Assignment Task: Policy Analysis
Purpose:
This assessment provides students with the opportunity to analyse a real-world policy related to LAW2CLP themes and apply Lessig's pathetic dot as the key theoretical framework. It is intended to facilitate the critical analysis of policy, while simulating the process of developing a policy submission.
Task details:
In this assessment, you are tasked to develop a report responding to a series of questions about a recent policy document that relates to issues covered in this subject. You must choose to examine one of the following:
Option 1: Australia's 'risk-based' approach to regulating artificial intelligence (AI)
Option 2: The 'Right to be Forgotten' in Australia
Option 3: A policy of your choosing.
Instructions:
Select one of the policy options listed in these instructions. Detailed information on each of these options will be provided below. Please read these details carefully, to ensure that you understand the scope and focus of the policy you will be analyzing.
Once you have selected your policy or have received approval (in the case of Option 3), write a policy report which responds to the following questions:
What is the background and/or context of your selected policy?
You may wish to discuss why the government, agency, advocacy group or statutory body is concerned with this cyber law issue or problem.
You may also add ethical concerns, human rights concerns or other underlying concerns.
What is the policy and how does/will this policy operate?
In answering this question, you should address Lawrence Lessig's model of regulation discussed in Week 2. What 'levers' are being pulled by this policy? How will the different levers in Lessig's theory work together in this policy?
Do you think this policy will achieve its objectives? What issues may arise as a result of this policy (will there be unintended consequences)? What would you do differently (if anything)?
Policy Options: Select ONE of the following as the subject of your report.
Option 1: Australia's 'risk-based' approach to regulating AI
Primary policy document: Safe and responsible AI in Australia: Discussion paper (Department of Industry, Science and Resources, 2023)
KEY INFORMATION: The Safe and responsible AI in Australia Discussion paper provides an overview of Australia's potential policy approaches to regulating Artificial Intelligence in Australia. It examines several existing frameworks and initiatives relevant to AI, outlines international approaches, and ultimately recommends that Australia adopts a risk-based approach similar to that pioneered by the European Union's AI Act. This risk-based model should be the focus of your report. There are several resources within the document which provide a draft for this risk-based approach. On PAGE 32-33 of the paper, you can find a diagram of the model, with examples of how the Australian risk-based approach could manage different AI technologies. Attachment C includes additional information on what kinds of measures or features should be included. You may also wish to use other resources provided in the discussion paper, or conduct some external research into how industries, policy analysts, or the Australian Government itself has responded to the proposal.
AI technology is quite broad and varied. You have some freedom to set the scope of your report: You may wish to analyse the proposed risk-based approach from a general perspective, or you may wish to focus your report on a particular example of AI technology (for example, chatbots, or the use of AI in policing) and use this example to evaluate the policy.
Option 2: the 'Right to be forgotten' in Australia
Primary policy document: Privacy Act Review: Report (Attorney-General's Department, 2022)
KEY INFORMATION: The Privacy Act Review Report is a major policy document outlining a series of recommendations to update the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth). While there are number of recommendations, we are concerned with Proposal 18.5, the introduction of a 'right to de-indexing', which is sometimes also called the 'Right to be forgotten'. On PAGE 177-179 of the report, you can find a discussion of the Right to de-indexing. You may also find that the overarching discussion of the 'right to erasure' also contains some useful lines of inquiry. You may also wish to conduct some research into the 'right to be forgotten', and how this power has been handled (and responded to) by legal analysts or in international frameworks - such as the EU's General Data Protection Regulation - that have already implemented this right.
Option 3: a policy for your choosing (see instructions below)
If you would like to select your own public policy to analyse for this assignment, then you may do so provided that your chosen policy meets certain criteria:
it must be a public policy from Australia (although the policy may be based on a law from another country)
it must be a federal or Commonwealth public policy (it cannot be a public policy from a state or territory)
it must relate to one of the topics discussed in Weeks 3-6 (generally AI and privacy)
it must have been designed in the last 10 years
it CANNOT be a policy that was discussed during the seminars.
If end up choosing a policy for this assessment, you must have this approved by your subject coordinator by the Friday of Week 5 (30 August 2024). Send your proposed policy via email and you will receive a response within 72 hours.
Please note that your policy choice - even if it meets the above criteria - may not be approved if it is determined that it is not of a suitable scope or complexity for the purposes of the assessment task. This is to ensure that you are not undertaking a significantly different workload from other students in the cohort.
Research requirement
You will be expected to conduct external research for your policy assessment. This research must be academic and peer-reviewed. You can find useful guides on how to conduct academic research via the La Trobe University Library guides. We will also practice academic research in our live seminars.
Your policy report should contain a minimum of eight academic references.
Of this minimum requirement, at least four of your academic references must be sourced through external research. This means that you will be required to conduct independent research to find academic sources for this assessment.
You may wish to use sources from the LAW2CLP reading list for your other academic references, and are welcome and encouraged to do so.
You may also wish to pull from Government reports and submissions; these are very useful resources that I highly recommend you explore, but please note that they will not count as academic sources for the purposes of this research requirement.
Please note that the quality of your sources is considered within the marking criteria. This means that, even if you meet the overall minimum standard within your report, you should ensure that you are not relying upon non-academic or unreliable sources to support your key claims and arguments.