Abstract
I argue in this paper that the development and convergence of information and communication technologies (ICT) is creating a global network of surveillance capabilities which affect the traveler. These surveillance capabilities are reminiscent of 18 th century philosopher Jeremy Bentham’s panopticon, and as such the emerging global surveillance network has been referred to as the travel panopticon. I argue that the travel panopticon is corrosive of personal autonomy, and in doing so I describe and analyse various philosophical approaches to personal autonomy.
- Expanded Introduction
The now well established ICT paradigm is one based on developments in digital computing technologies combined with advances in telecommunications capabilities. On top of this paradigm is emerging a whole range of new technological developments and applications – technologies which are enabling unprecedented convergence of hitherto disparate fields of human endeavour.
In particular, the convergence of these technologies is having a profound effect on the policies and practices which nation states use for border control. This effect is transforming previously largely passive, incompatible, and primitive systems of border control into coordinated, sophisticated, and active systems of people tracking. This transformation has accelerated subsequent to the events in the United States of September 11, 2001, and is resulting in the emergence of a seamless, ubiquitous, and continuous form of travel surveillance.
The travelling public are generally unaware of the scale, depth, or sophistication of this travel surveillance. They are also often unaware that they are under surveillance at all, let alone by whom they are being surveilled.
Such surveillance characteristics are reminiscent of 18 th century English philosopher Jeremy Bentham’s panopticon, and as such the phenomenon of systematic global mass travel surveillance has been referred to as the travel panopticon.
Bentham’s panopticon – an idea he adapted the from his brother Samuel’s efficient factory design – was an architectural plan intended (primarily) for a prison building where the prison’s guard could observe all prisoners, but where the prisoners could not see the guard.
The travel panopticon has much of this same functionality, albeit in a more complex and multifaceted form
. Its overall effect is one of ICT enabled surveillance of people movement on a massive and global scale as well as at increasingly fine levels of segmentation.
The emergence of the travel panopticon raises profound ethical, political, and societal questions, including that which is the focus of this paper – namely what effect is this emergence having on personal autonomy? In order to assess whether (as I claim) personal autonomy is being negatively affected by the travel panopticon, it is necessary firstly to understand what personal autonomy has been argued philosophically to consist of and in. I begin the paper, therefore, with a discussion of some key ideas around personal autonomy, particularly from a broadly Kantian perspective. I also critique the ideas of Joseph Raz.
Personal autonomy is an essential part of any canonical account of moral philosophy, and it is also one of the most important elements in the political tradition of liberalism. It is no surprise, then, that personal autonomy has been the focus of substantial research in philosophical enquiry. But in the latter half of the 20 th century this research has increased considerably and crossed over into many other (related) disciplines such as sociology, law, and public policy. Personal autonomy has also become a focus of newly established interdisciplinary fields such as those encompassing the study of information in an “information society”. An important reason for these changes is the increase in the capabilities of ICT, and I discuss this in relation to the travel panopticon in the paper.
Following this discussion of personal autonomy, I analyse Bentham’s panopticon in more detail. I include in this analysis a description of key elements of the panopticon design, as well as some of Bentham’s hopes and expectations for the panopticon. I follow this with a discussion of some of the metaphorical and philosophical issues the panopticon raises. I provide some relevant background by situating the development of the panopticon within the context of Bentham’s other contributions to philosophy.
To aid in assessing the degree and nature of change to personal autonomy brought about by the travel panopticon, it is helpful to describe the emergence of the travel panopticon from the infrastructural perspective. I therefore next outline some of the main technologies which create, enable, and sustain the travel panopticon. In doing so, I draw comparisons between Bentham’s panopticon and the travel panopticon, noting key similarities and differences, and I ask the question as to whether either panopticon has any “advantages” over the other.
Having established a theoretical and contextual basis from which to assess the applied ethical questions of this paper, my discussion then turns to an analysis of the degree to which personal autonomy is affected by the travel panopticon. I argue that the nature and extent of the surveillance capabilities and practices inherent within the travel panopticon have had and are having a corrosive effect on personal autonomy , and I provide examples of this corrosion.
As part of my discussion of the travel panopticon’s corrosive effect on personal autonomy, I critique the ideas of Jeffrey Reiman. In “Driving to the Panopticon” , Reiman uses the development of Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems (IVHS) to highlight the omniscient capabilities of converging ICT. Reiman refers to these converging technologies as the “informational panopticon”.
Whereas Reiman’s informational panopticon seems to refer to the entire set of ICT-based surveillance effects, the travel panopticon limits its scope to ICT-based travel surveillance. It is self evident, however, that we are referring to the same general phenomenon. Naturally, then, Reiman’s ideas on the informational panopticon and my comments on his ideas apply also to the travel panopticon.
Although I provide some answers to the questions posed by the travel panopticon, as is almost invariably the case my discussion raises yet more questions. I conclude the paper therefore by not only synthesizing its main arguments, but also by highlighting a number of important questions for further research. These include the analysis of the various national and international laws, policies, and conventions which give political legitimacy to the travel panopticon.
Bibliography for Personal Autonomy in the Travel Panopticon
Ameriks, K., Kant and the Fate of Autonomy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 2000
Bentham, J., The Panopticon Writings. Verso, London. 1995
Bird, G. ed., A Companion to Kant. Blackwell Publishing, Massachusetts. 2006
Daly, E., Information Privacy and the Ethics of Information Technologies: from Kant to Cryptography. University of Canterbury Christchurch. (1996)
Dworkin, G., The Theory and Practice of Autonomy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1988
Fairfield, P., Moral Selfhood in the Liberal Tradition. University of Toronto Press, Toronto. 2000
Hill Jr., T., Autonomy and Self-Respect. Cambridge University Press. 1991
Lyon, D., The Electronic Eye. Polity Press, Cambridge.1994
Lyon, D., Surveillance Society. (2001)
Mill, J. S., On Liberty (1859) (Ed E. Rapaport). Hackett Publishing, Indiana. 1978
Novek, E. et al, “The value of your name” in Media Culture and Society. vol. 12(4) pp. 525-544. Oct 1990.
Raz, J., The Morality of Freedom. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 1996
Reath, A., Agency and Autonomy in Kant’s Moral Theory. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 2006
Reiman, J., “Driving to the Panopticon” in Privacies: Philosophical Evaluations. (Rössler, B. ed.), Stanford University Press. 2004
Semple, J., Bentham’s Prison: A Study of the Panopticon Penitentiary. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 1993
Young, R., Personal Autonomy: Beyond Negative and Positive Liberty. Croom Helm, Kent. 1986