Kamu Yönetişiminin Uzamı ve Aracı Olarak Nesnelerin İnterneti Politikaları Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme

Year 2020, Volume: 7 Issue: 1, 74 - 94, 04.04.2020

Serhat Kaymas

https://doi.org/10.17336/igusbd.675949

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Bu çalışma, isminde de yer aldığı üzere, kamu politikalarının uzamı ve aracı olarak nesnelerin internetini karşılaştırmalı bir siyasa analizi üzerinden özellikle gelişmekte olan ülkeler bağlamında ele almaktadır. Ülkelerin bilgi toplumuna dönüşüm süreçlerinin önemli bir bileşeni olarak nesnelerin interneti ekosistemini, gelişmiş ülkelere göre sosyal, siyasal, kültürel ve ekonomik bağlamlar öncelikli olmak üzere yapısal farklılıkları bulunan gelişmekte olan ülkeler perspektifinden bakarak değerlendirmek anlamlı bir çaba olarak değerlendirilmelidir. Bu doğrultuda çalışma, nesnelerin interneti ve bileşen bilgi teknolojilerini Türkiye örneğinde bir “fırsatlar” ve “tehditler” alanı olarak tartışmaktadır. Çalışmanın sonunda, Türkiye için nesnelerin interneti yönetişimi bağlamında bir dizi öneri geliştirilmiştir. 

Keywords

Nesnelerin İnterneti, Bilgi Toplumu, Bilişsel Kapitalizm, Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri, Yönetişim

An Assessment on the Internet of Things as Both a Space and an Apparatus of the Public Policies

Abstract

This study, as mentioned in its title, deals with the internet of things as both a space or medium and an apparatus of public policies, specifically in the context of developing countries via the lens of comparative political analysis. To assess the internet of things ecosystem as an important component of the transformation process of the countries into the knowledge society from a perspective of developing countries which are differentiating primarily political, cultural and economic contexts, should be considered as a meaningful effort. In this sense, the present study debated the internet of things ecosystem and associates information technologies synchronically “opportunity” and “threats” realm for developing countries in the case of Turkey. At the end of the study, the present study would offer some recommendations for Turkey’s newly established internet of things ecosystem governance.  

Keywords

Internet of Things, Knowledge Society, Knowledge Capitalism, Information and Communication Technologies, Governmentality

References

• ANTHOPOULOS, L. G. (2017). “Smart Government: A New Adjective to Government Transformation or a Trick”. Understanding Smart Cities: A Tool for Smart Government or an Industrial Trick? İçinde. Haz: Leonidas G. Anthopoulos. New York: Springer Puslishing. 263-283.
• ARVIDSOON, A (2009). “The Ethical Economy: Towards a Post-Capitalist Theory of Value”. Capital & Class. Vol: 97. 13-29.
• ATSINSON, D. Robert. (2014). “ICT Innovation Policy in China: A Review”. The Information Technology & Innovation. July 2014. 1-11.
• ATZORI, Luigi, IERA, Antonio. ve MORABITO, Giacomo. (2010). “The Internet of Things: A Survey”. Computer Networks. 31.May.2010. 1-19.
• BAUWENS, M. (2009). “Class and Capital in Peer Productions”. Capital & Class. Vol: 97. 121-141.
• Bilim, Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı (2018). “Türkiye’nin Sanayi Devrimi: Dijital Türkiye Yol Haritası”. http://www.sanayi.gov.tr. Erişim Tarihi: 18.09.2019.
• CASTELNOVO, W, MISURACA, G, SAVOLDELLI, A. (2015). “Smart Cities Governance: The Need for a Holistic Approach to Assesing Urban Participatory Policy Making”. Social Science Computer Review. Vol: 34(6). 724-739.
• CHATFIELD, A. T, REDDICK, G, C. (2019). “A Framework for Internet of Things- Enabled Smart Government: A Case of IOT Cybersecurity Policies and Use Cases in U.S Federal Government”. Government Information Quarterly. Vol: 36. 346-357.
• CHEN, S; LIU, D; XU; H, WANG, H, HU, B. (2014). “A Vision of IoT: Applications, Challenges and Oppurtunities with China Perspective”. IEEE Internet of Things Journal. Vol: 1(4). 349-359.
• China Briefing. (2017). “Made in China 2025: Implications for Foreing Business”. http://www.china-briefing.com. Erişim Tarihi: 16.09.2019.
• COLETTA, C, KITCHIN, R. (2017). “Algorhythmic Governance: Regulating the “Hearthbeat” of a City Using the Intrenet of Things”. Big Data & Society. July-December. 1-16.
• CONGRESS (2019). “IOT Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2019”. http://congress.gov. Erişim Tarihi: 02.09.2019.
• CONSTANCE, E. (2017). “The Internet of Things: Preparing for the Revolution”. Journal of Cyber Policy. Vol: 2(2). 152-154.
• ESTOPACE, E. (2019). “GSMA: China is World’s Largest IOT Market”. http://www.futureiot.tech. Erişim Tarihi: 16.09.2019.
• FLEW, T. , WAISBORD, S (2015). “The Ongoing Significance of National Media Systems in the Context of Media Globalization”. Media, Culture & Society. Vol: 37(4). 620-636.
• FUCHS, C. (2015). Dijital Emek ve Karl Marx. Çev: Tahir Emre Kalaycı ve Senem Oğuz. Ankara: Nota Bene Bilişim Yayınları.
• GÖÇOĞLU, V. (2020). “Kamu Hizmetlerinin Sunumunda Dijital Dönüşüm: Nesnelerin İnterneti Üzerine Bir İnceleme”. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. Vol: 9(1). 615-628.
• GÖYGÖNÜR, E, ŞENSOY, M, Mel, G. D. (2019). “Enabling Smart Environments Through Scalable Policy Reasoning and Internet of Things”. WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery. Vol: 9(2). 1-20.
• GRIFFOR, E, GREER, C; WOLLMAN, D; BURN, J, M. (2017). “Framework for Cyber-Physical Systems: Volume I, Overwiev”. http://www.nist.gov. Erişim Tarihi: 01.09.2019.
• HOFMANN, J., KATZENBACH, C, GOLLATZ, K. (2017). “Between Coordination and Regulation: Finding the Governance in Internet Governance”. New Media&Society. Vol: 19(9). 1406-1423.
• http://www.ab.gov.tr (2019). “Avrupa Birliği’nin Genişlemesi”. Erişim Tarihi: 02.08.2019.
• http://www.ec.europe.eu (2016). “Definition of a Research and Innovation Policy Leveraging Cloud Computing and IOT Combination”. Erişim Tarihi: 22.07.2019.
• http://www.ec.europe.eu (2019). “Policy: The Internet of Things”. Erişim Tarihi: 22.07.2019.
• http://www.ec.europe.eu. (2016). “Commission Staff Working Document: Advancing The Internet of Things in Europe”. Erişim Tarihi: 25.07.2019.
• http://www.ec.europe.eu. (2016). “Digitising European Industry”. Erişim Tarihi: 25.07.2019.
• http://www.ec.europe.eu. (2018). “Data Protection: Rules for the Protection of Personal Data Inside and Outside the EU”. Erişim Tarihi: 29.07.2019.
• http://www.ec.europe.eu. (2019). “Digital Single Market”. Erişim Tarihi: 24.07.2019.
• http://www.eugdpr.org (2019). “The EU General Data Protection Regulation is the Most Important Change in Data Privacy Regulation in 20 Years”. Erişim Tarihi: 29.07.2019
• http://www.eur-lex.europe.eu. (2018). “Regulation EU 2016/679 Of the European Parliament and of the Council”. Erişim Tarihi: 29.07.2019.
• http://www.internetworldstats.com (2017). “Internet Stats and Facebook Usage in Europe June 2017 Statistics”. Erişim Tarihi: 20.12.2017.
• http://www.ioturkiye.com. (2019). “Iot Türkiye: Türkiye’nin En Büyük Nesnelerin İnterneti Ekosistemi”. Erişim Tarihi: 17.09.2019.
• http://www.japan.go.jp (2019). “Realizing Society 5.0”. Erişim Tarihi: 18.09.2019.
• http://www.meity.gov.in. (2019). “IOT Policy Document”. Erişim Tarihi: 16.09.2019.
• http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr (2016). “Kişisel Verilerin Korunması Kanunu”. Erişim Tarihi: 30.07.2019.
• INTEL (2019). “Policy Framework for the Internet of Things”. http://www.intel.com. Erişim Tarihi: 28.08.2019.
• Internetworldstats (2019). “Internet Stats and Facebook Usage in Europe Mach 2019 Statistics”. http://www.internetworldstats.com. Erişim Tarihi: 12.07.2019.
• ITU (2018). “Policies and Regulations Pertaining to IOT”. http://www.itu.int. Erişim Tarihi: 28.08.2019.
• BAN, M. C ve AKSU, O. (2020). “A Model for Big Spatial Rural Data Infrastructure in Turkey: Sensor-Driven and Integrative Approach”. Land Use Policy. Vol: 91 (February). 1-15.
• KARATGOZIANNI, A, MICHAELIDES, G. (2009). “Cyberconflict at the Edge of the Chaos: Cryptohierarcies and Self Organization in the Open Source Movement”. Capital & Class. Vol: 97. 143-157.
• KONG, L, WOODS, O. (2018). “The Ideological Alingnment of Smart Urbanism in Singapore: Critical Reflection on a Political Paradox”. Urban Studies. Vol: 55(4). 679-701.
• KRANENBURG, R. V. (2010). “A Poor or a Rich Internet of Things; Our Choice Now: A Look into the Future and the Meaning of the Internet of Things”. Vision and Challenges for Realising the Internet of Things. Ed: Herald Sundmaeker, Patrick Guillemin, Peter Friess ve Sylvie Woelffle. Brusells: European Commission: Information Society and Media DG Publishing. 25-32.
• MAPLE, C. (2017). “Security and Privacy in the Internet of Things”. Journal of Cyber Policy. Vol: 2(2). 155-184.
• MIAZI, S. N, REZZAQE, A, ERASMUS, Z, ZENNARO, M, BAGULA, A. (2016). “Enabling the Internet of Things in Developing Countries: Opportunities and Challanges”. http://www.researchgate.net./publication/311757185. Erişim Tarihi: 18.09.2019.
• MURDOCK, G. (2017). “Communication, Crissi and Control: Economies, Ecologies and Technologies of Digital Times”. Medijska Istrazivanja. Vol: 23(2). 17-33.
• NIST (2016). “Cyber-Physical Systems”. http://www.nist.gov. Erişim Tarihi: 31.08.2019. U
• ORSI, C (2009). “Knowledge Based Society, Peer Production and the Common Good”. Capital& Class. Vol: 97. 31-51.
• PICARD, V (2007). “Neoliberal Visions and Revisions in Global Communications Policy From NWICO to WSIS”. Journal of Communications Inquiry. Vol:31(2). 118-139.
• PUPPIS, M. (2008). “National Media Regulations in the Era of Free Trade: The Role of Global Media Governence”. European Journal of Communication. Vol: 23(4). 405-424.
• RIFKIN, J. (2015). Nesnelerin İnterneti ve İşbirliği Çağı. Çev: Levent Göktem. İstanbul: Optimist Yayınları.
• RIGI, J. (2013). “Peer Production and Marxian Communism: Contours of a New Emerging Mode of Production”. Capital & Class. Vol: 37(3). 397-416.
• SANTUCCI, G (2010). “The Internet of Things: Between the Revolution of the Internet and Metamorphosis of Objects”. Vision and Challenges for Realising the Internet of Things. Ed: Herald Sundmaeker, Patrick Guillemin, Peter Friess ve Sylvie Woelffle. Luxembourg: Publication Office of European Union. European Commission Information Society and Media Dividions. 11-25.
• SENNET, R. (2017). Eşit Olmayan Bir Dünyada Saygı. Çev: Ümmuhan Bardak. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
• SHERMAN, J. (2018). “US Federal IOT Policy: What You Need to Know”. http://www.tripwire.com. Erişim Tarihi: 31.08.2019.
• STATISTA (219). “Retail Iot Spending in Turkey from 2013 to 2018”. http://www.statista.com. Erişim Tarihi: 7.09.2108.
• TRAK (2019). “First Ever Internet of Things Policy Document Released by Indian Government”. http://www.trak.in. Erişim Tarihi: 04.07.2019.
• Ulaştırma, Denizcilik ve Haberleşme Bakanlığı. (2016). “2016-2019 Ulusal e-Devlet Strateji ve Eylem Planı”. http://www.e-devlet.gov.tr. Erişim Tarihi: 02.03.2020.
• UMAR, A, ÇALIŞ, C. (2019). “Centralized Smart Governance Framework Based on IOT Smart City Using TTG-Classified Technique”. IEE 16th International Conference on Smart Cities: Improving Quality of Life Using ICT & IOT and AI (Honet-ICT). New York: Charlette. 157-160.
• WEBER, V (2018). “Linking Cyber Strategy With Grand Strategy: The Case of the United States”. Cyber Policy. Vol: 3(2). 236-257.
• YÜKSEL, A. E. B (2016). “Nesnelerin İnternetinin Hukuki Yönden İncelenmesi”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. Cilt: 17(2). 113-139.