Data sharing and data harvesting practices not only infringe the privacy rights of individuals but cause significant harms to others as well. Emissions of personally sensitive behavioural data are...Show moreData sharing and data harvesting practices not only infringe the privacy rights of individuals but cause significant harms to others as well. Emissions of personally sensitive behavioural data are leaked into the digital economy causing damage to social practices and destabilizing political and informational ecosystems. Data pollution is like industrial pollution, and environmental law suggestions can offer solutions to the problem. Will a Pigouvian tax on data extraction limit or constrain the negative externalities of data pollution? This explorative research aims to investigate whether a data pollution tax can operate as a regulatory instrument to curb data pollution and whether citizens support this measure. Do citizens support a data pollution tax designed so that harms to others, affecting their core human capabilities, will be taxed as a matter of principle? Suppose excessive (corporate) data sharing and extraction practices that cause harm to others will be taxed. Do individuals expect that persons and corporations will change their data transmission practices? Our survey findings show that (United States) citizens consider that harms caused by data pollution should be taxed. Respondents will also substantially decrease their data pollution behaviour once a tax is imposed. However, and to our surprise, our research findings also lay bare a possible ‘bad behaviour paradox’: the more significant the harm caused by some instances of data pollution, the less willing people are to change behaviour relative to the tax imposed.Show less
