A Study on Evaluating National Regulations on Automated Deci-sion-Making and Profiling Using MCDM and AHP Techniques
Seok Hun Yang, Jung Soo Rhee · Asia-pacific Journal of Convergent Research Interchange · 2025
This study evaluates and analyzes regulations on 'automated decision-making' and 'profiling' based on the privacy protection laws of various countries.Legal and regulatory data were collected to achieve this, and a systematic approach was applied for analysis.First, evaluation criteria were defined according to Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) principles.Then, the weights for each criterion were calculated using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique by applying pairwise comparison matrices and eigenvalue computations.The level of regulation and protection for each country was quantified using the following formula: Final Score=∑(Weight×Criterion Score).This formula was used to quantify the regulatory frameworks of each country numerically.The study highlights differences in regulatory strengths and weaknesses, such as the EU's GDPR emphasizing the right to object to automated decisions and request human intervention.At the same time, California's CPRA focuses on opt-out mechanisms and consumer control rights.This comparison illustrates the differing regulatory approaches of the EU, South Korea, the United States, China, and other countries.By systematically quantifying the level of regulation, this study proposes a robust evaluation framework that captures key elements such as Transparency, Fairness, and Right of access by the data subject.The results demonstrate that MCDM and AHP techniques can be effectively used to analyze legal regulations, providing a foundation for understanding the diverse approaches of various countries in addressing challenges arising from automated decision-making and profiling.Ultimately, these analytical results offer practical guidance for countries to enhance and complement their automated decisionmaking and profiling regulations, contributing to the establishment of balanced regulatory frameworks.