IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/32905.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Complexities of Differential Privacy for Survey Data

Author

Listed:
  • Jörg Drechsler
  • James Bailie

Abstract

The concept of differential privacy (DP) has gained substantial attention in recent years, most notably since the U.S. Census Bureau announced the adoption of the concept for its 2020 Decennial Census. However, despite its attractive theoretical properties, implementing DP in practice remains challenging, especially when it comes to survey data. In this paper we present some results from an ongoing project funded by the U.S. Census Bureau that is exploring the possibilities and limitations of DP for survey data. Specifically, we identify five aspects that need to be considered when adopting DP in the survey context: the multi-staged nature of data production; the limited privacy amplification from complex sampling designs; the implications of survey-weighted estimates; the weighting adjustments for nonresponse and other data deficiencies, and the imputation of missing values. We summarize the project’s key findings with respect to each of these aspects and also discuss some of the challenges that still need to be addressed before DP could become the new data protection standard at statistical agencies.

Suggested Citation

  • Jörg Drechsler & James Bailie, 2024. "The Complexities of Differential Privacy for Survey Data," NBER Working Papers 32905, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:32905
    Note: TWP
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w32905.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html. Free access is also available to older working papers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jörg Drechsler, 2023. "Differential Privacy for Government Agencies—Are We There Yet?," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 118(541), pages 761-773, January.
    2. John M. Abowd & Ian M. Schmutte, 2019. "An Economic Analysis of Privacy Protection and Statistical Accuracy as Social Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(1), pages 171-202, January.
    3. Marco Avella-Medina, 2021. "Privacy-Preserving Parametric Inference: A Case for Robust Statistics," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 116(534), pages 969-983, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John M. Abowd & Ian M. Schmutte & William Sexton & Lars Vilhuber, 2019. "Suboptimal Provision of Privacy and Statistical Accuracy When They are Public Goods," Papers 1906.09353, arXiv.org.
    2. Ron S. Jarmin & John M. Abowd & Robert Ashmead & Ryan Cumings-Menon & Nathan Goldschlag & Michael B. Hawes & Sallie Ann Keller & Daniel Kifer & Philip Leclerc & Jerome P. Reiter & Rolando A. Rodrígue, 2023. "An in-depth examination of requirements for disclosure risk assessment," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 120(43), pages 2220558120-, October.
    3. Chemaya, Nir & Liu, Dingyue, 2024. "The suitability of using Uniswap V2 model to analyze V3 data," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    4. Polanec Sašo & Smith Paul A. & Bavdaž Mojca, 2022. "Determination of the Threshold in Cutoff Sampling Using Response Burden with an Application to Intrastat," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 38(4), pages 1205-1234, December.
    5. Giuseppe Di Vita, 2023. "The economic impact of legislative complexity and corruption: A cross‐country analysis," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(2), pages 1801-1825, April.
    6. Karl van der Schyff & Greg Foster & Karen Renaud & Stephen Flowerday, 2023. "Online Privacy Fatigue: A Scoping Review and Research Agenda," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-31, April.
    7. Raj Chetty & John N. Friedman, 2019. "A Practical Method to Reduce Privacy Loss When Disclosing Statistics Based on Small Samples," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 109, pages 414-420, May.
    8. John M. Abowd & Robert Ashmead & Ryan Cumings-Menon & Simson Garfinkel & Micah Heineck & Christine Heiss & Robert Johns & Daniel Kifer & Philip Leclerc & Ashwin Machanavajjhala & Brett Moran & William, 2022. "The 2020 Census Disclosure Avoidance System TopDown Algorithm," Papers 2204.08986, arXiv.org.
    9. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2020. "Fostering participation in digital public health interventions: The case of digital contact tracing," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-076, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Michler, Jeffrey D. & Josephson, Anna & Kilic, Talip & Murray, Siobhan, 2022. "Privacy protection, measurement error, and the integration of remote sensing and socioeconomic survey data," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    11. Yosuke Uno & Akira Sonoda & Masaki Bessho, 2021. "The Economics of Privacy: A Primer Especially for Policymakers," Bank of Japan Working Paper Series 21-E-11, Bank of Japan.
    12. Rod Garratt & Maarten van Oordt, 2019. "Systemic Privacy as a Public Good: A Case for Electronic Cash," Staff Working Papers 19-24, Bank of Canada.
    13. John Mullahy, 2022. "Investigating health-related time use with partially observed data," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 103-121, March.
    14. Guy Aridor & Yeon-Koo Che & Tobias Salz, 2020. "The Effect of Privacy Regulation on the Data Industry: Empirical Evidence from GDPR," NBER Working Papers 26900, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Mateusz Mysliwski & Lars Nesheim & Simeon Duckworth, 2023. "Taking the biscuit: how Safari privacy policies affect online advertising," CeMMAP working papers 04/23, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    16. Ko, Hyungjin & Byun, Junyoung & Lee, Jaewook, 2023. "A privacy-preserving robo-advisory system with the Black-Litterman portfolio model: A new framework and insights into investor behavior," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    17. Joel Slemrod, 2024. "What taxpayers, governments and tax economists do – and what they should do," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(1), pages 7-19, March.
    18. Charles I. Jones & Christopher Tonetti, 2020. "Nonrivalry and the Economics of Data," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(9), pages 2819-2858, September.
    19. Inbal Dekel & Rachel Cummings & Ori Heffetz & Katrina Ligett, 2024. "Privacy Elasticity: A (Hopefully) Useful New Concept," NBER Chapters, in: Data Privacy Protection and the Conduct of Applied Research: Methods, Approaches and their Consequences, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Heng Xu & Nan Zhang, 2022. "Implications of Data Anonymization on the Statistical Evidence of Disparity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2600-2618, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C42 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Survey Methods
    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:32905. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.