arXiv preprint ·
Click, Branch, Audit: A Decision-Tree Toolkit for Assessing Fundamental Rights Impacts under the Digital Services Act of Very Large Platforms & Search Engines
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
The EU Digital Services Act (DSA) requires Very Large Online Platforms and Search Engines (VLOPs/VLOSEs) to assess and mitigate systemic risks, including actual or foreseeable negative effects on fundamental rights, and subjects these assessments to independent audit. Yet how such rights-relevant risks should be identified, assessed, evidenced, and documented remains methodologically under-specified. We address this gap by introducing a decision-tree-based toolkit that operationalizes Article 34(1)(b) DSA and related audit requirements into a structured assessment process. The toolkit decomposes platforms as systems-of-systems and guides assessors through DSA applicability, context definition, subsystem and stakeholder identification, risk identification, risk assessment, reporting, and visualization. A central design contribution is its treatment of vulnerability as situational and relational: rather than assigning vulnerability to fixed groups, the toolkit asks how particular platform subsystems and dependencies may place stakeholders in vulnerable positions. It further makes fundamental rights-relevant judgments traceable by recording the affected right, interference and justification analysis within the structure of a proportionality test, while also covering a perception and impact dimension including severity, scope, duration, reversibility, as well as practical consequences. We developed the toolkit iteratively through a design-science process combining literature-derived design requirements, three interdisciplinary expert workshops (N=4; N=11; N=20) testing the framework design with two DSA user persona scenarios. We contribute an extensible methodological foundation for making fundamental-rights risk assessments under the DSA more streamlined, systematic, transparent, and auditable.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computers & Society
Literary Axioms: A Conceptual Framework for Literary Creation, Interpretation, and Evaluation
Who Acts, Who Knows, Who Answers? A Corpus-Assisted Discourse Analysis of Agency, Epistemic Responsibility, and Accountability in Generative AI Higher Education Research
Beyond Provenance: The Economics and Governance of Personalized AI Memory
What fidelity metrics miss: a structural check on synthetic educational data
When the Strike Zone Becomes Algorithmic: Umpire Judgment and Player Challenge Decisions under AI Review
Get the few papers worth your time in Computers & Society every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.