How Should Public Administrations Foster the Ethical Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence? A Review of Proposals for Developing Governance of AI

“Wicked or so-called systemic problems (Rittel and Webber, 1973) further emphasize the importance of gaining systemic knowledge and building mutual understanding through the wide inclusion of and deliberation among stakeholders with local and situational information (Sun and Medaglia, 2019; Liu and…”

“As a result, ethical principles, codes, and guidelines have emerged as a key soft governance solution to AI (Floridi et al., 2018; Jobin et al., 2019; Stix, 2021).”

“Contributions suggested ways to enhance the practical implementation of ethical principles and human rights in policy-making (Floridi et al., 2018; Rahwan, 2018; Wallach and Marchant, 2018; Donahoe and Metzger, 2019; Sun and Medaglia, 2019; Truby, 2020; de Almeida et al., 2021; Delacroix and…”

“However, as a basis for AI governance, ethical principles face problems of weak operationalization and implementation through governmental policies and organizational practices (Mittelstadt, 2019; Hagendorff, 2020; Larsson, 2020; Morley et al., 2020; Stix, 2021).”

“While a systematic literature review may have several different objectives and audiences (Okoli, 2015), this review aims to contribute to research that supports public governance for the ethical and responsible use of AI.”

“An integrative literature review critically examines research data and integrates it to generate new models or frameworks for examining the selected perspective or literature (Torraco, 2016; Cronin and George, 2020).”

“The early involvement of a wide range of stakeholders and citizens, as well as cross-sectoral dialogue among experts, might help ensure that the system works legitimately in terms of democratic and human-rights values (Nemitz, 2018; Donahoe and Metzger, 2019; Stix, 2021).”

“…addressing ethical issues of AI governance can be perceived at three levels (Stahl, 2021): policy and legislation (e.g., Jobin et al., 2019; European Commission, 2022), organizations (Shneiderman, 2020; Tsamados et al., 2021), and guidance mechanisms for individuals (e.g., Morley et al., 2020).”

“To address this challenge, ethical governance of AI aims to minimize the risks of AI and support the use of technology for the common good, as well as social and economic sustainability (Taddeo and Floridi, 2018; Winfield and Jirotka, 2018; Ireni-Saban and Sherman, 2021; Stahl, 2021).”

“An integrative literature review critically examines research data and integrates it to generate new models or frameworks for examining the selected perspective or literature (Torraco, 2016; Cronin and George, 2020).”

“The governance of AI faces problems similar to that of any other emerging technology, which include information asymmetries, policy uncertainty, structural power dynamics, and policy errors (Taeihagh, 2021).”

“Contributions suggested ways to enhance the practical implementation of ethical principles and human rights in policy-making (Floridi et al., 2018; Rahwan, 2018; Wallach and Marchant, 2018; Donahoe and Metzger, 2019; Sun and Medaglia, 2019; Truby, 2020; de Almeida et al., 2021; Delacroix and…”

“…and purposes for participating in the innovation activity openly), inclusiveness (bringing into the common discussion various stakeholder and citizen interests, values, and perspectives), and responsiveness (learning and changing of target-setting and operative practices) (Owen et al., 2013).”

“In addition, ethical AI governance has been linked to RRI (Winfield and Jirotka, 2018; Ireni-Saban and Sherman, 2021), which aims to ensure that innovation activities are in the public interest by taking a broad range of stakeholders’ perspectives into account at early stages in the innovation process.”

“Such framing partially guides the funding of AI, objectives of AI development, and AI governance principles (Ulnicane et al., 2020; Bareis and Katzenbach, 2021).”

“AI governance frameworks should be all-encompassing, enough so to account for the systemic and multi-dimensional nature of the AI phenomenon and its governance challenges (Gasser and Almeida, 2017; Cath et al., 2018; Donahoe and Metzger, 2019; Wirtz et al., 2020; de Almeida et al., 2021).”

“The quickly evolving research in this field addresses topics ranging from governing and using AI for the common good (Floridi et al., 2020; Tomašev et al., 2020; Stahl, 2021; Wamba et al., 2021) and sustainable social and environmental development (Truby, 2020; Vinuesa et al., 2020) to ideas of…”

“The selected articles were then analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis, following the steps suggested by Nowell et al. (2017).”

“To address this challenge, ethical governance of AI aims to minimize the risks of AI and support the use of technology for the common good, as well as social and economic sustainability (Taddeo and Floridi, 2018; Winfield and Jirotka, 2018; Ireni-Saban and Sherman, 2021; Stahl, 2021).”

“To address this challenge, ethical governance of AI aims to minimize the risks of AI and support the use of technology for the common good, as well as social and economic sustainability (Taddeo and Floridi, 2018; Winfield and Jirotka, 2018; Ireni-Saban and Sherman, 2021; Stahl, 2021).”

“…technology governance (e.g., Taeihagh, 2021; Taeihagh et al., 2021; Ulnicane et al., 2021), highlighting the fact that practices of good public governance should also include taking a facilitating role in the coordination and cooperation between state and non-state actors (Borrás and Edler, 2020).”

“…and cross-disciplinary dialogue is needed to ensure that decision makers, AI developers, businesses, and the general public are aware of societal, ethical, and legal implications of AI systems and of concrete recommendations for action (Floridi et al., 2018; Donahoe and Metzger, 2019; Truby, 2020).”

“In essence, the framing of AI depends on the extent to which various stakeholder views are taken into consideration in the forming of AI strategies, collective sociotechnical imaginaries, and the anticipation of impacts (Radu, 2021).”

“Such framing partially guides the funding of AI, objectives of AI development, and AI governance principles (Ulnicane et al., 2020; Bareis and Katzenbach, 2021).”

“To move toward the ethical development and use of AI, the principles for good governance, human rights and ethics, and the procedures of RRI should be integrated in the governance approach alongside procedures for adaptation to short- and long-term challenges and strategic objectives (e.g., Winfield and Jirotka, 2018;…”

“However, as a basis for AI governance, ethical principles face problems of weak operationalization and implementation through governmental policies and organizational practices (Mittelstadt, 2019; Hagendorff, 2020; Larsson, 2020; Morley et al., 2020; Stix, 2021).”

“In fact, it might be counter-productive to restrict proposed solutions to any single governance paradigm, and policy-makers should instead aim to adapt and mix different governance modes to find the best solutions for particular contexts (Rhodes, 2016).”

“Based on an earlier paper (Clarke and Moses, 2014), they put forward a framework for assessing the transparency of the regulation process, the consideration of stakeholders’ interests, the articulation and enforcement of regulatory mechanisms, and accountability.”

“To address this challenge, ethical governance of AI aims to minimize the risks of AI and support the use of technology for the common good, as well as social and economic sustainability (Taddeo and Floridi, 2018; Winfield and Jirotka, 2018; Ireni-Saban and Sherman, 2021; Stahl, 2021).”

“Contributions suggested ways to enhance the practical implementation of ethical principles and human rights in policy-making (Floridi et al., 2018; Rahwan, 2018; Wallach and Marchant, 2018; Donahoe and Metzger, 2019; Sun and Medaglia, 2019; Truby, 2020; de Almeida et al., 2021; Delacroix and Wagner, 2021; Stix, 2021;…”

“These calls for more flexible (i.e., tentative, adaptive, anticipatory) technology governance modalities and procedures seem to intertwine with each other (Winfield and Jirotka, 2018; Lehoux et al., 2020; Ireni-Saban and Sherman, 2021).”

“Similar governance features can also variably be found in notions of agile, adaptive, tentative, and anticipatory governance (Kuhlmann et al., 2019; Lehoux et al., 2020; Taeihagh et al., 2021).”

“…the public interest by balancing the interests of different stakeholders and ensuring an inclusive process of integrating various human values and ethical standpoints as the foundation of technology development and implementation (e.g., Baldwin et al., 2012; Cath et al., 2018; Yeung et al., 2019).”

“However, Clarke (2019)”

“…for the common good should include independent institutions for oversight, enforcement, and compliance to minimize the risks of AI and ensure the actionability of ethics or human-rights principles (Floridi et al., 2018; Bannister and Connolly, 2020; Dignam, 2020; de Almeida et al., 2021).”

“…2020; Tomašev et al., 2020; Stahl, 2021; Wamba et al., 2021) and sustainable social and environmental development (Truby, 2020; Vinuesa et al., 2020) to ideas of universal, human rights–based value frameworks for the governance of AI ( Donahoe and Metzger, 2019; Yeung et al., 2019; Smuha, 2020).”

“To address this challenge, ethical governance of AI aims to minimize the risks of AI and support the use of technology for the common good, as well as social and economic sustainability (Taddeo and Floridi, 2018; Winfield and Jirotka, 2018; Ireni-Saban and Sherman, 2021; Stahl, 2021).”

“TheseAI governance studies are often influenced by insights of emerging technology governance (e.g., Taeihagh, 2021; Taeihagh et al., 2021; Ulnicane et al., 2021), highlighting the fact that practices of good public governance should also include taking a facilitating role in the coordination and…”

“Some authors argued that the governance for the common good should include independent institutions for oversight, enforcement, and compliance to minimize the risks of AI and ensure the actionability of ethics or human-rights principles (Floridi et al., 2018; Bannister and Connolly, 2020; Dignam, 2020; de Almeida et a…”

“…systemic problems (Rittel and Webber, 1973) further emphasize the importance of gaining systemic knowledge and building mutual understanding through the wide inclusion of and deliberation among stakeholders with local and situational information (Sun and Medaglia, 2019; Liu and Maas, 2021).”

“Framing is also performative in the sense that it shapes our thinking on what kind of governance is relevant, urgent, possible, or necessary (Konrad and Böhle, 2019; Mager and Katzenbach, 2021).”

“It refers to the organized interaction between different actors— i.e., formal and informal regulation or control that guides action or behavior toward set objectives (Asaduzzaman and Virtanen, 2016).”

“In addition, ethical AI governance has been linked to RRI (Winfield and Jirotka, 2018; Ireni-Saban and Sherman, 2021), which aims to ensure that innovation activities are in the public interest by taking a broad range of stakeholders’ perspectives into account at early stages in the innovation…”

“Inclusiveness also supports a more systemic, comprehensive informational basis for public decision-making, decreases informational asymmetries (Sigfrids et al., 2022), and increases the flexibility of public governance (Kuhlmann et al.”

“…may thus be hesitant to use AI technologies as they may threaten the privacy of citizens, make decisions more opaque, biased, or because there is a general distrust towards having machines or computers play a more substantial part in the delivery of public services (Sigfrids et al., 2022).”

“…the use of AI corporations have also garnered attention, with a focus on fostering ethical development and responsible AI use [31] Governments and public administrations are actively developing SAMI 2025 • IEEE 23rd World Symposium on Applied of AI technologies in corporate environments [31].”

“Taeihagh [30] explained the dynamics of AI governance and stressed the importance of pragmatically guiding its evolution [31] [32] [33].”

“The retrieved records were exported to a reference management tool to facilitateorganization, deduplication, and subsequent screening(10,11).”

“In practice, ethical decision-making becomes even more complex when it is negotiated among developers, public of fi cials and end-users (Sigfrids et al., 2022).”

“Dynamic boundary setting applies rules that adjust to emergent coordination patterns rather than relying on fixed prohibitions designed for individual actors (Taeihagh 2025; Sigfrids et al. 2022).”

“Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming public administration in both the European Union (EU), and the United States (US), reshaping organizational structures, processes, and governance approaches (Shrestha, 2019) (Van Noordt, 2023) (Sigfrids, 2022).”

“…e.g., hierarchical commitment, clear policy, and internal pressure mechanisms or the installation of positions such as ethicists, ethics boards or roles specifically dedicated to responsible algorithmization (Keymolen & Taylor, 2023; Rakova et al., 2021; Sigfrids et al., 2022; Stahl et al., 2021).”