Automated, administrative decision‐making and good governance: Synergies, trade‐offs, and limits

Abstract

Automated, administrative decision‐making (AADM) is a key component in digital government reforms. It represents an aspiration for a better and more efficient administration but also presents challenges to values of public administration. We systematically review the emerging literature on use of AADM from the perspective of good governance. Recognizing the inherent tensions of values of public administration, the broad review identifies key synergies, trade‐offs, and limits of AADM and good governance associated with nine values: Accountability, efficiency, equality, fairness, resilience, responsiveness, right‐to‐privacy, rule‐of‐law, and transparency. While synergies represent “low‐hanging fruits”, trade‐offs and limits are “hard cases” representing challenges to good governance. Taking the specific decision‐making context into account, practitioners and scholars should attempt to nurture the “fruits” and lessen the tensions of the “hard‐cases” thereby increasing the desirable societal outcomes of use of AADM.