IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/mwhnb.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Administration by Algorithm? Public Management meets Public Sector Machine Learning

Author

Listed:
  • Veale, Michael
  • Brass, Irina

Abstract

Public bodies and agencies increasingly seek to use new forms of data analysis in order to provide 'better public services'. These reforms have consisted of digital service transformations generally aimed at 'improving the experience of the citizen', 'making government more efficient' and 'boosting business and the wider economy'. More recently however, there has been a push to use administrative data to build algorithmic models, often using machine learning, to help make day-to-day operational decisions in the management and delivery of public services rather than providing general policy evidence. This chapter asks several questions relating to this. What are the drivers of these new approaches? Is public sector machine learning a smooth continuation of e-Government, or does it pose fundamentally different challenge to practices of public administration? And how are public management decisions and practices at different levels enacted when machine learning solutions are implemented in the public sector? Focussing on different levels of government: the macro, the meso, and the 'street-level', we map out and analyse the current efforts to frame and standardise machine learning in the public sector, noting that they raise several concerns around the skills, capacities, processes and practices governments currently employ. The forms of these are likely to have value-laden, political consequences worthy of significant scholarly attention.

Suggested Citation

  • Veale, Michael & Brass, Irina, 2019. "Administration by Algorithm? Public Management meets Public Sector Machine Learning," SocArXiv mwhnb, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:mwhnb
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/mwhnb
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5cbb2a3af2be3c001805c24c/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/mwhnb?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sunstein,Cass R., 2002. "Risk and Reason," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521791991.
    2. Bowen, Elinor R., 1982. "The Pressman-Wildavsky Paradox: Four Addenda or Why Models Based on Probability Theory Can Predict Implementation Success and Suggest Useful Tactical Advice for Implementers," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 1-21, February.
    3. Rachel Courtland, 2018. "Bias detectives: the researchers striving to make algorithms fair," Nature, Nature, vol. 558(7710), pages 357-360, June.
    4. Erickson, Paul & Klein, Judy L. & Daston, Lorraine & Lemov, Rebecca & Sturm, Thomas & Gordin, Michael D., 2013. "How Reason Almost Lost Its Mind," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, number 9780226046631, September.
    5. Veale, Michael & Van Kleek, Max & Binns, Reuben, 2018. "Fairness and Accountability Design Needs for Algorithmic Support in High-Stakes Public Sector Decision-Making," SocArXiv 8kvf4, Center for Open Science.
    6. Veale, Michael & Binns, Reuben, 2017. "Fairer machine learning in the real world: Mitigating discrimination without collecting sensitive data," SocArXiv ustxg, Center for Open Science.
    7. Irvine Lapsley, 2009. "New Public Management: The Cruellest Invention of the Human Spirit?1," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 45(1), pages 1-21, March.
    8. repec:elg:eebook:14251 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Veale, Michael & Edwards, Lilian, 2017. "Clarity, Surprises, and Further Questions in the Article 29 Working Party Draft Guidance on Automated Decision-Making and Profiling," LawArXiv y25ag, Center for Open Science.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lena Ulbricht & Karen Yeung, 2022. "Algorithmic regulation: A maturing concept for investigating regulation of and through algorithms," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 3-22, January.
    2. Katzenbach, Christian & Ulbricht, Lena, 2019. "Algorithmic governance," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 8(4), pages 1-18.
    3. König, Pascal D. & Wenzelburger, Georg, 2021. "The legitimacy gap of algorithmic decision-making in the public sector: Why it arises and how to address it," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Kuziemski, Maciej & Misuraca, Gianluca, 2020. "AI governance in the public sector: Three tales from the frontiers of automated decision-making in democratic settings," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).
    5. Emily Keddell, 2019. "Algorithmic Justice in Child Protection: Statistical Fairness, Social Justice and the Implications for Practice," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-22, October.
    6. Aristotelis Mavidis & Dimitris Folinas, 2022. "From Public E-Procurement 3.0 to E-Procurement 4.0; A Critical Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-23, September.
    7. Katzenbach, Christian & Ulbricht, Lena, 2019. "Algorithmic governance," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 8(4), pages 1-18.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vesnic-Alujevic, Lucia & Nascimento, Susana & Pólvora, Alexandre, 2020. "Societal and ethical impacts of artificial intelligence: Critical notes on European policy frameworks," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).
    2. Matus, Kira & Veale, Michael, 2021. "Certification Systems for Machine Learning: Lessons from Sustainability," SocArXiv pm3wy, Center for Open Science.
    3. Tóth, Balázs, 2021. "Milyen kapcsolatban állnak a közszféra reformjai a gazdaságpolitikai paradigmákkal? [How reforms of the public sector relate to the paradigms of economic policy]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 205-222.
    4. Donald Macrae, 2011. "Standards for risk assessment of standards: how the international community is starting to address the risk of the wrong standards," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(8), pages 933-942, September.
    5. Neelke Doorn, 2015. "The Blind Spot in Risk Ethics: Managing Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(3), pages 354-360, March.
    6. Palermo, Tommaso, 2014. "Accountability and expertise in public sector risk management: a case study," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 59948, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Fellnhofer, Katharina & Sornette, Didier, 2022. "Embracing The Intuitive-Analytical Paradox? How Intuitive And Analytical Decision-Making Drive Paradoxes In Simple And Complex Environments," OSF Preprints evjd6, Center for Open Science.
    8. Les Worrall & Kim Mather & Roger Seifert, 2010. "Solving the Labour Problem Among Professional Workers in the UK Public Sector: Organisation Change and Performance Management," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 117-137, June.
    9. Brendan Whitty & Jessica Sklair & Paul Robert Gilbert & Emma Mawdsley & Jo‐Anna Russon & Olivia Taylor, 2023. "Outsourcing the Business of Development: The Rise of For‐profit Consultancies in the UK Aid Sector," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 54(4), pages 892-917, July.
    10. Tian Sang & Peng Liu & Liang Zhao, 2022. "Judicial Response to Ecological Environment Risk in China—From the Perspective of Social Systems Theory," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-13, November.
    11. Julia Black & Robert Baldwin, 2012. "When risk‐based regulation aims low: Approaches and challenges," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 2-22, March.
    12. Manuel Fernández-García & Clemente J. Navarro & Irene Gómez-Ramirez, 2021. "Evaluating Territorial Targets of European Integrated Urban Policy. The URBAN and URBANA Initiatives in Spain (1994–2013)," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-18, September.
    13. Sylvain Lenfle & Christoph Loch, 2017. "Has Megaproject management lost its way ? Lessons from History," Post-Print hal-03640779, HAL.
    14. Alina Köchling & Marius Claus Wehner, 2020. "Discriminated by an algorithm: a systematic review of discrimination and fairness by algorithmic decision-making in the context of HR recruitment and HR development," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 795-848, November.
    15. Damian Tago & Henrik Andersson & Nicolas Treich, 2014. "Pesticides and Health: A Review of Evidence on Health Effects, Valuation of Risks, and Benefit-Cost Analysis," Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research, in: Preference Measurement in Health, volume 24, pages 203-295, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    16. B. Buylen & J. Christiaens, 2013. "Politics by numbers? An exploration of councillors’ apparent use of financial information during the budget discussion in Flemish municipal councils," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 13/841, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    17. Hamza El Kezazy & Yassine Hilmi, 2023. "Improving Good Governance Through Management Control in Local Authorities," Post-Print hal-04422229, HAL.
    18. Kirtchik, Olessia & Boldyrev, Ivan, 2024. "“Rise And Fall” Of The Walrasian Program In Economics: A Social And Intellectual Dynamics Of The General Equilibrium Theory," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-26, March.
    19. Hildebrand Sean, 2015. "Coerced Confusion? Local Emergency Policy Implementation After September 11," Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 273-298, June.
    20. Alexandra P. Bocharova, 2020. "Network Analysis Of The Chinese Media On The Evidence From The Hong Kong Protest Movement," HSE Working papers WP BRP 76/PS/2020, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:osf:socarx:mwhnb. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.