IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/p4sey.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Understanding Accountability in Algorithmic Supply Chains

Author

Listed:
  • Cobbe, Jennifer
  • Veale, Michael

    (University College London)

  • Singh, Jatinder

Abstract

Academic and policy proposals on algorithmic accountability often seek to understand algorithmic systems in their socio-technical context, recognising that they are produced by ‘many hands’. Increasingly, however, algorithmic systems are also produced, deployed, and used within a supply chain comprising multiple actors tied together by flows of data between them. In such cases, it is the working together of an algorithmic supply chain of different actors who contribute to the production, deployment, use, and functionality that drives systems and produces particular outcomes. We argue that algorithmic accountability discussions must consider supply chains and the difficult implications they raise for the governance and accountability of algorithmic systems. In doing so, we explore algorithmic supply chains, locating them in their broader technical and political economic context and identifying some key features that should be understood in future work on algorithmic governance and accountability (particularly regarding general purpose AI services). To highlight ways forward and areas warranting attention, we further discuss some implications raised by supply chains: challenges for allocating accountability stemming from distributed responsibility for systems between actors, limited visibility due to the accountability horizon, service models of use and liability, and cross-border supply chains and regulatory arbitrage

Suggested Citation

  • Cobbe, Jennifer & Veale, Michael & Singh, Jatinder, 2023. "Understanding Accountability in Algorithmic Supply Chains," SocArXiv p4sey, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:p4sey
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/p4sey
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/644ba6ad9e8e1c693e1e2d07/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/p4sey?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. Thompson, Dennis F., 1980. "Moral Responsibility of Public Officials: The Problem of Many Hands," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 905-916, December.
    2. Veale, Michael & Nouwens, Midas & Santos, Cristiana, 2022. "Impossible Asks: Can the Transparency and Consent Framework Ever Authorise Real-Time Bidding After the Belgian DPA Decision?," SocArXiv mj7xu, Center for Open Science.
    3. Kira J.M. Matus & Michael Veale, 2022. "Certification systems for machine learning: Lessons from sustainability," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 177-196, January.
    4. Bovens, Mark, 2006. "Analysing and Assessing Public Accountability. A Conceptual Framework," European Governance Papers (EUROGOV) 1, CONNEX and EUROGOV networks.
    5. Edwards, Lilian & Veale, Michael, 2017. "Slave to the Algorithm? Why a 'right to an explanation' is probably not the remedy you are looking for," LawArXiv 97upg, Center for Open Science.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Pauline Allen & David Hughes & Peter Vincent-Jones & Christina Petsoulas & Shane Doheny & Jennifer A. Roberts, 2016. "Public Contracts as Accountability Mechanisms: Assuring quality in public health care in England and Wales," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 20-39, January.
    2. Popoola, Oluwatoyin Muse Johnson & Che-Ahmad, Ayoib & Samsudin, Rose Shamsiah, 2014. "Fraud and Forensic Accounting: Knowledge and Risk Assessment Task Performance in Malaysian Public Sector – Conceptual study," MPRA Paper 66680, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2014.
    3. Sarah Maslen & Jan Hayes & Janice Wong & Christina Scott-Young, 2020. "Witch hunts and scapegoats: an investigation into the impact of personal liability concerns on engineers’ reporting of risks," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 413-426, September.
    4. Livia Johannesson & Noomi Weinryb, 2021. "How to blame and make a difference: perceived responsibility and policy consequences in two Swedish pro-migrant campaigns," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 41-62, March.
    5. 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).
    6. Vasiliki Koniakou, 2023. "From the “rush to ethics” to the “race for governance” in Artificial Intelligence," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 71-102, February.
    7. Mattei, Paola, 2007. "The welfare state and new challenge from the back door," TranState Working Papers 65, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    8. MARTENS, David, 2020. "FAT Flow: A data science ethics framework," Working Papers 2020004, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    9. Radu USZKAI & Cristina VOINEA & Toni GIBEA, 2021. "Responsibility Attribution Problems In Companies: Could An Artificial Moral Advisor Solve This?," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 15(1), pages 951-959, November.
    10. Maliheh Mansouri & Julie Rowney, 2014. "The Dilemma of Accountability for Professionals: A Challenge for Mainstream Management Theories," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 45-56, August.
    11. Koefer, Franziska & Lemken, Ivo & Pauls, Jan, 2023. "Fairness in algorithmic decision systems: A microfinance perspective," EIF Working Paper Series 2023/88, European Investment Fund (EIF).
    12. Arnošt Veselý, 2017. "Policy advice as policy work: a conceptual framework for multi-level analysis," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 139-154, March.
    13. Iris Wanzenböck & Joeri H Wesseling & Koen Frenken & Marko P Hekkert & K Matthias Weber, 0. "A framework for mission-oriented innovation policy: Alternative pathways through the problem–solution space," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(4), pages 474-489.
    14. Pesch, Udo, 2015. "Tracing discursive space: Agency and change in sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 379-388.
    15. Hazel Si Min Lim & Araz Taeihagh, 2019. "Algorithmic Decision-Making in AVs: Understanding Ethical and Technical Concerns for Smart Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-28, October.
    16. Julia Black, 2008. "Constructing and contesting legitimacy and accountability in polycentric regulatory regimes," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 137-164, June.
    17. Veronica Goitsemang Magang & Tebogo Israel Teddy Magang, 2021. "What Is ‘Tenderpreneuring’? A Review of the Literature," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 14(12), pages 128-128, July.
    18. Prasetyono, Pipin, 2017. "Facilitating payments: an ethical problem in the Indonesian bureaucracy," MPRA Paper 97656, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Hein Duijf & Frederik Putte, 2022. "The problem of no hands: responsibility voids in collective decisions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(4), pages 753-790, May.
    20. Maaser, Nicola & Stratmann, Thomas, 2024. "Costly voting in weighted committees: The case of moral costs," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).

    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:p4sey. 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.