Congratulations, Jeff! You truly deserve it! 😁

This latest is particularly important to me because it serves as a sequel to my previous piece on the normative principle of reciprocity in cooperation and its potential application to US-ROK cooperation in AI. END

nationalinterest.org/blog/korea-w...

I outline a) the bargaining between two capitals that utilizes issue linkage tactics, b) the nature of technology cooperation between interdependence and independence, and c) how these factors collectively weaken technology cooperation between the two. 2/n

As I mentioned in my acceptance speech, I will “take this award as a reminder and courage to keep pushing forward, no matter what challenges are ahead.” Thanks again to those who have always been there and supported me!

I am indebted to so many people, especially: @jonrlindsay @peterswire @miltonmueller @Katie_Johanna @Vagisha_16 Alasdair Young Ahmed Said Katharina Kuhn and participants from @isanet virtual, WEIS, CSI 2023 @GaTechCyber, @GSIPE 5th mini-con, and @NunnSchoolGT (cc @GTliberalarts).

The comprehensive perspective as proposed by this article is essential, given the array of strategic options available beyond data localization and its interwoven nature within the domains of economy and security. It contributes to IPE-Security nexus and economic statecraft. END/

Rather than deep diving into each case in this 🧵, three Southeast Asian cases assert that data localization is driven by a state’s comprehensive understanding of the network effect. Specifically, the state’s perspective on the economic impact and security implications is crucial. 8/

Based on the number of internet users and a sizable platform market, I select Singapore, Vietnam, and Indonesia as case studies which are based on their similar geographical location and market characteristics. This comparative case study with process-tracing is conducted. 7/

Data results in increased value and gains (network effect). As both network perception and security externality emerge as significant factors to data lolcalization, both NEGATIVE network perception and NEGATIVE security externality must be present as a necessary condition. 6/

To capture this strategic dimension, which can be viewed as a form of economic statecraft derived from digital technology, a theoretical mechanism is proposed that incorporates the concepts of network perception and security externality in a heuristic way. 5/

States have varying motivations for implementing data localization policies and I categorized based on three key actors: individual referents, platforms, and the structural characteristics of data. Yet, no single motivation explains the entire calculation of data localization. 4/

Then why do states choose to localize data for all the negative impacts it can have on their interests? My answer is straightforward: Data localization is seen as an economic means derived from digital technology that serves political objectives (= economic statecraft). 3/

Data localization, which requires businesses to establish new data infrastructures within a country’s borders, strengthens national data security and generates economic benefits. HOWEVER, the drawbacks of data localization often outweigh the benefits with empirical evidence. 2/

Given the significance of data in tandem with the rapid development and application of AI, data localization is one of the attempts to protect/use data. The adoption of it has increased significantly in recent years, with the number of countries more than doubling since 2017 1/

Thanks @cfbalcazar.bsky.social for having me and looking forward to enjoying all great works at the conference!

And my bad! It’s Feb 8st!