Ethical Use of Big Data Analytics

  • Home
  • Ethical Use Of Big Data Analytics
Blog preview image

Abstract
This paper explores the ethical implications of big data analytics, a rapidly growing field that uses vast amounts of data to drive decisions in business, healthcare, marketing, and government. While big data promises efficiency, personalization, and innovation, it raises significant ethical and legal concerns regarding privacy, consent, discrimination, and accountability. This report examines these challenges through real-world examples like the Cambridge Analytica scandal and algorithmic bias in predictive policing. The paper also evaluates the current regulatory landscape, especially the role of GDPR, and concludes by emphasizing the need for transparent, fair, and responsible data practices.

Introduction
Big data analytics involves the collection, processing, and analysis of massive datasets to uncover patterns, trends, and associations. It underpins modern technologies, from recommendation systems to health diagnostics. However, as the capabilities of big data have expanded, so have the ethical and legal concerns. The key question explored in this paper is: How can big data be used ethically and legally while respecting individual rights and promoting social good? (Floridi & Taddeo, 2016).

Understanding Big Data and Its Applications
Big data is characterized by the "Three Vs": volume, velocity, and variety. It is gathered from numerous sources including social media, sensors, mobile devices, and online transactions. Applications span industries:
Healthcare: Predicting disease outbreaks, personalizing treatment
Marketing: Targeted advertising based on consumer behavior
Public Safety: Predictive policing using crime data
Employment: Algorithmic hiring decisions
Each of these use cases offers benefits but also introduces potential ethical and legal pitfalls (Mittelstadt et al., 2016).

Ethical and Legal Challenges of Big Data

Privacy is the most cited ethical issue in big data. Often, data is collected without the subject's explicit consent, or consent is buried in unreadable terms and conditions. This raises not only ethical concerns but also legal issues under laws like the GDPR. For example, fitness apps may share sensitive health data with third parties without user knowledge, violating both ethical principles of autonomy and legal requirements of informed consent (Asadi Someh et al., 2016).


Mass surveillance becomes possible when governments or corporations track online behavior or location data. This challenges personal autonomy and may conflict with legal rights to privacy. The chilling effects of constant monitoring can lead individuals to self-censor or change their behavior out of fear of being watched (Asadi Someh et al., 2016).


Big data systems often reflect and reinforce social biases, leading to discriminatory outcomes. This is not only ethically problematic but may also violate anti-discrimination laws. For example, predictive policing systems have shown tendencies to disproportionately target minority communities, raising serious ethical concerns (Hung & Yen, 2023).


Many big data algorithms operate as "black boxes," where even developers struggle to explain decision-making processes. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to assign accountability, especially when individuals are harmed by automated decisions. Legally, this raises concerns around due process and the right to explanation, which are central to GDPR compliance (Mittelstadt et al., 2016).

Personal Reflection
As a student and everyday technology user, I encounter the ethical and legal implications of big data in real life. Most of the time, I click 'Accept' on privacy policies just to get on with using an app. I know I’m not alone—many people do the same without really understanding what they’re agreeing to. This shows how flawed the current model of ‘informed consent’ can be. It often feels like an illusion of choice rather than genuine permission.
I also believe that the biggest issue isn’t just how data is collected, but how it’s used without transparency. For instance, if an algorithm rejects a loan application based on online behavior, the person affected might never know the reason or get a chance to challenge it.

That kind of invisibility is dangerous, especially for vulnerable groups.
While GDPR is a great step forward—especially here in the EU—I’ve noticed that not every company fully complies. Some still make it hard to opt out or find the right to erasure forms. It makes me think that regulation alone isn’t enough. What we really need is a shift in mindset where companies view ethics not as a legal obligation but as a moral responsibility. We’re dealing with human data, not just numbers on a spreadsheet.

Real-World Examples

In 2018, it was revealed that Cambridge Analytica harvested Facebook data from millions of users without consent to influence political campaigns. This scandal highlighted failures in consent, transparency, and data protection (Asadi Someh et al., 2016).


Cities like Chicago and Los Angeles have used big data to predict where crimes might occur. However, critics argue that these systems often target minority neighborhoods and rely on flawed historical data, reinforcing bias rather than reducing crime (Hung & Yen, 2023).


Alternative credit scoring models use online behavior (e.g., social media activity) to assess loan eligibility. While this can help people without traditional credit histories, it also raises questions about fairness and data accuracy (Mittelstadt et al., 2016).

Privacy-Preserving Technologies in Big Data
Privacy-preserving technologies such as Fully Homomorphic Encryption (FHE) provide innovative solutions to protect sensitive data during processing. FHE allows computations to be carried out directly on encrypted data without the need to decrypt it, ensuring that data privacy is maintained at every stage of processing.

This is particularly valuable in cases where personal or confidential information is analyzed continuously, such as in financial systems or health monitoring services (Chamikara et al., 2019). The implementation of such encryption techniques demonstrates a proactive and technically robust approach to ethical data handling, aiming to mitigate the risks of exposure or unauthorized access.

Application of Ethical Lenses

Utilitarian Perspective
From a utilitarian perspective, the ethical use of big data is judged by its ability to maximize overall societal benefit. Big data systems that enhance healthcare, safety, and economic efficiency are ethically acceptable if they do not disproportionately harm individuals or groups. For example, data-driven health alerts can save lives, but only if data privacy is also safeguarded through encryption or anonymization.

Deontological Ethics
Deontological ethics focuses on duty and individual rights. Under this lens, practices like data harvesting without consent are unethical, regardless of the benefits. Organizations must ensure user autonomy, fair treatment, and adherence to legal obligations like GDPR. Transparent consent mechanisms and ethical data governance are mandatory, not optional.

Virtue Ethics
Virtue ethics evaluates big data practices based on the moral integrity of institutions and individuals. A company guided by virtue ethics would go beyond compliance, fostering a culture of responsibility, fairness, and respect. For instance, firms that publish ethical impact assessments and involve diverse stakeholders in data governance exemplify moral leadership in technology.

Addressing Ethical Issues: Solutions and Best Practices

Transparency and Explainability Transparency is foundational to ethical data governance. Organizations must clearly communicate what data is collected, how it is used, and how decisions are derived from algorithms. Floridi and Taddeo (2016) argue that explainability should not only be a technical function but also a moral obligation. Explainable AI (XAI) initiatives are critical in this regard, allowing individuals to understand and challenge automated decisions. However, critics note that current implementations of XAI often fail to meet the needs of non-technical users, which calls for interdisciplinary collaboration to make explanations more accessible and meaningful.

Data Minimization and Purpose Limitation Data should only be collected if it serves a specific, legitimate purpose. Barrett (2023) emphasizes that over-collection increases the risk of privacy breaches and erodes public trust. The principle of purpose limitation ensures that data is not repurposed in ways that violate user expectations or legal norms. This means organizations must critically evaluate both their data needs and retention policies to avoid unnecessary risks.

Fairness and Bias Mitigation To address bias, organizations must go beyond surface-level compliance. Hung and Yen (2023) stress the importance of diverse training datasets and continual algorithmic audits. This aligns with broader ethical expectations to prevent discriminatory outcomes. In addition, inclusive development teams can bring varied perspectives to system design, helping mitigate blind spots that reinforce social inequalities. Critics, however, argue that bias cannot be fully eliminated, only managed—highlighting the importance of humility and vigilance in data science.

Strengthening Regulation and Governance Legal frameworks like the GDPR are essential, but not sufficient on their own. Barrett (2023) notes that although the GDPR imposes strong obligations on data controllers—such as data minimization, purpose specification, and user rights enforcement—enforcement varies widely across jurisdictions. Moreover, compliance alone may not guarantee ethical outcomes. Floridi and Taddeo (2016) argue that governance must also be anticipatory, adapting to emerging challenges such as AI-based profiling and real-time surveillance. As such, ethical oversight should include not only legal compliance but also proactive ethical review boards and stakeholder engagement to assess societal impacts.

Conclusion
Big data analytics offers immense potential for innovation, efficiency, and social benefit. However, without ethical and legal guardrails, it can lead to privacy violations, discriminatory outcomes, and erosion of trust. By adopting transparent, fair, and responsible practices, and ensuring compliance with laws like GDPR, stakeholders can harness big data’s power while safeguarding human rights. As this field evolves, ongoing dialogue, regulation, and ethical awareness are essential.


Looking ahead, emerging technologies like generative AI, biometric recognition, and cross-border data analytics will further complicate ethical governance. This makes it critical for policymakers to adapt existing frameworks to ensure algorithmic accountability, protect vulnerable groups, and promote data justice globally. As highlighted by recent research from Barrett (2023), embedding privacy-by-design and ethical impact assessments in every stage of system development is key to maintaining trust in an increasingly digitized world.


Moreover, the rise of synthetic data and AI-generated content (e.g., deepfakes, virtual personas) introduces new ethical dimensions. These technologies blur the lines between real and artificial data, challenging our definitions of consent, authenticity, and truth. Ethical frameworks must evolve to consider the provenance, traceability, and potential misuse of synthetic information, especially in contexts like journalism, education, and biometric identification. A multidisciplinary and anticipatory approach is needed to ensure that the rapid pace of innovation does not outstrip the safeguards meant to protect individual rights and social integrity.

Additionally, domain-specific ethical guidelines—such as those proposed by the ERA Ethics Committee for the use of big data and AI in kidney research—emphasize the importance of contextual sensitivity, multidisciplinary oversight, and safeguarding vulnerable populations when deploying data-intensive systems in healthcare (Van Biesen et al., 2025).


References

·       Floridi, L., & Taddeo, M. (2016). What is data ethics? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 374(2083).

·       Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2).

·       Barrett, C. (2023). Revisiting Risk: Dynamic Compliance in a Post-Pandemic GDPR Landscape. European Journal of Law and Technology, 14(1).

·       Hung, T.-W., & Yen, C.-P. (2023). Predictive policing and algorithmic fairness. Synthese, 201(206).

·       Asadi Someh, I., Breidbach, C. F., Davern, M. J., & Shanks, G. (2016). Ethical implications of big data analytics. ECIS 2016 Research-in-Progress Papers, 24.

·       Chamikara, M. A. P., Bertok, P., Liu, D., Camtepe, S., & Khalil, I. (2019). An efficient and scalable privacy preserving algorithm for big data and data streams. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.13498.

·       Van Biesen, W., Buturovic Ponikvar, J., Fontana, M., Heering, P., Sever, M. S., Sawhney, S., & Luyckx, V. (2025). Ethical considerations on the use of big data and artificial intelligence in kidney research from the ERA ethics committee. *Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 40*(3), 455–464. https://doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfae267


       - Research By Asif Iqbal




Subscribe

Subscribe to our newsletter, stay updated with us

Enter your e-mail to get the latest news.

Quick Question?