N. 2 (2025)
Dossier - Adolescenti nell’epoca della trasformazione digitale: un approccio sociologico, normativo e culturale

Child Rights Impact Assessment and Responsible Design in the Digital Transformation: Notes for a Preliminary Reflection

pdf (Italiano)
Michele Martoni
University of Urbino
DOI: https://doi.org/10.54103/1972-5760/30056

Published 2025-11-11

Keywords

  • digital transformation,
  • child rights impact assessment,
  • CRIA,
  • responsible design,
  • best interests of the child

How to Cite

Martoni, M. (2025). Child Rights Impact Assessment and Responsible Design in the Digital Transformation: Notes for a Preliminary Reflection. Sociologia Del Diritto, 52(2). https://doi.org/10.54103/1972-5760/30056

Copyright (c) 2025 Michele Martoni

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Digital transformation is profoundly reshaping childhood experiences, offering new opportunities but also posing significant risks to children’s rights. Against this backfrop, the principle of the best interests of the child, as established by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, must be translated into tools capable of concretely guiding design choices. The Child Rights Impact Assessment (CRIA) meets this need by providing a preventive evaluation method that embeds a child-rights perspective into the development of digital technologies. This paper critiques the limitations of the informed-consent model and advocates for a shift toward a responsibility-driven, ethics-by-design approach. After outlining the relevant legal framework and reviewing key international experiences with impact assessments, the paper examines the role businesses can play in protecting children’s rights in digital environments. CRIA is presented as a method that bridges technical, legal, and cultural dimensions. The conclusion emphasizes the urgency of institutionalizing child rights impact assessments, ensuring that the protection of children becomes an integral part of both public policy and corporate strategy.

pdf (Italiano)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Acquisti, A., Grossklags, J., (2005), Privacy and rationality in decision making, IEEE Security & Privacy, 3, 1, pp. 24-30.
  2. Acquisti, A., Grossklags, J., (2008), What Can Behavioral Economics Teach Us About Privacy?, in A. Acquisti, S. Gritzalis, C. Lambrinoudakis e S. De Capitani di Vimercati, a cura di, Digital Privacy, New York, Auerbach Publications, pp. 363-369.
  3. Barassi, V., (2021), I figli dell’algoritmo. Sorvegliati, tracciati, profilati dalla nascita, Roma, Luiss University Press.
  4. Baroni, M., (2024), Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment, in AIRIA, a cura di, Navigare l’European AI Act, Milano, Wolters Kluwer.
  5. Beerwinkle, A.L., (2021), The use of learning analytics and the potential risk of harm for K-12 students participating in digital learning environments, Education Tech Research Dev, 69, pp. 327-330.
  6. Berlingò, V., (2017), Il fenomeno della datafication e la sua giuridicizzazione, Rivista trimestrale di diritto pubblico, 3, pp. 641-675.
  7. Bisztray, T., Gruschka, N., (2019), Privacy Impact Assessment: Comparing Methodologies with a Focus on Practicality, in Askarov, A., Hansen, R., Rafnsson, W., a cura di, Secure IT Systems. NordSec 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 11875, Cham, Springer.
  8. Breen, C., (2002), The standard of the best interests of the child: a western tradition in international and comparative law, Dordrecht, Kluwer.
  9. Business for Social Responsibility (BSR), (2024), Child Rights Impact Assessments in Relation to the Digital Environment, in https://www.bsr.org/reports/BSR_UNICEF_D6.pdf (consultato il 2 giugno 2025).
  10. Cominelli, L., (2018), Framing Choices to Influence Behaviors: A Debate on the Pros and Cons of “Nudging”, Diritto & Questioni pubbliche, XVIII, 1, pp. 293-306.
  11. Comitato sui Diritti dell’Infanzia, (2013), Commento generale n. 14 del 2013, Sul diritto del minorenne a che il proprio superiore interesse sia tenuto in primaria considerazione, in https://www.unicef.it/pubblicazioni/il-superiore-interesse-del-minorenne (consultato il 28 maggio 2025).
  12. Comitato sui Diritti dell’Infanzia, (2021), Commento generale n. 25 del 2021, Sui diritti dei minorenni in relazione all’ambiente digitale, in https://www.unicef.it/pubblicazioni/i-diritti-dei-minorenni-in-relazione-all-ambiente-digitale (consultato il 30 maggio 2025).
  13. Cosentini, A., Pollicino, O., De Gregorio, G., Ermellino, A., Fontanella, D., Inverardi, N., Paolucci, F., Penco, I.G., Regoli, D., Tessaro Trapani, S., (2025), Assessing the Impact of Artificial Intelligence Systems on Fundamental Rights, Media LAWS, https://www.medialaws.eu/assessing-the-impact-of-artificial-intelligence-systems-on-fundamental-rights/ (consultato il 2 giugno 2025).
  14. Floridi, L., (2020), Il verde e il blu, Milano, Raffaello Cortina Editore.
  15. Galimberti, U., (2018), I miti del nostro tempo, Milano, Feltrinelli.
  16. Garapon, A., Lassègue, J., (2021), La giustizia digitale. Determinismo tecnologico e libertà, traduzione italiana di F. Morini, Bologna, il Mulino.
  17. Haidt, J., (2024), La generazione ansiosa. Come i social hanno rovinato i nostri figli, Milano, Rizzoli.
  18. Heyndels, S., (2023), Technology and Neutrality, Philosophy & Technology, 36, 4, 75, pp. 1-22.
  19. Hirsch, M., Binder, A., Matthes, J., (2025), A “drop in the ocean”? Emerging adults’ experiences and understanding of targeted political advertising on social media, New Media & Society, in https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epub/10.1177/14614448241306455 (consultato il 30 settembre 2025).
  20. Hof, S. van der, Challis, L., Wanroij, E. van, Schermer, B.W., (2024), Child rights impact assessment: impact and legal analysis for the development of the CRIA, The Hague, Ministry for Internal Affairs and Kingdom Relations, in https://hdl.handle.net/1887/4209969 (consultato il 30 maggio 2025).
  21. Hoffman, S., (2020), Ex ante children’s rights impact assessment of economic policy, in The International Journal of Human Rights, 24, 9, pp. 1333-1352.
  22. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., (1973), On the psychology of prediction, Psychological Review, 80, pp. 237-251.
  23. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., (1982), The simulation heuristic, in Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., Tversky, A., a cura di, Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, Cambridge, U.K., Cambridge University Press, pp. 201-210.
  24. Lalatta Costerbosa, M., (2019), I diritti dei bambini come priorità, Rivista di filosofia del diritto, numero speciale, pp. 137-160.
  25. Livingstone, S., Cantwell, N., Özkul, D., Shekhawat, G., Kidron, B., (2024), The best interests of the child in the digital environment, in https://www.digital-futures-for-children.net/digitalfutures-assets/digitalfutures-documents/Best-Interests-of-the-Child-FINAL.pdf, 2024 (consultato il 30 maggio 2025).
  26. Livingstone, S., Stoilova, M., (2021), The 4Cs: Classifying Online Risk to Children, in CO:RE Short Report Series on Key Topics, in https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/71817 (consultato il 30 maggio 2025).
  27. Livingstone, S., (2020), Can we realise children’s rights in a digital world?, in https://medium.com/reframing-childhood-past-and-present/can-we-realise-childrens-rights-in-a-digital-world-d4f5f19f298f (consultato il 30 maggio 2025).
  28. Livingstone, S., Third, A., (2017), Children and young people’s rights in the digital age: An emerging agenda, New Media & Society, 19, 5, pp. 657-670.
  29. Lessig, L., (1999), Code and other laws of cyberspace, New York, Basic Books, [Online] Consultabile all’indirizzo: https://lessig.org/images/resources/1999-Code.pdf (consultato il 30 maggio 2025).
  30. Lud, D., (2020), Impact Assessment, in Idowu, S., Schmidpeter, R., Capaldi, N., Zu, L. Del Baldo, M., Abreu, R., a cura di, Encyclopedia of Sustainable Management, Cham, Springer.
  31. Maestri, E., (2017), Lex informatica e diritto. Pratiche sociali, sovranità e fonti nel cyberspazio, Ars Interpretandi, 1, pp. 15-28.
  32. Mai, J.E., (2016), Big Data Privacy: The Datafication of Personal Information, The Information Society, 32, 3, pp. 192-199.
  33. Mantelero, A., Esposito, M.S., (2021), An evidence-based methodology for human rights impact assessment (HRIA) in the development of AI data-intensive systems, Computer Law & Security Review, 41, 105561.
  34. Martoni, M., (2020), Datificazione dei nativi digitali e società della classificazione. Prime riflessioni sull’educazione alla cittadinanza digitale, Federalismi.it, 1, pp. 119-136.
  35. Mascheroni, G., (2020), Datafied childhoods: Contextualising datafication in everyday life, Current Sociology Review, 68, 6, pp. 798-813.
  36. Mittica, M.P., (2001), Una cornice giuridica per partecipare: la legge 285/1997, in C. Baraldi, a cura di, I diritti dei bambini e degli adolescenti. Una ricerca sui progetti legati alla legge 285, Roma, Donzelli, pp. 27-50.
  37. OECD, (2024), Framework for Anticipatory Governance of Emerging Technologies, in OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, 165.
  38. OECD, (2021), Children in the Digital Environment. Revised Typology of Risks, OECD Digital Economy Papers, 302.
  39. Paolucci, C., Vancini, S., Bex Ii, R.T., Cavanaugh, C., Salama, C., de Araujo, Z., (2024), A review of learning analytics opportunities and challenges for K-12 education, Heliyon, 10, 4, e25767, pp. 1-14.
  40. Pariser, E., (2012), Il Filtro, Milano, Il Saggiatore.
  41. Payne, L., (2019), Child Rights Impact Assessment as a policy improvement tool, The International Journal of Human Rights, 23, 3, pp. 408-424.
  42. Rodotà, S., (1997), Tecnopolitica, la democrazia e le nuove tecnologie della comunicazione, Bari-Roma, Laterza.
  43. Ronfani, P., (1998), L’interesse del minore nella cultura giuridica e nella pratica, Studi Urbinati, 68, pp. 675-698.
  44. Ronfani, P., (1997), L’interesse del minore: dato assiomatico o nozione magica?, Sociologia del diritto, 1, pp. 47-93.
  45. Selwyn, N., (2019), What’s the Problem with Learning Analytics?, The Journal of Learning Analytics, 6, 3, pp. 11-19.
  46. Solove, D.J., (2013), Introduction: privacy self-management and the consent dilemma, Harvard Law Review, 126, 7, pp.1880-1903.
  47. Sunstein, C.R., (2019), Sludge Audits, Harvard Public Law Working Paper, 19-21, pp. 1-31.
  48. Sunstein, C.R., (2022), Sludge. What Stops Us from Getting Things Done and What to Do about It, Cambridge, The MIT Press.
  49. Thaler, R.H., Sunstein, C.R., (2009), La spinta gentile, traduzione italiana di A. Oliveri, Milano, Feltrinelli.
  50. Twenge, J.M., (2018), Iperconnessi, Torino, Einaudi.
  51. UNICEF, (2024), Developing Global Guidance for Child Rights Impact Assessment in Relation to the Digital Environment. Summary of Initial Project Findings, aprile 2024, in https://www.unicef.org/media/156046/file/Child%20Rights%20Impact%20Assessments%20in%20Relation%20to%20the%20Digital%20Environment.pdf (consultato il 30 maggio 2025).
  52. UNICEF, (2021), Child Rights Impact Assessment. Template and Guidance for Local Authorities, giugno 2021, in https://www.unicef.org.uk/child-friendly-cities/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/06/CRIA_June-2022.pdf (consultato il 30 maggio 2025).
  53. Van Dijck, J., (2014), Datafication, Dataism and Dataveillance: Big Data between Scientific Paradigm and Ideology, Surveillance and Society, 12, 2, pp. 197-208.
  54. Vella, F., (2023), Diritto ed economia comportamentale, Bologna, il Mulino.
  55. Zaccaria, G., (2022), Postdiritto. Nuove fonti, nuove categorie, Bologna, il Mulino.
  56. Zuboff, S., (2019), Il capitalismo della sorveglianza. Il futuro dell’umanità nell’era dei nuovi poteri, traduzione italiana di P. Bassotti, Roma, Luiss University Press.