Inside algorithmic bureaucracy: Disentangling automated decision-making and good administration

被引:6
作者
Roehl, Ulrik [1 ]
Crompvoets, Joep [2 ]
机构
[1] Copenhagen Business Sch, Dept Digitalizat, Howitzvej 60, DK-2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
[2] Katholieke Univ Leuven KU Leuven, Publ Governance Inst, Leuven, Belgium
关键词
Administrative capabilities; administrative decisions; algorithmic bureaucracy; automated decision-making; good administration; multiple case-study; STREET-LEVEL; E-GOVERNMENT; ACCOUNTABILITY; DISCRETION;
D O I
10.1177/09520767231197801
中图分类号
C93 [管理学]; D035 [国家行政管理]; D523 [行政管理]; D63 [国家行政管理];
学科分类号
12 ; 1201 ; 1202 ; 120202 ; 1204 ; 120401 ;
摘要
Public administrative bodies around the world are increasingly applying automated, administrative decision-making as underlying technologies such as machine learning mature. Such decision-making is a central element of emerging forms of algorithmic bureaucracies. With its direct exercise of public authority over individual citizens and firms, automated, administrative decision-making makes it particularly important to consider relations to values of good administration. Based on a multiple case-study, the article focuses on how empirical use of automated decision-making influences and transforms issues of good administration in four policy areas in Denmark: Business and social policy; labour market policy; agricultural policy; and tax policy. Supplementing emerging literature, the article exemplifies how public authorities struggle to apply automated decision-making in ways that support rather than undermine good administration. We identify six empirical relations of usage of automated, administrative decision-making and good administration: (I) Giving accurate and comprehensible reasons; (II) Informing addressees' expectations; (III) Combining material and algorithmic expertise; (IV) Achieving effective oversight; (V) Continuously ensuring quality; and (VI) Managing high complexity. Additionally, we pinpoint related key capabilities for administrative bodies in order to support good administration.
引用
收藏
页码:322 / 350
页数:29
相关论文
共 57 条
[41]   The agency of algorithms: Understanding human-algorithm interaction in administrative decision-making [J].
Peeters, Rik .
INFORMATION POLITY, 2020, 25 (04) :507-522
[42]   The digital cage: Administrative exclusion through information architecture - The case of the Dutch civil registry's master data management system [J].
Peeters, Rik ;
Widlak, Arjan .
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION QUARTERLY, 2018, 35 (02) :175-183
[43]   DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES IN PUBLIC ORGANIZATIONS A literature review and research agenda [J].
Piening, Erk P. .
PUBLIC MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 2013, 15 (02) :209-245
[44]  
Pollitt C., 2011, PUBLIC POLICY ADMIN, V26, P377, DOI DOI 10.1177/0952076710378548
[45]  
Ponce J., 2005, Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, P551
[46]   Ombudsman's Assessments of Public Administration Conduct: Between Legal and Good Administration Norms [J].
Remac, Milan ;
Langbroek, Philip M. .
NISPACEE JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND POLICY, 2011, 4 (02) :87-115
[47]  
Roehl U.B.U., 2022, Service automation in the public sector, P35
[48]  
Russell Bernard H., 2016, ANAL QUALITATIVE DAT
[49]  
Schartum Dag Wiese, 2020, CAMBRIDGE HDB LAW AL, P301
[50]   Assessing public value failure in government adoption of artificial intelligence [J].
Schiff, Daniel S. ;
Schiff, Kaylyn Jackson ;
Pierson, Patrick .
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION, 2022, 100 (03) :653-673