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

Accountability in Artificial Intelligence

Author

Listed:
  • Gil, Olga

Abstract

This work stresses the importance of AI accountability to citizens and explores how a fourth independent government branch/institutions could be endowed to ensure that algorithms in today´s democracies convene to the principles of Constitutions. The purpose of this fourth branch of government in modern democracies could be to enshrine accountability of artificial intelligence development, including software-enabled technologies, and the implementation of policies based on big data within a wider democratic regime context. The work draws on Philosophy of Science, Political Theory (Ethics and Ideas), as well as concepts derived from the study of democracy (responsibility and accountability) to make a theoretical analysis of what artificial intelligence (AI) means for the governance of society and what are the limitations of such type of AI governance. The discussion shows that human ideas, as cement of societies, make it problematic to enshrine governance of artificial intelligence into the world of devices. In ethical grounds, the work stresses an existing trade off between greater and faster advancement of technology, or innovation on the one hand, and human well being on the oher, where the later is not automatically guaranteed by default. This trade off is yet unresolved. The work contends that features of AI offer an opportunity to revise government priorities from a multilevel perspective, from the local to the upper levels.

Suggested Citation

  • Gil, Olga, 2022. "Accountability in Artificial Intelligence," SocArXiv wckuf, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:wckuf
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/wckuf
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6388d3e0228a5a2cf47bc7ac/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/wckuf?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. Cartwright,Nancy, 2007. "Hunting Causes and Using Them," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521860819, June.
    2. Constantiou, Ioanna D & Kallinikos, Jannis, 2015. "New games, new rules: big data and the changing context of strategy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 63017, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Ronald H. Coase, 2022. "The Market for Goods and the Market for Ideas," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 19(1), pages 166–175-1, March.
    4. Patrick Mikalef & Ilias O. Pappas & John Krogstie & Michail Giannakos, 2018. "Big data analytics capabilities: a systematic literature review and research agenda," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 547-578, August.
    5. Amy K. Glasmeier & Molly Nebiolo, 2016. "Thinking about Smart Cities: The Travels of a Policy Idea that Promises a Great Deal, but So Far Has Delivered Modest Results," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-11, November.
    6. Sun, Edward W. & Chen, Yi-Ting & Yu, Min-Teh, 2015. "Generalized optimal wavelet decomposing algorithm for big financial data," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 194-214.
    7. Cartwright,Nancy, 2007. "Hunting Causes and Using Them," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521677981, June.
    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. repec:osf:socarx:wckuf_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Conboy, Kieran & Mikalef, Patrick & Dennehy, Denis & Krogstie, John, 2020. "Using business analytics to enhance dynamic capabilities in operations research: A case analysis and research agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(3), pages 656-672.
    3. Andrew Gelman & Guido Imbens, 2013. "Why ask Why? Forward Causal Inference and Reverse Causal Questions," NBER Working Papers 19614, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Courgeau, Daniel, 2012. "Probability and social science : methodologial relationships between the two approaches ?," MPRA Paper 43102, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Adrian Pabst & Roberto Scazzieri, 2012. "The political economy of civil society," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 337-356, December.
    6. Michael Margolis, 2017. "Graphs as a Tool for the Close Reading of Econometrics (Settler Mortality is not a Valid Instrument for Institutions)," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 6(1), pages 56-82, March.
    7. Mouchart, Michel & Russo, Federica & Wunsch, Guillaume, 2011. "Inferring causal relations by modelling structures : Article de recherche," LIDAM Discussion Papers ISBA 2011007, Université catholique de Louvain, Institute of Statistics, Biostatistics and Actuarial Sciences (ISBA).
    8. Galbács Peter, 2021. "What did it take for Lucas to set up ‘useful’ analogue systems in monetary business cycle theory?," Economics and Business Review, Sciendo, vol. 7(3), pages 61-82, September.
    9. Sabeen Hussain Bhatti & Wan Mohd Hirwani Wan Hussain & Jabran Khan & Shahbaz Sultan & Alberto Ferraris, 2024. "Exploring data-driven innovation: What’s missing in the relationship between big data analytics capabilities and supply chain innovation?," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 333(2), pages 799-824, February.
    10. Emily Chamlee-Wright, 2010. "Qualitative methods and the pursuit of economic understanding," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 23(4), pages 321-331, December.
    11. Pearl Judea, 2018. "Does Obesity Shorten Life? Or is it the Soda? On Non-manipulable Causes," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-7, September.
    12. Padró, R. & Marco, I. & Font, C. & Tello, E., 2019. "Beyond Chayanov: A sustainable agroecological farm reproductive analysis of peasant domestic units and rural communities (Sentmenat; Catalonia, 1860)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 227-239.
    13. Priscilla Álamos-Concha & Valérie Pattyn & Benoît Rihoux & Benjamin Schalembier & Derek Beach & Bart Cambré, 2022. "Conservative solutions for progress: on solution types when combining QCA with in-depth Process-Tracing," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1965-1997, August.
    14. Patrick Mikalef & Ilias O. Pappas & John Krogstie & Michail Giannakos, 2018. "Big data analytics capabilities: a systematic literature review and research agenda," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 547-578, August.
    15. Paul Shaffer, 2018. "Causal pluralism and mixed methods in the analysis of poverty dynamics," WIDER Working Paper Series 115, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    16. John Kay, 2014. "El mapa no es el territorio: un ensayo sobre el estado de la economía," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 16(30), pages 13-24, January-J.
    17. LeRoy, Stephen F, 2024. "Reconsidering Causation," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt12q3t2vd, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    18. Bader A. Alyoubi, 2019. "The Impact of Big Data on Electronic Commerce in Profit Organisations in Saudi Arabia," Research in World Economy, Research in World Economy, Sciedu Press, vol. 10(4), pages 106-115, December.
    19. Deirdre Nansen McCloskey, 2013. "Why Economics cannot Explain the Modern World," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 89, pages 8-22, June.
    20. Hünermund Paul & Louw Beyers & Caspi Itamar, 2023. "Double machine learning and automated confounder selection: A cautionary tale," Journal of Causal Inference, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, January.
    21. Magdalena Małecka, 2017. "Posner versus Kelsen: the challenges for scientific analysis of law," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 495-516, June.

    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:wckuf. 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.