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

被引:4
|
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 50 条
  • [21] Clinical decision-making and algorithmic inequality
    Challen, Robert
    Danon, Leon
    BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, 2023, 32 (09) : 495 - 497
  • [22] On the ethics of algorithmic decision-making in healthcare
    Grote, Thomas
    Berens, Philipp
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2020, 46 (03) : 205 - 211
  • [23] Statistical evidence and algorithmic decision-making
    Sune Holm
    Synthese, 202
  • [24] Algorithmic legitimacy in clinical decision-making
    Sune Holm
    Ethics and Information Technology, 2023, 25
  • [25] Gender discrimination in algorithmic decision-making
    Andreeva, Galina
    Matuszyk, Anna
    2ND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ADVANCED RESEARCH METHODS AND ANALYTICS (CARMA 2018), 2018, : 251 - 251
  • [26] PPBS AND THEORIES OF DECISION-MAKING, BUREAUCRACY, AND POLITICS
    SUDAMA, T
    PUBLIC FINANCE-FINANCES PUBLIQUES, 1977, 32 (03): : 354 - 373
  • [27] Bureaucracy and public decision-making in foreign policy
    Siqueira, Cynthia D.
    MERIDIANO 47-JOURNAL OF GLOBAL STUDIES, 2011, 12 (128) : 10 - 16
  • [28] PPBS AND THEORIES OF DECISION-MAKING, BUREAUCRACY AND POLITICS
    SUDAMA, T
    POLITICAL SCIENCE, 1977, 29 (01) : 39 - 56
  • [29] Disentangling the Temporal Effects of Attention and Decision-Making
    Moerel, Denise
    Woolgar, Alexandra
    Rich, Anina N.
    PERCEPTION, 2019, 48 : 57 - 57
  • [30] Province of Origin, Decision-Making Bias, and Responses to Bureaucratic Versus Algorithmic Decision-Making
    Wang, Ge
    Zhang, Zhejun
    Xie, Shenghua
    Guo, Yue
    PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW, 2025,