Artificial intelligence in French public administrations : between mistrust and reality

The French administration is often caricatured by its extreme bureaucracy and lack of capacity for reform, despite the recurrent use of the term "reform" in a large number of laws and decrees. However, major changes have taken place as a result of society's expectations (sociological evolution) and the introduction of the New Public Management doctrine within administrations (managerial evolution). The arrival of artificial intelligence (technological evolution) is bringing new perspectives to public administrations. The French case is interesting to study for several reasons. Firstly, it is one of the OECD countries where the role of the public sphere is one of the most important in terms of government spending as a percentage of GDP. Secondly, France is also a country where the use of artificial intelligence in public services is modest. AI is only present in internal public service processes or at the level of service design and delivery, and not in improving the formulation of public policies, unlike in countries such as Canada, UK or Italy. This reluctance on the part of government agencies can be explained by a lack of understanding of the new technology and by their natural legal caution (the French precautionary principle) in the face of novelty. Thus, ethics is often developed to explain why administrations are so reluctant to commit to AI. Other principles are evoked at the highest level to circumscribe this caution. These include the principles of human primacy, performance, equity and non-discrimination, transparency, safety, environmental sustainability and strategic autonomy. It's clear that some experiments (particularly outside France) are proving particularly profitable. Whether in the field of justice (reducing the prison population, supporting decision-making, reducing the risk of recidivism), of education (teaching better adapted to students' individual needs), of security (adapting control efforts to risks) or of health (improving the quality of care and limiting costs), the benefits seem to offer very positive prospects. We still need to define what we mean by artificial intelligence, as the concept is very fluid over time. Generative AI is being experimented with in a number of ministries, including the Ministry of Economy and Finance. While the results of this superficial AI, based as it is on a specific business dimension, are very encouraging, their impact remains limited. For example, the "Llamandement" project at the Public Finances General Directorate was able to automate 3 out of 4 stages in the process of handling parliamentary amendments during the examination of the finance act. This has improved performance, without compromising service quality. This results in improved performance, without any deterioration in service quality. However, some experiments have not had the same positive effects ("Service public +", "je donne mon avis"). These findings highlight the role of "Automated, administrative decision-making (AADM)" and the need to respect good governance values such as accountability, efficiency, equality, fairness, resilience, responsiveness, right-to-privacy, rule-of-law, and transparency.