自动行政决策:黑盒子里藏着什么?

Jan Nešpor
{"title":"自动行政决策:黑盒子里藏着什么?","authors":"Jan Nešpor","doi":"10.14712/23366478.2024.23","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The exploration of the “black box” phenomenon underscores opacity challenges in automated administrative decision-making systems, prompting a discussion on the paradox of transparency. Advocating for the concept of “qualified transparency”, the article aims to navigate the delicate balance between understanding and safeguarding sensitive information. Ethical imperatives, including respect for human autonomy, harm prevention, fairness, and explicability, are considered, culminating in recommendations for human participation, ethicality or accountability by design considerations, and the implementation of regulatory sandboxes to test such models prior to broad integration. Ultimately, the article advocates for a comprehensive discourse on transitioning from a human-centric to an automated public administration model, acknowledging the complexity and potential risks involved.","PeriodicalId":158742,"journal":{"name":"AUC IURIDICA","volume":"11 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Automated Administrative Decision-Making: What is the Black Box Hiding?\",\"authors\":\"Jan Nešpor\",\"doi\":\"10.14712/23366478.2024.23\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The exploration of the “black box” phenomenon underscores opacity challenges in automated administrative decision-making systems, prompting a discussion on the paradox of transparency. Advocating for the concept of “qualified transparency”, the article aims to navigate the delicate balance between understanding and safeguarding sensitive information. Ethical imperatives, including respect for human autonomy, harm prevention, fairness, and explicability, are considered, culminating in recommendations for human participation, ethicality or accountability by design considerations, and the implementation of regulatory sandboxes to test such models prior to broad integration. Ultimately, the article advocates for a comprehensive discourse on transitioning from a human-centric to an automated public administration model, acknowledging the complexity and potential risks involved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":158742,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AUC IURIDICA\",\"volume\":\"11 10\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AUC IURIDICA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2024.23\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AUC IURIDICA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2024.23","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对 "黑箱 "现象的探讨凸显了自动行政决策系统的不透明挑战,引发了对透明度悖论的讨论。文章倡导 "合格透明 "的概念,旨在把握理解和保护敏感信息之间的微妙平衡。文章考虑了包括尊重人的自主性、预防伤害、公平性和可解释性在内的道德要求,最终建议通过设计考虑人的参与、道德性或问责制,并实施监管沙箱,以便在广泛整合之前对此类模式进行测试。最后,文章主张就从以人为本的公共管理模式过渡到自动化公共管理模式展开全面讨论,并承认其中涉及的复杂性和潜在风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Automated Administrative Decision-Making: What is the Black Box Hiding?
The exploration of the “black box” phenomenon underscores opacity challenges in automated administrative decision-making systems, prompting a discussion on the paradox of transparency. Advocating for the concept of “qualified transparency”, the article aims to navigate the delicate balance between understanding and safeguarding sensitive information. Ethical imperatives, including respect for human autonomy, harm prevention, fairness, and explicability, are considered, culminating in recommendations for human participation, ethicality or accountability by design considerations, and the implementation of regulatory sandboxes to test such models prior to broad integration. Ultimately, the article advocates for a comprehensive discourse on transitioning from a human-centric to an automated public administration model, acknowledging the complexity and potential risks involved.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信