Cited by 266Ethics and Social Impacts of AIDigitalization, Law, and RegulationInnovation, Sustainability, Human-Machine Systems

Governing Artificial Intelligence to benefit the UN Sustainable Development Goals

Open access
Truby, Jon·2020·Sustainable Development

Abstract

Big Tech's unregulated roll‐out out of experimental AI poses risks to the achievement of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), with particular vulnerability for developing countries. The goal of financial inclusion is threatened by the imperfect and ungoverned design and implementation of AI decision‐making software making important financial decisions affecting customers. Automated decision‐making algorithms have displayed evidence of bias, lack ethical governance, and limit transparency in the basis for their decisions, causing unfair outcomes and amplify unequal access to finance. Poverty reduction and sustainable development targets are risked by Big Tech's potential exploitation of developing countries by using AI to harvest data and profits. Stakeholder progress toward preventing financial crime and corruption is further threatened by potential misuse of AI. In the light of such risks, Big Tech's unscrupulous history means it cannot be trusted to operate without regulatory oversight. The article proposes effective pre‐emptive regulatory options to minimize scenarios of AI damaging the SDGs. It explores internationally accepted principles of AI governance, and argues for their implementation as regulatory requirements governing AI developers and coders, with compliance verified through algorithmic auditing. Furthermore, it argues that AI governance frameworks must require a benefit to the SDGs. The article argues that proactively predicting such problems can enable continued AI innovation through well‐designed regulations adhering to international principles. It highlights risks of unregulated AI causing harm to human interests, where a public and regulatory backlash may result in over‐regulation that could damage the otherwise beneficial development of AI.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/sd.2048

Cites

57 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. IEEE Standards Association, Ethically Aligned Design, Version 2. 24 Are tech companies Africa's new colonialists? July 5, 2019, Financial Times https://on.ft.com/2YyeMkz, at p. 752.
  2. 2019 EY CEO Imperative Study, https://www.ey.com/en_gl/growth/ ceo-imperative-global-challenges. 26 https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2016/09/20/sp092016-Financial- Inclusion-Bridging-Economic-Opportunities-and-Outcomes. 27 April 19, 2018, Financial Inclusion on the Rise, But Gaps Remain, Global Findex Database Shows, https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press- release/2018/04/19/financial-inclusion-on-the-rise-but-gaps-remain- global-findex-database-shows.
  3. Ethically aligned design: A vision for prioritizing human wellbeing with artificial intelligence and autonomous systems (Tech. Rep. No. 1). IEEE. (Version 1-For Public Discussion). https://standards.ieee.org/content/ dam/ieee-standards/standards/web/documents/other/ead_v1.pdf, at 91. 42 https://www.research.ibm.com/5-in-5/ai-and-bias/.
  4. Elizabeth E. Joh, Seattle University Law Review 41 Seattle U. L. Rev. 1139. REFERENCES
  5. Graeber, D. (2019). Bullshit jobs: A theory. USA: Penguin.
  6. Hillman, N. L. (2019). The use of artificial intelligence in gauging the risk of recidivism. The Judges' Journal, 58(1), 36-39. https://www.americanbar. org/groups/judicial/publications/judges_journal/2019/winter/the-use- artificial-intelligence-gauging-risk-recidivism/ HKMA and PwC. (2019). Reshaping banking with artificial intelligence. https://www.hkma.gov.hk/media/eng/doc/key-functions/finanical- infrastructure/Whitepaper_on_AI.pdf
  7. Truby, J. (2019). Financing and self-financing of SDGs through financial technology, legal and fiscal tools. In J. Walker, A. Pekmezovic, & G. Walker (Eds.), Sustainable development: Harnessing business to achieve the SDGs through financing, technology and innovation (pp. 205-217). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Truby, J.
Affiliations
Qatar University (QA)
Corresponding author
Truby, Jon
Venue
Sustainable Development
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-02-26
Volume
28
Issue
4
Pages
946-959
ISSN
  • 0968-0802 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1719
OpenAlex
W3006864169
Cited by
266
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 77 · 2024: 59 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 2
FWCI
27.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sustainable Development (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
  • Qatar University QSpace (Qatar University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Qatar National Research Fund (NPRP 11S‐1119‐170016)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Innovation, Sustainability, Human-Machine Systems
Keywords
AI governance, Sustainable Development Goals, Big Tech, automated decision-making, algorithmic bias, financial inclusion, developing countries, algorithmic auditing, AI regulation, algorithmic transparency, financial crime, corruption, data exploitation, overregulation, AI ethics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review