自动化决策、自由裁量权和公共价值观:对两个市镇及其社会援助个案管理的个案研究

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL WORK European Journal of Social Work Pub Date : 2023-03-07 DOI:10.1080/13691457.2023.2185875
A. Ranerup, L. Svensson
{"title":"自动化决策、自由裁量权和公共价值观:对两个市镇及其社会援助个案管理的个案研究","authors":"A. Ranerup, L. Svensson","doi":"10.1080/13691457.2023.2185875","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Our aim is to increase knowledge about discretion and automated decision-making (ADM) in social work based on an approach that brings forward the role of humans and technologies and the resulting public values. This approach is applied to a case study of two Swedish municipalities and their social assistance case management. Our research questions are twofold: (1) How do humans and technologies appear in decisions about social assistance? and (2) How do they influence digital discretion and the resulting public values? A case management process with human actors (caseworkers and clients) and non-human actors (case management systems, e-applications, robotic process automation and algorithms) is used, influencing the digital discretion of caseworkers and the resulting ethical, democratic and professional values. Digital discretion is not dichotomous but, rather, related to a repertoire of technologies, their design and their use in a routine that ADM is a part of. The interaction with clients may be considered an important rationale for ADM itself. There is a necessary difference in weight between public values related to more straightforward (an ‘improved’ process enabling professional values) and complicating factors (distrust between caseworkers and the unwanted use of information technology).","PeriodicalId":12060,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Work","volume":"26 1","pages":"948 - 962"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Automated decision-making, discretion and public values: a case study of two municipalities and their case management of social assistance\",\"authors\":\"A. Ranerup, L. Svensson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13691457.2023.2185875\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Our aim is to increase knowledge about discretion and automated decision-making (ADM) in social work based on an approach that brings forward the role of humans and technologies and the resulting public values. This approach is applied to a case study of two Swedish municipalities and their social assistance case management. Our research questions are twofold: (1) How do humans and technologies appear in decisions about social assistance? and (2) How do they influence digital discretion and the resulting public values? A case management process with human actors (caseworkers and clients) and non-human actors (case management systems, e-applications, robotic process automation and algorithms) is used, influencing the digital discretion of caseworkers and the resulting ethical, democratic and professional values. Digital discretion is not dichotomous but, rather, related to a repertoire of technologies, their design and their use in a routine that ADM is a part of. The interaction with clients may be considered an important rationale for ADM itself. There is a necessary difference in weight between public values related to more straightforward (an ‘improved’ process enabling professional values) and complicating factors (distrust between caseworkers and the unwanted use of information technology).\",\"PeriodicalId\":12060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Social Work\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"948 - 962\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Social Work\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2023.2185875\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL WORK\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Social Work","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13691457.2023.2185875","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

我们的目标是通过提出人类和技术的作用以及由此产生的公共价值的方法,增加社会工作中自由裁量权和自动决策(ADM)的知识。这一方法应用于对两个瑞典城市及其社会援助案件管理的案例研究。我们的研究问题是双重的:(1)人类和技术如何在社会救助决策中出现?(2)它们如何影响数字自由裁量权和由此产生的公共价值观?案例管理过程涉及人类行为者(个案工作者和客户)和非人类行为者(个案管理系统、电子应用程序、机器人过程自动化和算法),影响个案工作者的数字自由裁量权以及由此产生的道德、民主和专业价值观。数字自由裁量权不是二分法,而是与一系列技术、它们的设计和它们在常规中的使用有关,ADM是其中的一部分。与客户的互动可能被认为是ADM本身的一个重要原理。在与更直接的(“改进的”过程实现专业价值)和复杂因素(个案工作者之间的不信任和不必要的信息技术使用)相关的公共价值之间存在必要的权重差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Automated decision-making, discretion and public values: a case study of two municipalities and their case management of social assistance
ABSTRACT Our aim is to increase knowledge about discretion and automated decision-making (ADM) in social work based on an approach that brings forward the role of humans and technologies and the resulting public values. This approach is applied to a case study of two Swedish municipalities and their social assistance case management. Our research questions are twofold: (1) How do humans and technologies appear in decisions about social assistance? and (2) How do they influence digital discretion and the resulting public values? A case management process with human actors (caseworkers and clients) and non-human actors (case management systems, e-applications, robotic process automation and algorithms) is used, influencing the digital discretion of caseworkers and the resulting ethical, democratic and professional values. Digital discretion is not dichotomous but, rather, related to a repertoire of technologies, their design and their use in a routine that ADM is a part of. The interaction with clients may be considered an important rationale for ADM itself. There is a necessary difference in weight between public values related to more straightforward (an ‘improved’ process enabling professional values) and complicating factors (distrust between caseworkers and the unwanted use of information technology).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
20.00%
发文量
96
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Social Work provides a forum for the social professions in all parts of Europe and beyond. It analyses and promotes European and international developments in social work, social policy, social service institutions, and strategies for social change by publishing refereed papers on contemporary key issues. Contributions include theoretical debates, empirical studies, research notes, country perspectives, and reviews. It maintains an interdisciplinary perspective which recognises positively the diversity of cultural and conceptual traditions in which the social professions of Europe are grounded. In particular it examines emerging European paradigms in methodology and comparative analysis.
期刊最新文献
When the outside penetrates the inside: the relationship between Palestinian Israeli and Jewish Israeli social workers in mixed cities during the events of May 2021 Discretion for whom? Local policies and the agency problem between politicians and care managers in Swedish social service ‘There is a fear of not being SUPER knowledgeable’ – social workers striving to enhance children’s participation in the assessment process for disability support The bridging role of social work: the quest towards installing a structural approach within primary health care Social work competence in disaster management: an integrative review
×
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