Bridging Data Protection and AI Ethics: A Two-Study Empirical Examination of LGPD Principles and Ethical AI in Brazil

Ana Caroline da Rocha Braz; João Rossi; Edna Dias Canedo

doi:10.5753/jis.2026.7128

Authors

Ana Caroline da Rocha Braz University of Brasília (UnB) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5712-8836
João Rossi University of Brasília (UnB) https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3675-5005
Edna Dias Canedo University of Brasília (UnB) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2159-339X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5753/jis.2026.7128

Keywords:

LGPD, Artificial Intelligence, Ethics, Data Protection, Responsible AI Governance

Abstract

Context: Data protection laws and AI ethics frameworks are increasingly invoked to govern the risks of data-driven and algorithmic systems, but there is still limited empirical evidence on how practitioners and students perceive the relationship between legal principles (such as the Brazilian LGPD) and ethical principles for Artificial Intelligence (AI). Goal: This study investigates how LGPD principles are interpreted as a foundation for ethical AI, examining perceived alignments, practical challenges, regulatory gaps, and expectations for the evolution of AI governance in Brazil. Method: We conducted two complementary survey based studies. Study 1 collected responses from 30 computing students, exploring their perceptions of privacy, transparency, security, data minimization, and accountability in AI systems. Study 2 extended this investigation with 100 participants (students and professionals in diverse software project roles), using paired LGPD AI items, Likert-scale questions on sufficiency and complementarity, and open-ended questions analyzed through inductive content analysis. Results: Across both studies, participants consistently perceived strong conceptual alignment between LGPD principles and AI ethical principles, especially regarding privacy, transparency, security, prevention, non-discrimination, and accountability. However, they also reported important gaps, particularly in explainability, fairness and bias mitigation, inclusion and diversity, solidarity, and other human-centered values, as well as uncertainty about accountability for automated decisions and the fit of static legal principles to dynamic AI systems. Conclusion: The findings indicate that LGPD is viewed as a solid but insufficient foundation for ethical AI. Participants expect LGPD to be complemented or updated by AI specific ethical and regulatory frameworks, governance mechanisms, and technical measures such as explainable AI and algorithmic auditing, pointing to the need for an integrated ecosystem for responsible AI in Brazil.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Beppu, F. R., Maciel, C., and Viterbo, J. (2021). Contributions of the brazilian act for the protection of personal data for treating digital legacy. Journal on Interactive Systems, 12(1):112–124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/jis.2021.1654.

Braz, A. and Canedo, E. (2025). Mapping lgpd principles to ethical principles in the context of artificial intelligence. In Anais do VI Workshop sobre as Implicações da Computação na Sociedade, pages 1–13, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil. SBC. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/wics.2025.7160.

Brey, P. and Dainow, B. (2023). Ethics by design for artificial intelligence. AI and Ethics, pages 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-023-00330-4.

Brown, N., Xie, B., Sarder, E., Fiesler, C., and Wiese, E. S. (2024). Teaching ethics in computing: A systematic literature review of ACM computer science education publications. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ., 24(1):6:1–6:36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3634685.

Cappelli, M. A. and Serugendo, G. D. M. (2025). A semi-automated software model to support AI ethics compliance assessment of an AI system guided by ethical principles of AI. AI Ethics, 5(2):1357–1380. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/S43681-024-00480-Z.

Carrasco, L. B. (2025). Towards responsible AI: A conceptual framework for mitigating ethical risks in generative artificial intelligence systems. In 31st Americas Conference on Information Systems: Intelligent Technologies for a Better Future, AMCIS 2025, Montreal, QC, Canada, August 14-16, 2025. Association for Information Systems. DOI: https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2025/ict_global/ict_global/8.

Carvalho, L. P., Oliveira, J., Santoro, F. M., and Cappelli, C. (2021). Social network analysis, ethics and lgpd, considerations in research. iSys-Brazilian Journal of Information Systems, 14(2):28–52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/isys.2021.1235.

Carvalho, L. P., Rodrigues, K. R. d. H., Oliveira, J., and Santoro, F. M. (2025). Enhancing ethical communication in brazilian computing research: A framework for human involvement reporting. Journal on Interactive Systems, 16(1):749–772. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/jis.2025.5977.

Danilevskyi, M., Pérez-Téllez, F., and Buscaldi, D. (2025). Implementing ethical principles in AI: an initial discussion. AI Ethics, 5(4):3549–3555. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/S43681-025-00710-Y.

de Araújo Neto, R. J. and Barbosa Aguiar, J. J. (2024). Os impactos da lei geral de proteção de dados (lgpd) na segurança da informação: uma revisão da literatura. GeSec: Revista de Gestao e Secretariado, 15(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.7769/gesec.v15i2.3442.

de Cerqueira, J. A. S., Azevedo, A. P. D., Leão, H. A. T., and Canedo, E. D. (2022). Guide for artificial intelligence ethical requirements elicitation - RE4AI ethical guide. In 55th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS 2022, Virtual Event / Maui, Hawaii, USA, January 4-7, 2022, pages 1–10. ScholarSpace. DOI: http://hdl.handle.net/10125/80015.

de Cerqueira, J. A. S., Leão, H. A. T., and Canedo, E. D. (2021). Ethical guidelines and principles in the context of artificial intelligence. In SBSI 2021: XVII Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems, Uberlândia, Brazil, June 7 - 10, 2021, pages 36:1–36:8. ACM. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3466933.3466969.

de Oliveira, K. A. C. (2024). Formação de jurisprudência administrativa pela anpd: estudo de casos das sanções aplicadas. Revista Digital de Direito Administrativo, 11(2):89–109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2319-0558.v11i2p89-109.

Díaz-Rodríguez, N., Del Ser, J., Coeckelbergh, M., López de Prado, M., Herrera-Viedma, E., and Herrera, F. (2023). Connecting the dots in trustworthy artificial intelligence: From ai principles, ethics, and key requirements to responsible ai systems and regulation. Information Fusion, 99:101896. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2023.101896.

Falcão, F. D. S. and Canedo, E. D. (2024). Investigating software development teams members' perceptions of data privacy in the use of large language models (llms). In Proceedings of the XXIII Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality, SBQS 2024, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, November 5-8, 2024, pages 373–382. ACM. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3701625.3701675.

Federal, G. (2021). Guia de boas práticas para implementação na administração pública federal. 2020. Available in https://www.gov.br/secom/pt-br/central-de-conteudo/redes/guia Accessed on 15 December 2025.

Fernandes, A. C. and MEIRA, T. M. (2023). Impactos da inteligência artificial na advocacia brasileira: desafios e oportunidades. Revista Jurídica do Nordeste Mineiro, 7(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.61164/rjnm.v7i1.2010.

Finocchiaro, G. (2024). The regulation of artificial intelligence. Ai & Society, 39(4):1961–1968. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-023-01650-z.

Floridi, L., Cowls, J., King, T. C., and Taddeo, M. (2021). How to design ai for social good: Seven essential factors. Ethics, Governance, and Policies in Artificial Intelligence, pages 125–151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00213-5.

Gonçalves, C. D., Menescal, E. d. P., de Mendonça, F. L. L., and Canedo, E. D. (2024). Trust in ai: Perspectives of c-level executives in brazilian organizations. In Proceedings of the XXIII Brazilian Symposium on Software Quality, SBQS '24, page 147–157, New York, NY, USA. Association for Computing Machinery. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3701625.3701654.

González, A. L., Moreno, M., Román, A. C. M., Fernández, Y. H., and Pérez, N. C. (2024). Ethics in artificial intelligence: an approach to cybersecurity. Inteligencia Artificial, 27(73):38–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4114/intartif.vol27iss73pp38-54.

Guimarães, G., Filho, G. R., Marques, G., and Canedo, E. (2025). May i speak? perceptions on ethical concerns and power while developing software in ai teams. In Anais do XXIV Simpósio Brasileiro de Qualidade de Software, pages 44–54, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil. SBC. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/sbqs.2025.13576.

Jobin, A., Ienca, M., and Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of ai ethics guidelines. Nature machine intelligence, 1(9):389–399. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2.

Karimov, A., Saarela, M., Aliyev, S., and Baker, R. (2025). Ethical considerations and student perceptions of engagement data in learning analytics. In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa. DOI: https://hdl.handle.net/10125/109419.

Khan, A. A., Akbar, M. A., Fahmideh, M., Liang, P., Waseem, M., Ahmad, A., Niazi, M., and Abrahamsson, P. (2023). Ai ethics: an empirical study on the views of practitioners and lawmakers. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 10(6):2971–2984. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSS.2023.3251729.

Khan, A. A., Badshah, S., Liang, P., Waseem, M., Khan, B., Ahmad, A., Fahmideh, M., Niazi, M., and Akbar, M. A. (2022). Ethics of AI: A systematic literature review of principles and challenges. In EASE 2022: The International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering 2022, Gothenburg, Sweden, June 13 - 15, 2022, pages 383–392. ACM. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3530019.3531329.

Kipman, F., Marques, G., and Canedo, E. (2025). Computing students' perceptions of ethical principles in ai and curricular coverage. In Anais do XXIV Simpósio Brasileiro de Qualidade de Software, pages 431–441, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil. SBC. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/sbqs.2025.13611.

Kitchenham, B. and Charters, S. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. EBSE Technical Report EBSE-2007-01.

Macedo, P. N. (2018). Brazilian general data protection law (lgpd). National Congress, Accessed on 15 December 2025.

Machado, H., Silva, S., and Neiva, L. (2025). Publics' views on ethical challenges of artificial intelligence: a scoping review. AI Ethics, 5(1):139–167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/S43681-023-00387-1.

Martins, M. E., Aguiar, Y. P. C., and Saraiva, J. (2025). Assessment of competences for LGPD DPO through ANPD standard and information systems curriculum. In Proceedings of the 21st Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems, SBSI 2025, Recife, Brazil, May 19-23, 2025, pages 565–574. SBC. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/SBSI.2025.246585.

Maturo, F., Porreca, A., and Porreca, A. (2025). The risks of artificial intelligence in research: ethical and methodological challenges in the peer review process. AI Ethics, 5(5):5389–5396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/S43681-025-00775-9.

McGrath, Q. P., Hevner, A. R., and de Vreede, G. (2025). Designing an enhanced enterprise risk management system to mitigate ethical risks of artificial intelligence applications. IEEE Trans. Engineering Management, 72:1813–1830. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2025.3565221.

Nascimento, S. M., de Paiva, T. M. G., Kasuga, M. P. M., Silva, T. d. A. F., Crozara, C. M. G., Byk, J., and da Conceição Furtado, S. (2024). Inteligência artificial e suas implicações éticas e legais: revisão integrativa. Revista Bioética, 32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-803420243729ES.

Neves, B. C. (2023). Mapeamento sistemático da literatura sobre a inteligência artificial na medicina clinica: papel e princípios éticos dos algoritmos. Revista Fontes Documentais, 6(Ed. Especial):78–79.

Nguyen, A., Ngo, H. N., Hong, Y., Dang, B., and Nguyen, B.-P. T. (2023). Ethical principles for artificial intelligence in education. Education and information technologies, 28(4):4221–4241. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11316-w.

Pant, A., Hoda, R., Tantithamthavorn, C., and Turhan, B. (2025). Navigating fairness: practitioners' understanding, challenges, and strategies in AI/ML development. Empir. Softw. Eng., 30(3):102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-025-10650-0.

Petersen, K., Feldt, R., Mujtaba, S., and Mattsson, M. (2008). Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. In 12th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, EASE 2008, University of Bari, Italy, 26-27 June 2008, Workshops in Computing. BCS.

Porto, D., Prado, R., Marques, G., Serrano, A., Mendonça, F., and Canedo, E. (2025). Ethical requirements in the age of artificial intelligence: A systematic literature review. In Anais do XXI Simpósio Brasileiro de Sistemas de Informação, pages 663–672, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil. SBC. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/sbsi.2025.246613.

Quintino, M. E. G., Garcia, A. G. P. V., Primola, A. M. S. P., Chaves, E. C., Souza, N. M., Oliveira, L. L. G., and Sousa, C. V. (2024). Implicações éticas do uso da inteligência artificial (ia) em textos científicos: uma revisão integrativa de literatura. In Abec Meeting. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21452/abecmeeting2024.258.

Rapôso, C. F. L., de Lima, H. M., de Oliveira Junior, W. F., Silva, P. A. F., and de Souza Barros, E. E. (2019). Lgpd-lei geral de proteção de dados pessoais em tecnologia da informação: Revisão sistemática. RACE- Revista de Administração do Cesmac, 4:58–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3131/race.v4i0.1035.

Rocha, L. D., Silva, G. R. S., and Canedo, E. D. (2023). Privacy compliance in software development: A guide to implementing the LGPD principles. In Proceedings of the 38th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC 2023, Tallinn, Estonia, March 27-31, 2023, pages 1352–1361. ACM. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3555776.3577615.

Russell, S., Norvig, P., and Intelligence, A. (1995). A modern approach. Artificial Intelligence. Prentice-Hall, Egnlewood Cliffs, 25(27):79–80.

Ryan, M. and Stahl, B. C. (2021). Artificial intelligence ethics guidelines for developers and users: clarifying their content and normative implications. J. Inf. Commun. Ethics Soc., 19(1):61–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-12-2019-0138.

Sarlet, G. B. S. and Ruaro, R. L. (2021). A proteção de dados sensíveis no sistema normativo brasileiro sob o enfoque da lei geral de proteção de dados (lgpd)–l. 13.709/2018. Revista Direitos Fundamentais & Democracia, 26(2):81–106. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25192/issn.1982-0496.rdfd.v26i22172.

Spósito, S. L., Moreira, F. R., and Canedo, E. D. (2025). Designing a training journey for privacy and information security practitioners in the federal public administration. In Proceedings of the 21st Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems, SBSI 2025, Recife, Brazil, May 19-23, 2025, pages 95–104. SBC. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/SBSI.2025.246040.

Stavrakakis, I., Gordon, D., Tierney, B., Becevel, A., Murphy, E., Dodig-Crnkovic, G., Dobrin, R., Schiaffonati, V., Pereira, C., Tikhonenko, S., et al. (2022). The teaching of computer ethics on computer science and related degree programmes. a european survey. International Journal of Ethics Education, 7(1):101–129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40889-021-00135-1.

UNESCO (2022). Recomendação sobre a Ética da inteligência artificial. Available in [link] Accessed on 10 January 2025.

Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M. C., Regnell, B., and Wesslén, A. (2012). Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer.