Title: THE INFORMAL LAYER OF RFID SYSTEMS* – ANALYSIS OF USER PERCEPTIONS

Informal questions refer to social and cultural norms that impact on whether the consumer/citizen will actually use the systems or whether there will be ‘civil disobedience’ or ‘digital-refusenik’ syndromes. While it is still early days for making generalised claims about actual behaviour, some indications as to norms and perceptions surrounding RFID technology may be identified. More specifically, three ‘profiles’ of RFID users arise from the literature. In some of the accounts, users are portrayed as ignorant about RFID and its associated risks. In other cases, users seem to be knowledgeable (at least aware) of the technology but less so about the risks, largely perceiving RFID as harmless, a ‘nice to have’ technology, enabler of gadgets. Finally, potential users of RFID are described as knowledgeable about the technology as well as its risks (primarily invasion of privacy), and as actors who are making rational decisions for or against the technology based on cost-effectiveness considerations.  

Lack of awareness among potential users of RFID is documented in a recent survey of the European Consumer reported in Capgemini (2005). An extreme case of such unawareness applies to the population of young children when RFID is used for the surveillance of school children as reported in Japan (Locquenghien, 2006). Unawareness, or rather helplessness, would also be the case of tagged hospital patients fighting for their lives rather than their privacy, presumably having little ability of becoming knowledgeable about threats of the technology in their vulnerable state.  

With low awareness at the core of users’ perception, RFID can be seen to ‘creep’ and pervade everyday life continually and unnoticed by many people. If this is the case (and so it will remain) then pervasive implementation of RFID is not expected to meet user resistance. It should not prove difficult to implement unless legal measures at the formal level are playing a role in regulating its terms of use.

Looking at users response to some of the current applications of RFID, such as access control in many holiday regions (Locquenghien, 2006), RFID technology appears to be harmless, perceived as a ‘nice to have’ technology that is associated with convenience and gadgets. In some applications of this kind, tags are attached to objects such as hotel keys and ski passes. In other cases, as in the Baja Beach Club in Barcelona, Spain, guests are offered a small implantable cylinder chip to identify them and which they use, in turn, to pay for food and drinks (Gossett, 2004). 

A ‘cost-benefit’ approach prevails in the discussion of users’ acceptance, appropriation or resistance to RFID systems*. This has been further described in chapter . In addition to the research summarised there Eckfeldt (2005) explores the prospect of RFID acceptance from a consumer point of view. Adopting a rational approach, he argues that as long as retailers/businesses maintain focus on their own agenda, consumers will reject the technology and resist its implementation. However, positive perceptions and acceptance can be achieved if consumers ‘enter the equation’ and businesses succeed in showing and creating benefits for the consumer. Eckfeldt (2005) thus concludes that the difference between successful and shunned RFID applications turns on delivery of clear, tangible value to the average consumer.  Successful applications, he argues, overcompensate for whatever privacy fears they may involve. Consumers accept the risk of being tracked and their activities being monitored if they feel it is worth the benefits the application provides.

Angel and Kiztman (2005), discussing the relationship between RFID and cash, point to the severe threats posed on anonymity. They explain how the introduction of tags into bank notes (implementation also being considered by EU, (Ingdahl, 2004)) will serve taxation authorities thereby increasing control exercised by the state over the individual citizen, whether good or bad. Notwithstanding this, objections are not being voiced because ‘the message going out is that the benefits far outweigh the hazards in a marketing blitz aimed at gaining widespread public acceptance’ (p. 6).  

Summary and Conclusion

This chapter sought to offer an integrative outlook of prevailing issues arising in the context of RFID, AmI and Profiling. The TFI model was applied to map out current (and future) concerns associated with RFID as they relate to technical, formal and informal facets. Of the technical concerns in RFID systems*, security stands out as a key issue, with availability and interoperability being crucial to resolve. Technical difficulties associated with implementing RFID were brought fourth, owing to the significant gap between what may be achieved with the technology in a lab and outside of it. Formal issues were seen to embody concerns of legal nature, leading to the conclusion that the existing formal framework falls short at protecting privacy in the context of omnipresent data processing. Finally, analysis of the informal dimension in the context of RFID focused on emerging perceptions surrounding RFID technology. Three ‘profiles’ of RFID users were identified in the literature, namely, users portrayed as ignorant about RFID and its associated risks, users who seem to be knowledgeable (at least aware) of the technology but less so about the risks, and, finally, potential users of RFID who are described as knowledgeable about the technology as well as its risks (primarily invasion of privacy), and as actors who are making rational decisions for or against the technology based on cost-effectiveness considerations.