States respond to homeless squatting in empty land by selectively conferring resilience on individuals, groups and/or institutions. In this chapter, we reflect on the role of aggregated or collective claims to state-backed resilience linked to homeless squatting on empty property. Specifically, we consider how interests become aggregated; how aggregation promotes collective consciousness and reaffirms individual claims; and how groups garner state support through the exercise of collective influence or voice. We recognize that the co-option of state actors and agencies to shore up the resilience of the group is not unidirectional but bidirectional. While collective or group interests may seek out state-backed resilience in the form of “other-regarding” state action, states also invoke collective interests to justify or explain their actions, particularly when the state’s own self-interest aligns with the interests or claims of the group. In this chapter we broaden the scope of our “problem topography” by alternately centering a range of networked or aggregated stakeholders: neighbors, market actors, social activists. We explore how collective interests cluster around specific claims; how they exercise influence to secure state action, and also how state actors and institutions justify or explain their responses with reference to the protection of specific group interests. These collective claims are not distinct from, but overlap with the individual claims of owners and squatters, who are themselves simultaneously self-interested individuals and members of networks that share common interests and goals.

Chapter five describes the ethical framework regulating research using linked data and examines the applicable international ethics guidelines. A hypothetical research project is used to compare how these guidelines address the ethical assessment of research using linked data and in particular to compare how they address a waiver of consent and the extent to which they consider collective interests. The chapter goes on to discuss how the core ethical values of research merit and integrity, justice, beneficence, and respect can be reinterpreted to encompass the ethical concerns raised by research using linked data.

Chapter two considers the interwoven interests of individual participants, collectives interests and the wider public interests in research using linked data. The chapter discusses the research participants interests including dignity, autonomy and privacy and the traditional approaches to protecting them — consent and anonymisation — and concludes that these do not operate to effectively to protect individual interests in this context. Research using linked data can also have impacts, both beneficial and harmful on others, including socio-demographic groups, disease groups and the wider community and these should be explicitly recognised and evaluated by decision makers. The current legal and ethical regulation of data linkage research are critiqued for being too individualistic and alternative approaches are discussed.

Chapter two considers the interwoven interests of individual participants, collectives interests and the wider public interests in research using linked data. The chapter discusses the research participants interests including dignity, autonomy and privacy and the traditional approaches to protecting them — consent and anonymisation — and concludes that these do not operate to effectively to protect individual interests in this context. Research using linked data can also have impacts, both beneficial and harmful on others, including socio-demographic groups, disease groups and the wider community and these should be explicitly recognised and evaluated by decision makers. The current legal and ethical regulation of data linkage research are critiqued for being too individualistic and alternative approaches are discussed.

Chapter five describes the ethical framework regulating research using linked data and examines the applicable international ethics guidelines. A hypothetical research project is used to compare how these guidelines address the ethical assessment of research using linked data and in particular to compare how they address a waiver of consent and the extent to which they consider collective interests. The chapter goes on to discuss how the core ethical values of research merit and integrity, justice, beneficence, and respect can be reinterpreted to encompass the ethical concerns raised by research using linked data.