Principles and business processes for responsible AI

Abstract The first article in this series examined why the world wants controls over Artificial Intelligence (AI). This second article discusses how an organisation can manage AI responsibly, in order to protect its own interests, but also those of its stakeholders and society as a whole. A limited amount of guidance is provided by ethical analysis. A much more effective approach is to apply adapted forms of the established techniques of risk assessment and risk management. Critically, risk assessment needs to be undertaken not only with the organisation's own interests in focus, but also from the perspectives of other stakeholders. To underpin this new form of business process, a set of Principles for Responsible AI is presented, consolidating proposals put forward by a diverse collection of 30 organisations.

[1]  Brian K. Kooy.  The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy , 2009 .

[2]  D. Payne,et al.  Evolution and Implementation: A Study of Values, Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility , 2002 .

[3]  E. Fosch Villaronga,et al.  European regulatory framework for person carrier robots , 2017, Comput. Law Secur. Rev..

[4]  R. E. Freeman,et al.  Stockholders and Stakeholders: A New Perspective on Corporate Governance , 1983 .

[5]  R. B.,et al.  The United Nations , 1947, Nature.

[6]  M. Clarkson.  A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance , 1995 .

[7]  Samuel B. Williams,et al.  ASSOCIATION FOR COMPUTING MACHINERY , 2000 .

[8]  A. Pouloudi,et al.  Stakeholder identification in inter-organizational systems: gaining insights for drug use management systems , 1997 .

[9]  A Gullard,et al.  To the House of Lords. , 1998, Nursing times.

[10]  Thomas Peltier,et al.  Information Technology: Code of Practice for Information Security Management , 2001 .

[11]  Roger Clarke,et al.  Privacy impact assessment: Its origins and development , 2009, Comput. Law Secur. Rev..

[12]  Gary T. Marx,et al.  An Ethics For The New Surveillance , 1998, Inf. Soc..

[13]  A. Carroll.  Corporate Social Responsibility , 1999, The Routledge Companion to Corporate Social Responsibility.

[14]  Roger Clarke.  Extra-Organisational Systems: A Challenge to the Software Engineering Paradigm , 1992, IFIP Congress.

[15]  M. Porter,et al.  Strategy and society: the link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. , 2006, Harvard business review.

[16]  Ugo Pagallo,et al.  Even Angels Need the Rules: AI, Roboethics, and the Law , 2016, ECAI.

[17]  Thomas W. Dunfee,et al.  Toward A Unified Conception Of Business Ethics: Integrative Social Contracts Theory , 1994 .

[18]  Donald Firesmith,et al.  Specifying Reusable Security Requirements , 2004, J. Object Technol..

[19]  Simone Fischer Hübner,et al.  Teaching Privacy-Enhancing Technologies , 2001 .

[20]  Yi Zeng,et al.  Linking Artificial Intelligence Principles , 2018, SafeAI@AAAI.

[21]  Frank Vanclay,et al.  The International Handbook of Social Impact Assessment , 2003 .

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

[23]  Stephen Pike,et al.  Mapping stakeholder perceptions for a third sector organization , 2003 .

[24]  Roger Clarke,et al.  Guidelines for the responsible application of data analytics , 2017, Comput. Law Secur. Rev..

[25]  Ronald K. Mitchell,et al.  Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of who and What Really Counts , 1997 .