In the current era of data, it is important to focus on the issue of cross-border governance of personal data, particularly in the weak link of data transmission. After understanding the current legislative situation in China, we examine the historical evolution of rules governing cross-border governance of personal data and explore effective legislative models. We also review typical international legislative examples and draw on their legislative experiences. Finally, taking into account the current situation in China, which relies on a system of personal data governance with dispersed legal provisions and vague specific regulations, we propose actively participating in large-scale bilateral trade agreements and exploring solutions using such agreements to improve specific domestic regulations. Starting from the legislative source, we provide suggestions to improve rules for cross-border governance of personal data and contribute to the development of China's digital economy.

Jiayue Yan. Improvement Path for Cross-Border Governance Rules of Personal Data from an International Perspective. International Journal of Frontiers in Sociology (2024), Vol. 6, Issue 1: 85-96. https://doi.org/10.25236/IJFS.2024.060116.

[1] Ma, Q., & Li, X. (2021). Constructing Regulatory Rules for Cross-Border Data Flow in China. Rule of Law Studies, 1, 91–101. 

[2] Gao, F., & Wang, Y. (2019). On the Origin of Personal Data Protection System: Historical Analysis and Enlightenment from Offshore Legislation. Henan Social Sciences, 27(11), 38–49.

[3] Hert, P. D., & Gutwirth, S. (2009). Data Protection in the Case Law of Strasbourg and Luxemburg: Constitutionalisation in Action. Springer, 3.

[4] Yang, G. (2021). On the Relationship between RCEP and WTO Rules. International Business Research, 42(5), 3–10.

[5] Greenleaf, G. (2014). Sheherezade and the 101 data privacy laws: Origins, significance and global trajectories. JL Inf. & Sci., 23, 4.

[6] Greenleaf, G. (2017). Global data privacy laws 2017: 120 national data privacy laws, including Indonesia and Turkey. Including Indonesia and Turkey, 145, 10-13

[7] Gao, F. (2022). The Institutional Defects of GDPR and Its Warning to the Implementation of China’s Personal Information Protection Law. Rule of Law Studies, 3.

[8] Wang, X., & Shi, W. (2022). Globalization of Data Legislation Jurisdiction and China’s Response. Intellectual Property Rights, 4, 54–75.

[9] Xie, Z. (2020). Data Privacy Protection in the Data-Driven Era: From Individual Control to Data Controller’s Fiduciary Obligations. Legal and Business Research, 2, 54–75.

[10] Feng, Y., & Wei, H. (2020). The Theory and Critique of the “Brussels Effect” of GDPR: An Analysis of Its Extraterritorial Legislative Influence. Journal of Yantai University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition), 2, 1–11.

[11] Chander, A., & Le, U. P. (2014). Breaking the web: data localization vs. the global internet. Emory Law Journal, Forthcoming, UC Davis Legal Studies Research Paper, 378.

[12] Ferris, E., & Bergmann, J. (2017). Soft law, migration and climate change governance. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment, 8(1), 6-29.

[13] Shi, J. (2020). Latest Progress and Prospects of APEC Digital Economic Cooperation. International Economic Cooperation, 1, 37–44.

[14] Liu, H., & Cheng, H. (2020). Global Governance of Cross-Border Data Flows: Progress, Trends, and China’s Path. International Outlook, 6, 65–88.

[15] Boklan, D., & Bahri, A. (2020). The first WTO's ruling on national security exception: balancing interests or opening Pandora's box? World Trade Review, 19(1), 123-136.

[16] Lin, F., & Du, Y. (2020). Development and Transformation: Reflection on the Construction Path of Digital Trade Rules from a Multilateral Perspective. Journal of Jianghai, 5, 161–162.