Administration by algorithm: A risk management framework

Algorithmic decision-making is neither a recent phenomenon nor one necessarily associated with artificial intelligence (AI), though advances in AI are increasingly resulting in what were heretofore human decisions being taken over by, or becoming dependent on, algorithms and technologies like machine learning. Such developments promise many potential benefits, but are not without certain risks. These risks are not always well understood. It is not just a question of machines making mistakes; it is the embedding of values, biases and prejudices in software which can discriminate against both individuals and groups in society. Such biases are often hard either to detect or prove, particularly where there are problems with transparency and accountability and where such systems are outsourced to the private sector. Consequently, being able to detect and categorise these risks is essential in order to develop a systematic and calibrated response. This paper proposes a simple taxonomy of decision-making algorithms in the public sector and uses this to build a risk management framework with a number of components including an accountability structure and regulatory governance. This framework is designed to assist scholars and practitioners interested in ensuring structured accountability and legal regulation of AI in the public sphere.

[1]  Steffen Staab,et al.  Bias in data‐driven artificial intelligence systems—An introductory survey , 2020, WIREs Data Mining Knowl. Discov..

[2]  M. Arntz,et al.  The Risk of Automation for Jobs in OECD Countries: A Comparative Analysis , 2016 .

[3]  Melvin J. Dubnick Seeking Salvation for Accountability , 2002 .

[4]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Fair, Transparent, and Accountable Algorithmic Decision-making Processes , 2017, Philosophy & Technology.

[5]  Frank Bannister,et al.  The Trouble with Transparency: A Critical Review of Openness in e‐Government , 2011 .

[6]  Mike Ananny,et al.  Seeing without knowing: Limitations of the transparency ideal and its application to algorithmic accountability , 2018, New Media Soc..

[7]  Jonathan F. Anderson,et al.  Illusions of Accountability , 2009 .

[8]  Cary Coglianese,et al.  Transparency and Algorithmic Governance , 2018 .

[9]  Daniel J. Power,et al.  Decision Support Systems: A Historical Overview , 2008 .

[10]  Katherine Fink,et al.  Opening the government’s black boxes: freedom of information and algorithmic accountability , 2017 .

[11]  Konrad Pesudovs,et al.  Improving subjective scaling of pain using Rasch analysis. , 2005, The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society.

[12]  Francesca Rossi,et al.  AI4People—An Ethical Framework for a Good AI Society: Opportunities, Risks, Principles, and Recommendations , 2018, Minds and Machines.

[13]  Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen,et al.  Do transparent government agencies strengthen trust? , 2009, Inf. Polity.

[14]  C. Fredriksson,et al.  Big Data in the Public Sector: A Systematic Literature Review , 2017, Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration.

[15]  Bram Klievink,et al.  Big data in the public sector: Uncertainties and readiness , 2016, Information Systems Frontiers.

[16]  Patrice M. Buzzanell,et al.  Cybervetting, Person–Environment Fit, and Personnel Selection: Employers' Surveillance and Sensemaking of Job Applicants' Online Information , 2014 .

[17]  M. Hussain,et al.  Constructing a Data-Driven Society: China's Social Credit System as a State Surveillance Infrastructure , 2018, Policy & Internet.

[18]  Ramlan Mahmod,et al.  Automated Marking System for Short Answer examination (AMS-SAE) , 2009, 2009 IEEE Symposium on Industrial Electronics & Applications.

[19]  Ben Williamson,et al.  Knowing public services: Cross-sector intermediaries and algorithmic governance in public sector reform , 2014 .

[20]  Alyssa M. Carlson,et al.  The Need for Transparency in the Age of Predictive Sentencing Algorithms , 2017 .

[21]  Patrick Dunleavy,et al.  The second wave of digital-era governance: a quasi-paradigm for government on the Web , 2013, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.