봄으로써 EU와 미국 간 데이터 역외이전에 있어서 미국의 정책적 비선호에도 불구하고 개인정보보호규범이 강화되고 있음을 밝힌다. 이를 통해, 본 연구는 소송을 통한 규범확산 및 브뤼셀효과의 증폭 가능성에 대한 이론적․정책적 함의를 모색하고자 한다.
Abstract
Due to the development of AI and digital trade, the contestation among countries regarding governance related to cross-border data transfer has become fierce. Amidst the competition between the United States, which advocates for the free flow of data, and China, which emphasizes data sovereignty, the EU's rights-centered model, which emphasizes human rights such as data privacy, is gaining influence. This is a representative example of the 'Brussels Effect'. However, previous studies on the Brussels Effect tend to focus on materialistic factors such as market size and regulatory capacity, relatively overlooking the synergy between the EU's regulatory power and normative power. Based on previous studies on norm diffusion and strategic litigation, this study aims to examine the possibility of transnational diffusion of norms through litigation. Specifically, this study seeks to demonstrate the strengthening of data privacy norms in data transfers between the EU and the United States, despite U. S. policy preferences, by examining the cases of Schrems I and II as examples of transnational norm diffusion through litigation. Based on the findings, the study aims to suggest some implications for norm diffusion through litigation as well as future development of cross-border data transfer governance.
참고문헌 (36)
- 김주희, "미중 디지털 규범 경쟁과 유럽의 전략", 대한정치학회보, 28(2) (2020)
- 남정아, "개인정보 역외 이전의 최근 동향에 대한 연구", 연세법학, (44) (2024)
- 문용일, "수렴인가? 이질동형상(isomorphism)인가? : EU, 미국, 중국의 데이터 프라이버시 법제 비교분석", 국제지역연구, 28(2) (2024)
- 디지털 규범경쟁 : 데이터의 자유로운 이동 vs 데이터 주권, "문용일", JPI, ~, pp.JPI 정책포럼 2023-06 (2023)
- 박노형, "개정된 개인정보보호법상 개인정보의 국외이전에 관한 규정의 분석: GDPR을 참조하여", 고려법학, (109) (2023)
- 심소연, "브뤼셀 효과 : EU의 탄소국경조정제도(CBAM), 배터리법 및 인공지능법을 통한 분석", 통합유럽연구, 15(1) (2024)
- 오창룡, "국제질서 전환기의 브뤼셀 효과: 유럽연합 규제 권력의 패권적 영향", EU 연구, (65) (2023)
- EU-미국 데이터 프라이버시 프레임워크(DPF) 주요 내용 및 시사점, "한국인터넷진흥원", ~, pp.개인정보보호 월간동향분석 2023년 8월호 (2023)
- Acharya, Amitav, "How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? Norm Localization and Institutional Change in Asian Regionalism", International Organization, 58(2) (2004)
- Alter, Karen, "Explaining Variation in the Use of European Litigation Strategies: European Community Law and British Gender Equality Policy", Comparative Political Studies, 33(2000) (2000)
- Alter, Karen, "The New Terrain of International Law: Courts, Politics, and Rights" (2014), Princeton University Press
- Azoulai, Loic, "Institutionalizing Personal Data Protection in Times of Institutional Distrust: the Schrems Case", Common Market Law Review, 53(5) (2016)
- Börzel, Tanja, "Participation through Law Enforcement: the Case of the European Union", Comparative Political Studies, 39 (2006)
- Bradford, Anu, "The Brussels Effect : Howthe European Union Rules the World" (2020), Oxford University Press
- Bradford, Anu, "The Race to Regulate Artificial Intelligence", Foreign Affairs, 27 June, 2023, ~ (2023)
- Checkel, Jeffrey, "Norms, Institutions, and National Identity in Contemporary Europe", International Studies Quarterly, 43(1) (1999)
- Cichowski, Rachael, "Court, Rights, and Democratic Participation", Comparative Political Studies, 39(1) (2006)
- Dobbin, Frank, "The Global Diffusion of Public Policies: Social Construction, Coercion, Competition, or Learning?", Annual Review of Sociology, 33 (2007)
- "The DPC’s Engagement with Meta on AI"[URL]
- "EU-US Data Privacy Framework: 3rd Time Lucky?"[URL]
- Epp, Charles, "The Rights Revolution: Lawyers, Activists, and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective" (1998), Cambridge University Press
- Digital Trade Restrictiveness Index, "Ferrancane, Martina", European Centre for International Political Economy, ~ (2018)
- Gönenç, Defne, "Litigation Process of Social Movements as a Driver of Norm Transformation?", Cambridge Reviewof International Affairs, 32(1) (2019)
- Greenhill, Barry, "The Company You Keep: International Socialization and the Diffusion of Human Rights Norms", International Studies Quarterly, 54(1) (2010)
- Gurowitz, Amy, "Mobilizing International Norms: Domestic Actors, Immigrants, and the Japanese State", World Politics, 51(3) (1999)
- Hastings, Peter, "Five Ways that Privacy Shield is Different from Safe Harbor and Five Simple Steps Companies Can Take to Prepare for Certification", Stay Current, ~ (2016)
- Jaichand, Vinodh, "Public Interest Litigation Strategies for Advancing Human Rights in Domestic Systems of Law", International Journal on Human Rights, 1(1) (2004)
- "European Commission gives EU-US data transfers third round at CJEU"[URL]
- Price, Richard, "Reversing the Gun Sights: Transnational Civil Society Targets Land Mines", International Organization, 52(3) (1998)
- Risse, Thomas, "The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change" (1999), Cambridge University Press
- Sarat, Austin, "Cause Lawyering: Political Commitments and Professional Responsibilities" (1998), Oxford University Press
- Simmons, Beth, "Global Diffusion of Markets and Democracy" (2008), Cambridge University Press
- "Everything You Need to Know about the Data Privacy Framework(Privacy Shield 2.0)"[URL]
- Vanhala, Lisa, "Anti-discrimination Policy Actors and Their Use of Litigation Strategies : the Influence of Identity Politics", Journal of European Public Policy, 16(5) (2009)
- Wang, Peiran, "China’s Perceptions of Cyber Security", Georgetown Journal of International Affairs (2012)
- Wilson, Bruce, "Institutional Reform and Rights Revolutions in Latin America: The Cases of Costa Rica and Colombia", Journal of Politics in Latin America, 1(2) (2009)