Switch to: Citations

References in:

Just accountability structures – a way to promote the safe use of automated decision-making in the public sector

AI and Society 39 (1):155-167 (2024)

Add references

You must login to add references.

Algorithmic Accountability and Public Reason.Reuben Binns - 2018 - Philosophy and Technology 31 (4):543-556.details The ever-increasing application of algorithms to decision-making in a range of social contexts has prompted demands for algorithmic accountability. Accountable decision-makers must provide their decision-subjects with justifications for their automated system’s outputs, but what kinds of broader principles should we expect such justifications to appeal to? Drawing from political philosophy, I present an account of algorithmic accountability in terms of the democratic ideal of ‘public reason’. I argue that situating demands for algorithmic accountability within this justificatory framework enables us to (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 50 citations
Administrative due process when using automated decision-making in public administration: some notes from a Finnish perspective.Markku Suksi - 2020 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 29 (1):87-110.details Various due process provisions designed for use by civil servants in administrative decision-making may become redundant when automated decision-making is taken into use in public administration. Problems with mechanisms of good government, responsibility and liability for automated decisions and the rule of law require attention of the law-maker in adapting legal provisions to this new form of decision-making. Although the general data protection regulation of the European Union is important in acknowledging automated decision-making, most of the legal safeguards within administrative (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 5 citations
Law and algorithms in the public domain.Dag Wiese Schartum - 2016 - Etikk I Praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics 1 (1):15-26.details This article explains and discusses the relationship between traditional legislative processes and the development of automated government decision-making systems. The juridical aspects of systems development should be regarded as invisible quasi-legislation. The author investigates and discusses possible ways of changing the legislative process with a view to increasing and improving political involvement in processes today often regarded as mere implementation, and thereby safeguard that important parts of the law of our computerised society is situated in the public domain. Download Export citation Bookmark 1 citation

1