Governing Ethical AI Transformation: A Case Study of AuroraAI
Open accessAbstract
How can the public sector use AI ethically and responsibly for the benefit of people? The sustainable development and deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) in the public sector requires dialogue and deliberation between developers, decision makers, deployers, end users, and the public. This paper contributes to the debate on how to develop persuasive government approaches for steering the development and use of AI. We examine the ethical issues and the role of the public in the debate on developing public sector governance of socially and democratically sustainable and technology-intensive societies. To concretize this discussion, we study the co-development of a Finnish national AI program AuroraAI, which aims to provide citizens with tailored and timely services for different life situations, utilizing AI. With the help of this case study, we investigate the challenges posed by the development and use of AI in the service of public administration. We draw particular attention to the efforts made by the AuroraAI Ethics Board in deliberating the AuroraAI solution options and working toward a sustainable and inclusive AI society.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The ethical transformation of AI in the public sector requires an open dialog among developers, decision-makers, deployers, end-users, and the public, which is essential for developing persuasive government strategies that guide responsible development and deployment of AI technologies.
“Finally, the ethical transformation of AI in the public sector requires an open dialog among developers, decisionmakers, deployers, end-users, and the public.This dialog is essential for developing persuasive government strategies that guide the responsible development and deployment of AI technologies (Leikas et al., 2022).”
From Navigating the perils of artificial intelligence: a focused review on ChatGPT and responsible research and innovation (2024) · cites this paper as Leikas et al., 2022
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
The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines
Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019) · Nature Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2 · Cited by 6,220 · cited 1× · see citing works
“AI tools can potentially improve democratic processes and increase democratic responsiveness and accountability if they are aligned with social and political changes and values that support change (König and Wenzelburger, 2020).”
BackgroundFloridi, L., Cowls, J., Beltrametti, M., Chatila, R., Chazerand, P., Dignum, V., Luetge, C., Madelin, R., Pagallo, U., Rossi, F., et al. (2018) · Minds and Machines · doi:10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5 · Cited by 4,774 · cited 2× · see citing works
“…e.g., the Asilomar AI Principles (Asilomar Conference, 2017), the guidelines of the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE) 3 , the European Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (ALTAI) 4 , and AI4People (Floridi et al., 2018), to mention but a few.”
BackgroundAutomating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor
Lebovits, H. (2018) · Public Integrity · doi:10.1080/10999922.2018.1511671 · Cited by 3,318 · see citing works
Vanoli, A. (2010) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1714428 · Cited by 3,277 · see citing works
What is AI Literacy? Competencies and Design Considerations
Long, D., & Magerko, B. (2020) · Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376727 · Cited by 3,241 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Long and Magerko (2020), define AI literacy as “a set of competencies that enables individuals to critically evaluate AI technologies; communicate and collaborate effectively with AI; and use AI as a tool online, at home, and in the workplace (p. 2) ” and outline a range of competencies and design…”
BackgroundPolitical Trust and Trustworthiness
Levi, M., & Stoker, L. (2000) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.475 · Cited by 2,190 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence and the Public Sector—Applications and Challenges
Wirtz, B. W., Weyerer, J. C., & Geyer, C. (2019) · International Journal of Public Administration · doi:10.1080/01900692.2018.1498103 · Cited by 1,341 · cited 2× · see citing works
“Overall, a lack of expertise (AlMushayt, 2019) coupled with increased demand for a limited number of AI experts (Wirtz et al., 2018) has resulted in the need to train more people.”
BackgroundSun, T. Q., & Medaglia, R. (2019) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2018.09.008 · Cited by 948 · see citing works
Zuiderwijk, A., Chen, Y.-C., & Salem, F. (2021) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2021.101577 · Cited by 795 · see citing works
A Framework for Responsible Innovation
Owen, R., Stilgoe, J., Macnaghten, P., Gorman, M., Fisher, E., & Guston, D. (2013) · doi:10.1002/9781118551424.ch2 · Cited by 772 · see citing works
Sengers, P., Boehner, K., David, S., & Kaye, J. '. (2005) · Proceedings of the 4th decennial conference on Critical computing: between sense and sensibility · doi:10.1145/1094562.1094569 · Cited by 747 · see citing works
Kuziemski, M., & Misuraca, G. (2020) · Telecommunications Policy · doi:10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101976 · Cited by 610 · see citing works
<scp>AI</scp> Literacy: Definition, Teaching, Evaluation and Ethical Issues
Ng, D. T. K., Leung, J. K. L., Chu, K. W. S., & Qiao, M. S. (2021) · Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/pra2.487 · Cited by 537 · see citing works
Ethics in artificial intelligence: introduction to the special issue
Dignum, V. (2018) · Ethics and Information Technology · doi:10.1007/s10676-018-9450-z · Cited by 379 · see citing works
An experimental study of public trust in AI chatbots in the public sector
Aoki, N. (2020) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2020.101490 · Cited by 350 · see citing works
Mikhaylov, S., Estève, M., & Campion, A. (2018) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1098/rsta.2017.0357 · Cited by 318 · see citing works
Standardizing Ethical Design for Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Systems
Bryson, J. J., & Winfield, A. F. T. (2017) · Computer · doi:10.1109/mc.2017.154 · Cited by 298 · see citing works
Desouza, K. C., Dawson, G. S., & Chenok, D. (2020) · Business Horizons · doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2019.11.004 · Cited by 271 · see citing works
National strategic artificial intelligence plans: A multi-dimensional analysis
Fatima, S., Desouza, K. C., & Dawson, G. S. (2020) · Economic Analysis and Policy · doi:10.1016/j.eap.2020.07.008 · Cited by 216 · see citing works
Lessons learned from AI ethics principles for future actions
Hickok, M. (2021) · AI and Ethics · doi:10.1007/s43681-020-00008-1 · Cited by 168 · cited 1× · see citing works
“…and challenges that are being created with the rise in the use of AI across sectors of society, many organizations, both public and private have come up with and published frameworks, principles, and guidelines on the ethical use of AI (Jobin et al., 2019; Hickok, 2020; Zicari et al., 2021).”
BackgroundAutomating E-government services with artificial intelligence
Al-Mushayt, O. S. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2946204 · Cited by 160 · see citing works
A Review of Artificial Intelligence in Government and its Potential from a Public Policy Perspective
Valle-Cruz, D., Alejandro Ruvalcaba-Gomez, E., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Ignacio Criado, J. (2019) · Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research · doi:10.1145/3325112.3325242 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Z-Inspection <sup>®</sup> : A Process to Assess Trustworthy AI
Zicari, R. V., Brodersen, J., Brusseau, J., Dudder, B., Eichhorn, T., Ivanov, T., Kararigas, G., Kringen, P., McCullough, M., Moslein, F., et al. (2021) · IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society · doi:10.1109/tts.2021.3066209 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Citizen Participation and Machine Learning for a Better Democracy
Arana‐Catania, M., van Lier, F.-A., Procter, R., Tkachenko, N., He, Y., Zubiaga, A., & Liakata, M. (2021) · Digital Government Research and Practice · doi:10.1145/3452118 · Cited by 122 · see citing works
Opportunity for renewal or disruptive force? How artificial intelligence alters democratic politics
König, P. D., & Wenzelburger, G. (2020) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2020.101489 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Empowering political participation through artificial intelligence
Savaget, P., Chiarini, T., & Evans, S. (2018) · Science and Public Policy · doi:10.1093/scipol/scy064 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
A Realist Perspective on AI-era Public Management*
Ojo, A., Mellouli, S., & Ahmadi Zeleti, F. (2019) · Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research · doi:10.1145/3325112.3325261 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Identifying the Ethics of Emerging Information and Communication Technologies
Stahl, B. C., Heersmink, R., Goujon, P., et al. (2010) · International Journal of Technoethics · doi:10.4018/jte.2010100102 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Holton, R., & Boyd, R. (2019) · Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1177/1440783319873046 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Artificial Intelligence in Swedish Policies: Values, Benefits, Considerations and Risks
Toll, D., Lindgren, I., Melin, U., & Madsen, C. Ø. (2019) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-27325-5_23 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Government AI Readiness Meta-Analysis for Latin America And The Caribbean
Montoya, L. N., & Rivas, P. (2019) · IEEE International Symposium on Technology and Society (ISTAS) · doi:10.1109/istas48451.2019.8937869 · Cited by 29 · see citing works
Gupta, K. P. (2019) · International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE) · doi:10.35940/ijrte.b3392.078219 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Trustworthy AI Services in the Public Sector: What Are Citizens Saying About It?
Drobotowicz, K., Kauppinen, M., & Kujala, S. (2021) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-73128-1_7 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Accelerating technology for self-organising networked democracy
Raikov, A. (2018) · Futures · doi:10.1016/j.futures.2018.03.015 · Cited by 23 · see citing works
Managing bioengineering complexity with AI techniques
Beal, J., Adler, A., & Yaman, F. (2015) · Biosystems · doi:10.1016/j.biosystems.2015.08.006 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Asilomar Conference (2017). Asilomar AI Principles. Available online at: https://futureoflife.org/ai-principles/?cn-reloaded=1
- Ben Rjab A. Mellouli S. (2018). Smart cities in the era of artificial intelligence and internet of things: literature review from 1990 to 2017, in Paper Presented at the 19th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: Governance in the Data Age (Delft). 10.1145/3209281.3209380 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Polyportis, A., & Pahos, N. (2024) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-023-02464-6 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Ethics dumping in artificial intelligence
Bélisle-Pipon, J.-C., & Victor, G. (2024) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2024.1426761 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Authors
- Leikas, J., Johri, A., Latvanen, M., Wessberg, N., & Hahto, A.
- Affiliations
- VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland (FI)
- George Mason University (US)
- Ministry of Finance (FI)
- Corresponding author
- Leikas, Jaana
- Venue
- Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2022-02-10
- Volume
- 5
- Pages
- 836557-836557
- ISSN
- 2624-8212 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8867034
- OpenAlex
- W4211035361
- Cited by
- 37
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 1.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Aaltodoc (Aalto University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (2021-67021-35329, 1939105, 1937950)
- U.S. Department of Agriculture (2021-67021-35329)
- National Institute of Food and Agriculture (2021-6702135329, 67021)
- Strategic Research Council
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › E-Government and Public Services
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Smart Cities and Technologies
- Keywords
- AI governance, ethical AI, public sector AI, deliberation, citizen participation, public administration, AI in public services, democratic sustainability, Finland
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
