IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ3/7963028.html

The digital sentinel: artificial intelligence and the mitigation of corporate litigation risk

Author

Listed:
  • Guo Wu
  • Anqi Du

Abstract

We provide robust evidence that the strategic adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) yields a net reduction in corporate litigation risk. Using firm-level data from Chinese A-share listed firms from 2008 to 2023, we show that AI significantly reduces corporate litigation risk and that firms with greater AI adoption experience fewer lawsuits, face reduced monetary damages and are less likely to be sued. The findings remain consistent across various robustness tests and endogeneity treatments. We also demonstrate that AI operates through two complementary channels: an organization-improving effect, which enhances innovation proactivity, knowledge diversity and information transparency; and a cost-cutting effect, which reduces operational, management and financial constraints. In addition, we indicate that the risk-mitigating effects of AI are heterogeneous in terms of firm characteristics and life cycle, and we find that AI adoption also corresponds to a lower probability of corporate default and increased managerial agility. The findings suggest that AI has benefits in mitigating litigation risk, and that it is not a replacement for human oversight but a powerful tool that empowers and enhances corporate stability and governance. The implications for various stakeholders are also highlighted.

Suggested Citation

  • Guo Wu & Anqi Du, . "The digital sentinel: artificial intelligence and the mitigation of corporate litigation risk," Journal of Operational Risk, Journal of Operational Risk.
  • Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:7963028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.risk.net/node/7963028
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:7963028. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-operational-risk .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.