规制、权力与合规悖论：智能家居的纵向研究
Regulation, Power, and the Compliance 1 Paradox: A Longitudinal Study of Smart Homes
浏览论文内容
中文总结 AI 辅助
本文通过对约旦智能家居采用情况的纵向社会技术研究，揭示了隐私规制在家庭语境中产生的合规悖论，提出相关干预空间以应对智能家居带来的不平等问题。
中文摘要 AI 辅助
智能家居技术正日益融入家庭环境，但其对权力、隐私和不平等的影响仍未得到充分理解，尤其在非西方语境中。本文呈现了一项针对约旦智能家居采用情况的纵向社会技术研究，考察文化规范、规制框架与日常技术实践如何塑造家庭权力动态。基于我们2022年的研究，我们采用包含两个阶段的扎根理论方法：（1）对30次访谈的二次分析；（2）2025年对回访及新参与者（包括家庭成员、家政工人、政策制定者和民间社会倡导者）开展的28次新访谈。该设计提供了关于规制与技术变革如何重塑家庭监控实践的罕见纵向视角。研究结果揭示了一种合规悖论：尽管约旦2023年《数据保护法》提高了隐私意识，但由于其在很大程度上将家庭环境排除在适用范围之外，该法也催生了新的剥削形式。我们识别出三种动态：（1）通过便利性与合规实现被动监控的常态化；（2）规制模糊性将责任转移给家庭，强化现有层级；（3）家政工人面临强化监控下的受限抵抗。我们贡献了关于隐私规制如何在社会文化系统中被挪用以再生产现有不平等的纵向阐释。最后，我们确定了设计、政策和倡导领域的四个干预空间，强调需采用基于语境的方法治理智能家居生态系统中的隐私问题。
英文摘要
Smart home technologies are becoming increasingly embedded in domestic environments, yet their implications for power, privacy, and inequality remain insufficiently understood, particularly in non-Western contexts. This paper presents a longitudinal socio-technical study of smart home adoption in Jordan, examining how cultural norms, regulatory frameworks, and everyday technological practices shape domestic power dynamics. Building on our 2022 study, we employ a two-phase grounded theory approach comprising (1) a secondary analysis of 30 interviews and (2) 28 new interviews conducted in 2025 with returning and new participants, including household members, domestic workers, policymakers, and civil society advocates. This design provides a rare longitudinal perspective on how regulatory and technological change reshapes domestic surveillance practices. Our findings reveal a compliance paradox: although Jordan's 2023 Data Protection Law has increased privacy awareness, it also enables new forms of exploitation by leaving domestic contexts largely outside its scope. We identify three dynamics: (1) the normalization of passive surveillance through convenience and legal compliance; (2) regulatory ambiguity that shifts responsibility to households, reinforcing existing hierarchies; and (3) constrained resistance among domestic workers facing intensified monitoring. We contribute a longitudinal account of how privacy regulation is appropriated within socio-cultural systems to reproduce existing inequalities. We conclude by identifying four intervention spaces across design, policy, and advocacy, emphasizing the need for contextually grounded approaches to privacy governance in smart home ecosystems.
