Examines China's identity construction in global data governance, suggesting implications for normative frameworks.
As data governance becomes a central arena for normative contestation and global standard-setting, China's state-centric governance model has emerged as a third paradigm alongside the US's market-oriented model and the EU's rights-based data protection regime. This study argues that prevailing interpretations portraying China as an authoritarian challenger to the liberal order overlook its domestic context, developmental imperatives, and the relational dynamics that shape its global engagement. Drawing on constructivist theory, the study examines discourse between 2012 and 2025, including laws, white papers, and official statements, to analyse how China constructs its corporate and social identities in global data governance. The findings show that its corporate identity links data regulation to developmental legitimacy, while its social identity reflects differentiated engagement with the US, EU, and Global South. Overall, China's data governance represents a form of normative pragmatism combining domestic stability, societal participation, and multi-lateral cooperation within an evolving pluralistic digital order.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: