Cited by 53Ethics and Social Impacts of AIDigitalization, Law, and RegulationE-Government and Public Services

Toward Fair, Accountable, and Transparent Algorithms: Case Studies on Algorithm Initiatives in Korea and China

Shin, Donghee (Don)·2019·Javnost - The Public

Abstract

Algorithms are playing an increasingly huge role becoming a big part of human lives. With the conceptualisation of algorithms as a socio-technical system, this study investigates algorithm initiatives in Korea and China in terms of the opportunities, risks, and challenges embedded in their development. This study analyses algorithm development and trends from a critical socio-technical lens: social, technological, cultural, and industrial phenomena that represent strategic interactions involving people, technology, and society and elicit sensitive legal, cultural, and ethical rhetoric issues. Despite rosy predictions and proactive drives, new risks related to privacy, transparency, and fairness emerge as critical concerns of the social ramifications of algorithms and of their impacts on the new information milieu. With these emerging issues, questions are raised on the ways to govern algorithms and to respond to potential outcomes that such a policy approach may have on society and industry. Both Korea and China will likely struggle with the social cost of AI as it challenges what it means to be fair, transparent, and accountable. The socio-political implications of algorithms are discussed to identify key issues as both countries progress toward an algorithm-based, AI-driven society.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/13183222.2019.1589249

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Open datasets such as ImageNet and Open Images have glaring gaps in geo-diversity.

    “For instance, [190] highlights the glaring gaps in geo-diversity of open datasets such as ImageNet and Open Images that drive much of the computer vision research.”

    From Re-imagining Algorithmic Fairness in India and Beyond (2021) · cites this paper as [190]

  • Representational gaps in data are documented as a major challenge for responsible AI from a global perspective.

    “Representational gaps in data is documented as one of the major challenges in achieving responsible AI from a global perspective [21,190].”

    From Re-imagining Algorithmic Fairness in India and Beyond (2021) · cites this paper as [190]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shin, D. (.
Affiliations
Zayed University (AE)
Corresponding author
Shin, Donghee (Don)
Venue
Javnost - The Public
Published
2019-05-23
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
274-290
ISSN
  • 1318-3222 (ISSN-L)
  • 1854-8377
OpenAlex
W2944818567
Cited by
53
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 3
FWCI
10.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Javnost - The Public (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
Keywords
algorithmic governance, algorithmic fairness, algorithmic transparency, algorithmic accountability, AI policy, socio-technical systems, privacy risks, algorithmic risk, Korea, China

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