Justifying AI regulation: Examining multi-stakeholder responses to the AI Act

IF 7.6 2区管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Telematics and Informatics Pub Date : 2025-04-16 DOI:10.1016/j.tele.2025.102278

Kaisla Kajava , Ana Paula Gonzalez Torres , Antti Rannisto , Shintaro Sakai

{"title":"Justifying AI regulation: Examining multi-stakeholder responses to the AI Act","authors":"Kaisla Kajava , Ana Paula Gonzalez Torres , Antti Rannisto , Shintaro Sakai","doi":"10.1016/j.tele.2025.102278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) has sparked discussions among stakeholders since the introduction of the European AI Act (AIA) regulatory proposal. This study examines how stakeholders justified their arguments around AI and its regulation in multi-stakeholder feedback on the first draft of the AIA.</div><div>Drawing on the framework of social justifications (<span><span>Boltanski and Thévenot, 2006</span></span>) and leveraging Natural Language Inference (NLI) for assisted reading, the paper identifies areas of contestation and similarity between stakeholders from the technology industry, academia, non-governmental organizations, and the public sector.</div><div>The findings show that stakeholders employed similar justifications to differing ends, suggesting that there exists some shared conception or tactical recognition of the types of justifications that are considered effective in this context. The paper argues that industry-driven discourse influences how stakeholders argue for and against regulating AI, and that justifications differ in the means they propose for achieving a similar end goal.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48257,"journal":{"name":"Telematics and Informatics","volume":"99 ","pages":"Article 102278"},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telematics and Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0736585325000401","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) has sparked discussions among stakeholders since the introduction of the European AI Act (AIA) regulatory proposal. This study examines how stakeholders justified their arguments around AI and its regulation in multi-stakeholder feedback on the first draft of the AIA.

Drawing on the framework of social justifications (Boltanski and Thévenot, 2006) and leveraging Natural Language Inference (NLI) for assisted reading, the paper identifies areas of contestation and similarity between stakeholders from the technology industry, academia, non-governmental organizations, and the public sector.

The findings show that stakeholders employed similar justifications to differing ends, suggesting that there exists some shared conception or tactical recognition of the types of justifications that are considered effective in this context. The paper argues that industry-driven discourse influences how stakeholders argue for and against regulating AI, and that justifications differ in the means they propose for achieving a similar end goal.

查看原文本刊更多论文

证明人工智能监管的合理性：审查多方利益相关者对人工智能法案的回应

自引入《欧洲人工智能法案》（AIA）监管提案以来，人工智能（AI）的监管引发了利益相关者之间的讨论。本研究考察了利益相关者如何在多利益相关者对AIA初稿的反馈中证明他们围绕人工智能及其监管的论点。利用社会论证的框架（Boltanski和thsamvenot， 2006）和利用自然语言推理（NLI）辅助阅读，本文确定了来自科技行业、学术界、非政府组织和公共部门的利益相关者之间争论和相似的领域。研究结果表明，利益相关者采用了类似的理由来达到不同的目的，这表明在这种情况下，对被认为有效的理由类型存在一些共同的概念或战术认识。该论文认为，行业驱动的话语影响了利益相关者支持和反对监管人工智能的方式，并且他们为实现类似的最终目标所提出的理由不同。

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分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Telematics and Informatics INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-

CiteScore

17.00

自引率

4.70%

发文量

104

审稿时长

24 days

期刊介绍： Telematics and Informatics is an interdisciplinary journal that publishes cutting-edge theoretical and methodological research exploring the social, economic, geographic, political, and cultural impacts of digital technologies. It covers various application areas, such as smart cities, sensors, information fusion, digital society, IoT, cyber-physical technologies, privacy, knowledge management, distributed work, emergency response, mobile communications, health informatics, social media's psychosocial effects, ICT for sustainable development, blockchain, e-commerce, and e-government.