Securitization in the context of the EU's use of health data during theCovid-19 pandemic in2020: A comparative case study of securitization implementation in the context of the EU's us of personal health data
Author
Nemethova, Veronika
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2021
Submitted on
2021-05-27
Pages
65
Abstract
This thesis links a theoretical debate to an empirical case. Securitization theory examines how an issue is presented as a security threat to justify exceptional measures. While the Copenhagen School first emphasized nation-states, later work argues that international organizations can also act as securitization actors. This study tests that claim during the COVID-19 pandemic by examining the European Union (EU) as the actor and Member States as the audience (the party that must be convinced). The EU suggested that Member States process personal health data to limit the spread of the virus, while complying with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), maintaining high safety standards, and respecting fundamental rights. The research uses a comparative case study and frame analysis of EU documents and documents from Denmark, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, Lithuania, and Luxembourg. The analysis shows that the EU frames COVID-19 as a threat to the functioning of society (e.g., unemployment, economic losses, discrimination, disinformation) and calls for more coherent and unified responses. At the same time, Member State responses are fragmented: all follow the GDPR during the crisis, but apply it according to national judgments. States differ in how they define health data, who acts as data collector/processor, and how responsibilities are assigned among stakeholders such as public authorities and employers. This fragmentation reflects non-specific EU-level definitions around health data, emergencies, and roles, as well as the GDPR’s broad, pre-pandemic design as a regulation intended to apply across all Member States. This leaves room for national adaptation. As a result, the audience—Member States—has meaningful power to adjust measures and can influence EU guidance in emergencies. Overall, securitization is largely possible in the EU context, but it produces varied national implementations of health data processing. Influence runs both ways between the EU and its Member States during crises.
Dette speciale forbinder en teoretisk debat med en empirisk undersøgelse. Sekuritiseringsteori handler om, hvordan et emne fremstilles som en sikkerhedstrussel for at legitimere ekstraordinære tiltag. Hvor Københavnerskolen først fokuserede på nationalstaten, hævder nyere forskning, at internationale organisationer også kan være sekuritiseringsaktører. Specialet undersøger dette i COVID-19-pandemien med EU som aktør og medlemsstaterne som publikum (den part, der skal overbevises). EU foreslog, at medlemsstaterne behandler personlige helbredsoplysninger for at begrænse smitten, samtidig med at de overholder databeskyttelsesforordningen (GDPR), opretholder høj sikkerhed og respekterer grundlæggende rettigheder. Undersøgelsen er et komparativt casestudie med en frameanalyse (rammeanalyse) af EU-dokumenter og dokumenter fra Danmark, Finland, Ungarn, Irland, Litauen og Luxembourg. Analysen viser, at EU rammesætter COVID-19 som en trussel mod samfundets funktion (fx arbejdsløshed, økonomiske tab, diskrimination, desinformation) og efterlyser mere sammenhængende og ensartede svar. Samtidig er medlemsstaternes reaktioner fragmenterede: Alle følger GDPR i krisesituationen, men anvender den efter nationale vurderinger. Staterne definerer helbredsdata forskelligt, tildeler rollen som dataindsamler/databehandler til forskellige aktører og fordeler ansvar forskelligt mellem fx staten og arbejdsgivere. Fragmenteringen skyldes manglende præciseringer på EU-niveau om helbredsdata, nødsituationer og roller samt GDPR’s brede, forhånds-pandemiske udformning som en forordning, der skal kunne bruges i alle medlemsstater. Det giver staterne spillerum til at tilpasse reglerne til nationale forhold. Dermed fungerer medlemsstaterne som et publikum med reel indflydelse, der både tilpasser tiltag og kan påvirke EU’s vejledninger i en nødsituation. Konklusionen er, at sekuritisering i høj grad er mulig i EU-konteksten, men den fører til forskellige nationale implementeringer af helbredsdatabehandling. Både EU og medlemsstaterne påvirker hinandens handlinger og retningslinjer under kriser.
[This apstract has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]