Data, Ethics, and Power: Reimagining the Social Contract in the Digital Age

Abstract

The exponential growth of digital technologies and the pervasive use of data in governance, commerce, and everyday life have fundamentally altered the traditional foundations of the social contract. Historically, the social contract has symbolized a mutual agreement between the state and its citizens, predicated on trust, accountability, and the equitable distribution of rights and responsibilities. However, in the digital age, the dynamics of this contract are being renegotiated under the influence of three powerful forces: datafication, algorithmic decision-making, and the asymmetrical control of digital infrastructure. In this paper, we examine the complex relationship between data, ethics, and power in shaping the future of the social contract, with a particular emphasis on the Indian context. The unregulated extraction, commodification, and surveillance of personal data by both state and private actors raise critical ethical questions about consent, autonomy, and digital rights. Simultaneously, the growing reliance on AI and machine learning in public policy and welfare delivery introduces concerns around algorithmic bias, opacity, and exclusion. These developments often concentrate power in the hands of a few tech corporations and state bodies, exacerbating existing social inequalities and diminishing citizen agency. India’s digital transformation—epitomized by platforms like Aadhaar, Digital India, and the growing use of AI in governance—presents a dual-edged scenario. On one hand, data-driven innovations have enhanced access to services, financial inclusion, and administrative efficiency. On the other, they have amplified risks of data misuse, discrimination, and surveillance without robust legal safeguards. The absence of a comprehensive data protection law, weak enforcement mechanisms, and limited digital literacy compound these vulnerabilities. This paper argues for the urgent need to reimagine the social contract in the digital era—one that centers ethical data practices, transparent governance, and participatory oversight. It explores the normative foundations of a new data ethics framework that prioritizes user dignity, consent, accountability, and distributive justice. It also discusses the potential of decentralized technologies, civic tech initiatives, and digital constitutionalism in redistributing power and restoring trust in digital institutions.

Introduction

The classical social contract theory, where individuals trade freedoms for state protection, is being reshaped by digital technologies, datafication, and algorithmic governance. Data has become a central source of power, altering relationships among states, corporations, and citizens. While digital transformation promises efficiency and inclusion, it raises serious ethical issues around privacy, surveillance, and inequality. This paper focuses on India’s experience to explore how the social contract might be redefined in the digital era.

The literature review highlights key concepts such as surveillance capitalism, data colonialism, and algorithmic bias, emphasizing the ethical and political challenges of digital governance. Scholars note that opaque algorithms can reinforce discrimination and exclude marginalized groups. Data privacy laws like the EU’s GDPR provide a model, but many developing countries, including India, face regulatory gaps.

Using a qualitative analysis, the paper examines datafication, algorithmic governance, and power asymmetries. It argues that digital ecosystems commodify citizens’ lives and enable new forms of control that threaten democratic values. In India, initiatives like Aadhaar have improved governance but also sparked concerns over privacy, exclusion, and accountability.

Reimagining the social contract requires embedding ethics, transparency, and accountability into digital governance. Concepts like digital constitutionalism, decentralized technologies, and participatory oversight are proposed to empower citizens and protect rights. India must balance technological innovation with robust safeguards to ensure digital transformation supports fairness, dignity, and democracy.

Conclusion

The digital age demands a redefined social contract that addresses not only the traditional relationship between the state and its citizens but also the growing influence of corporations and global technology platforms. In this new landscape, data has become both a vital resource and a source of vulnerability. Therefore, the future of democratic governance and social justice will depend on how data is collected, processed, and regulated, and whose interests it ultimately serves. For India, this means going beyond incremental reforms and adopting a holistic, rights-based approach to digital governance. While the Digital Personal Data Protection Act represents a critical step forward, the real test lies in its effective implementation. Ensuring citizen-centric safeguards requires strong institutions, empowered oversight bodies, and a culture of transparency. Key Recommendations: 1) Strengthen Data Protection Frameworks: Move from procedural compliance to substantive protection of citizens’ rights. This includes clearer definitions of consent, stronger penalties for misuse, and effective grievance redressal mechanisms. 2) Independent Oversight and Accountability: Establish autonomous data protection authorities with adequate resources and powers to monitor both state and private actors, free from political or corporate influence. 3) Algorithmic Transparency and Fairness: Mandate regular audits of high-impact algorithms in welfare delivery, policing, hiring, and financial services. Public disclosure of audit results can build trust and reduce the risks of bias and discrimination. 4) Digital Literacy and Inclusion: Expand large-scale programs to equip citizens with critical digital literacy, particularly among rural and marginalized populations. This reduces risks of exclusion and empowers individuals to exercise their rights effectively. 5) Participatory Data Governance: Encourage citizen participation through mechanisms like data trusts or community data boards, ensuring that people have a collective voice in how their information is used and monetized. 6) Platform Regulation: Create clear guidelines for digital platforms on issues such as content moderation, data portability, and cross-border data flows. This would help balance innovation with accountability. 7) Global Cooperation: As data flows transcend national borders, India should actively participate in international dialogues to shape equitable digital governance standards, preventing a new form of data colonialism. In conclusion, India stands at a critical juncture. It has the opportunity to either replicate global patterns of unchecked data exploitation or emerge as a leader in developing a rights-based, inclusive model of digital governance. A renewed social contract must be forged—one that balances innovation with justice, state power with citizen agency, and data utility with human dignity. Such a contract will ensure that the promise of the digital age is realized not just for a privileged few, but for society as a whole.

References

[1] Andrejevic, M. (2014). Surveillance and alienation in the online economy. Surveillance & Society, 12(3), 381–397. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v12i3.5113 [2] Arora, P. (2019). The next billion users: Digital life beyond the West. Harvard University Press. [3] Banerjee, S. (2021). Data governance in India: Emerging frameworks and challenges. Journal of Information Policy, 11(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0001 [4] Belli, L., & Zingales, N. (2017). Platform regulations: How platforms are regulated and how they regulate us. Internet Policy Review, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2017.4.775 [5] Bhattacharya, D., & Sinha, A. (2020). Algorithmic governance in India: Risks and opportunities. Economic and Political Weekly, 55(47), 29–36. [6] Bhatia, A., & Bhabha, F. (2017). India’s Aadhaar scheme: The promise and perils of digital ID. Economic and Political Weekly, 52(26-27), 15-19. [7] Boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878 [8] Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. (2019). The costs of connection: How data is colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism. Stanford University Press. [9] Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin’s Press. [10] Gandy, O. H. (1993). The panoptic sort: A political economy of personal information. Westview Press. [11] Greenleaf, G. (2014). Global data privacy laws 2013: 99 countries and accelerating. Privacy Laws & Business International Report, 122, 10–13. [12] Khera, R. (2017). Impact of Aadhaar in welfare programmes. Economic and Political Weekly, 52(50), 61-70. [13] Lessig, L. (1999). Code and other laws of cyberspace. Basic Books. [14] Lyon, D. (2018). The culture of surveillance: Watching as a way of life. Polity Press. [15] Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., &Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679679 [16] Narayan, S. (2020). Digital identity and the Aadhaar ecosystem: Implications for inclusion and exclusion. Indian Journal of Human Development, 14(2), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973703020959611 [17] Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press. [18] Sen, R. (2022). Regulating digital platforms in India: Between innovation and accountability. Journal of Digital Economy, 4(1), 12–29. [19] West, S. M. (2019). Data capitalism: Redefining the logics of surveillance and privacy. Business & Society, 58(1), 20–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650317718185 [20] Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.

Copyright

Copyright © 2025 Dr. Subasish Mohanty, Dr. Nisha Sawant, Dr. Shruti Kirti, Mr. Dnyandev Khadapkar. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.