Big data in the fight against terrorism: Is mass surveillance ethically justifiable?

Governments and security agencies around the world are increasingly using surveillance methods to counter the threat of Islamist terrorism. This can be seen in reports from organisations such as Freedom House, in laws on information collection and storage that have been passed in recent years, including in the UK, or in leaked documents such as those from Edward Snowden. But to what extent can this practice be ethically justified? Alexander Ritter, a graduate of the "PPE - Philosophy, Politics and Economics" degree programme, and Prof. Dr Jens Harbecke, Chair of Theoretical Philosophy and Philosophy of the Social Sciences at Witten/Herdecke University (UW/H), explore this question in their new article, which has been published in the renowned journal "Studies in Conflict and Terrorism".

Mass surveillance can promote ethical problems and terror

The researchers were particularly interested in weighing up the expected positive effects and possible negative consequences from an ethical perspective. Alexander Ritter: "We looked at evidence that suggests that close mass surveillance can unintentionally contribute to the emergence of Islamist violence."

For their investigation, the scientists have set up a so-called bayesian model. This allows them to analyse how likely it is that the surveillance mechanisms actually identify the correct threat actor. The misidentifiers of suspects and the performativity of surveillance can also be taken into account. Performativity describes the fact that measures to prevent terror can themselves contribute to the emergence of Islamist violence. "Our results suggest that mass surveillance has a partial justification problem," says Harbecke. "Errors in the identification of suspects can result in unnecessary burdens for many uninvolved citizens, and the surveillance of individuals can motivate them to commit offences in the first place."

Despite the critical results, the authors are not fundamentally against mass surveillance. "It is true that such measures can make an undeniable contribution to the fight against terrorism," emphasises Alexander Ritter. "Rather, we argue in favour of more embedding and transparency of such measures in order to mitigate their possible negative consequences."

Alexander Ritter and Jens Harbecke thus make an important contribution to the debate on the ethical consequences of big data-based surveillance and emphasise the importance of a balanced assessment of the potential advantages and disadvantages.

Further information: Publication details: Ritter, A. & Harbecke, J. (2024-onlinefirst). Counter-Terrorism: The Risk of Performativity in Big Data-Based Mass Surveillance. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism. DOI: 10.1080/1057610X.2024.2341447