Artificial Intelligence and Administrative Evil

IF 2.7 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Perspectives on Public Management and Governance Pub Date : 2021-04-09 DOI:10.1093/PPMGOV/GVAB006
Matthew M. Young, Johannes Himmelreich, Justin B. Bullock, Kyoung-Cheol Kim
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence and Administrative Evil","authors":"Matthew M. Young, Johannes Himmelreich, Justin B. Bullock, Kyoung-Cheol Kim","doi":"10.1093/PPMGOV/GVAB006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Artificial intelligence (AI) offers challenges and benefits to the public sector. We present an ethical framework to analyze the effects of AI in public organizations, guide empirical and theoretical research in public administration, and inform practitioner deliberation and decision making on AI adoption. We put forward six propositions on how the use of AI by public organizations may facilitate or prevent unnecessary harm. The framework builds on the theory of administrative evil and contributes to it in two ways. First, we interpret the theory of administrative evil through the lens of agency theory. We examine how the mechanisms stipulated by the former relate to the underlying mechanisms of the latter. Specifically, we highlight how mechanisms of administrative evil can be analyzed as information problems in the form of adverse selection and moral hazard. Second, we describe possible causal pathways of the theory of administrative evil and associate each with a level of analysis: individual (micro), organizational (meso), and cultural (macro). We then develop both descriptive and normative propositions on AI’s potential to increase or decrease the risk of administrative evil. The article hence contributes an institutional and public administration lens to the growing literature on AI safety and value alignment.","PeriodicalId":29947,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Public Management and Governance","volume":"55 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Public Management and Governance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/PPMGOV/GVAB006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) offers challenges and benefits to the public sector. We present an ethical framework to analyze the effects of AI in public organizations, guide empirical and theoretical research in public administration, and inform practitioner deliberation and decision making on AI adoption. We put forward six propositions on how the use of AI by public organizations may facilitate or prevent unnecessary harm. The framework builds on the theory of administrative evil and contributes to it in two ways. First, we interpret the theory of administrative evil through the lens of agency theory. We examine how the mechanisms stipulated by the former relate to the underlying mechanisms of the latter. Specifically, we highlight how mechanisms of administrative evil can be analyzed as information problems in the form of adverse selection and moral hazard. Second, we describe possible causal pathways of the theory of administrative evil and associate each with a level of analysis: individual (micro), organizational (meso), and cultural (macro). We then develop both descriptive and normative propositions on AI’s potential to increase or decrease the risk of administrative evil. The article hence contributes an institutional and public administration lens to the growing literature on AI safety and value alignment.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工智能与行政罪恶
人工智能(AI)给公共部门带来了挑战和好处。我们提出了一个伦理框架来分析人工智能在公共组织中的影响,指导公共行政的实证和理论研究,并为从业者审议和决策采用人工智能提供信息。我们就公共机构使用人工智能如何促进或防止不必要的伤害提出了六项建议。该框架建立在行政恶理论的基础上,并在两个方面对行政恶理论做出了贡献。首先,我们从代理理论的角度来解释行政恶理论。我们研究了前者规定的机制如何与后者的潜在机制相关。具体而言,我们强调了如何将行政邪恶的机制分析为逆向选择和道德风险形式的信息问题。其次,我们描述了行政邪恶理论的可能因果路径,并将每个路径与个人(微观)、组织(中观)和文化(宏观)的分析水平联系起来。然后,我们对人工智能增加或减少行政邪恶风险的潜力提出了描述性和规范性命题。因此,本文为越来越多的关于人工智能安全和价值一致性的文献提供了一个制度和公共管理的视角。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
28
期刊最新文献
What Is The Public? A Pragmatic Analysis of a Core Concept in Public Administration The Flawed Foundations of Social Equity in Public Administration: A Racial Contract Theory Critique The Procedural Politicking Tug of War: Law-Versus-Management Disputes in Contexts of Democratic Backsliding Producing Agreements and Innovations in Collaborative Governance Political Transactions, the Social Contract, and Administrative Power
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1