Automated decision-making and good administration
Views from inside the government machinery
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 12079020 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Ulrik Roehl (0000-0003-1242-0902, Copenhagen Business School, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2023 |
| Volumen | 40 |
| Número | 4 |
| Páginas | 101864-101864 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2023-08-22 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Government Information Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0740-624X • E-ISSN: 1872-9517 |
| Editorial | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.giq.2023.101864 |
| OpenAlex | W4386062966 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 6 |
| Referencias citadas | 40 |
Use of semi- and fully automated, administrative decision-making in public administration is increasing. Despite this increase, few studies have explicitly analysed its relation to good administration. Good administration is regulations and norms aimed at securing the correctness of administrative decisions as well as the legitimacy of these and is often associated with underlying values such as transparency, equality of treatment and accountability. Based on a thematic analysis of qualitative interviews with 43 key public administration stakeholders in a wide array of policy areas in Denmark, insiders of government machinery are shown to perceive relations between automated decision-making and good administration as manifold. Automated, administrative decision-making is articulated as providing both opportunities for supporting good administration and undermining good administration. Six values of good administration particularly related to automated, administrative decision-making are identified: Carefulness; Respecting-individual-rights; Professionalism; Trustworthiness; Responsiveness and Empowerment. Put simply, risks to good administration can be expected to occur if administrative bodies apply automated, administrative decision-making, while opportunities must be actively nurtured through managerial attention. Despite popular conceptions of the threat of “robotic government”, the conclusions of this study indicate a need for a more pragmatic view of relations of automated, administrative decision-making and good administration balanced between outright techno-optimism and techno-pessimism
Administration (probate law · Business · Government (linguistics · Political science · Computer Science · E-Government and Public Services · Law · Public Administration · Public Policy and Administration Research · Taxation and Compliance Studies
Checks and balances under pressure in the welfare state
Experiencing Social Exclusion and Distrust
Is Algorithmic Accessibility Sufficient? The Pivotal Role of Accessibility and Accountability in Shaping Trust in Automated Decision‐Making
Hybrid images of generative AI
Tensions in time-saving technologies
Ironies of automation and their implications for public service automation
Improving public services using artificial intelligence
Managing e‐Government
Translocal empowerment in transformative social innovation networks
Rethink government with AI
Management Fashion
Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research
Discretion and the Quest for Controlled Freedom
The Welfare State, Citizenship, and Bureaucratic Encounters
AI governance in the public sector
Australian Administrative Law
Good Administration and Administrative Procedures
Digital discretion
Value positions viewed through the lens of automated decision-making
Digitization or equality
The perils and pitfalls of explainable AI
ICT, public values and transformative government
The digital cage
From one-stop shop to no-stop shop
Integrating Values into Public Service
Public Values
From Street‐Level to System‐Level Bureaucracies
The ‘Iron Cage’ Strengthened? Discretion and Digital Discipline
The Computerization of Social Security
To do more, better, faster and more cheaply
Toward a General Theory of Action
Without Affection or Enthusiasm' Problems of Involvement and Attachment in `Responsive' Public Management
Interpreting Qualitative Data
Trust in Scandinavia
The Listening Bureaucrat
Political Trust and Trustworthiness
The agency of algorithms
Transparency in algorithmic decision-making
Automating Inequality
New Public Management Is Dead--Long Live Digital-Era Governance
A Public Management for All Seasons
| Obras citantes distintas | 6 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 3 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2024 - 2026 (3) |
| Velocidad de citación | current |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 6 |