From fair predictions to just decisions? Conceptualizing algorithmic fairness and distributive justice in the context of data-driven decision-making
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 13077080 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Matthias Kuppler (0000-0002-7324-4722, University of Siegen, corresponding author), Christoph Kern (0000-0001-7363-4299, University of Mannheim, corresponding author), Robert L Bach (0000-0001-5690-2829, University of Mannheim), Frauke Kreuter (0000-0002-7339-2645, University of Maryland, College Park) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 7 |
| Pages | 883999-883999 |
| Publication date | 2022-10-10 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Frontiers in Sociology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2297-7775 • E-ISSN: 2297-7775 |
| Publisher | Frontiers Media (PUBLISHER • CH) |
| DOI | 10.3389/fsoc.2022.883999 |
| PMID | 36299413 |
| OpenAlex | W4303962107 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 43 |
Prediction algorithms are regularly used to support and automate high-stakes policy decisions about the allocation of scarce public resources. However, data-driven decision-making raises problems of algorithmic fairness and justice. So far, fairness and justice are frequently conflated, with the consequence that distributive justice concerns are not addressed explicitly. In this paper, we approach this issue by distinguishing (a) fairness as a property of the algorithm used for the prediction task from (b) justice as a property of the allocation principle used for the decision task in data-driven decision-making. The distinction highlights the different logic underlying concerns about fairness and justice and permits a more systematic investigation of the interrelations between the two concepts. We propose a new notion of algorithmic fairness called error fairness which requires prediction errors to not differ systematically across individuals. Drawing on sociological and philosophical discourse on local justice, we present a principled way to include distributive justice concerns into data-driven decision-making. We propose that allocation principles are just if they adhere to well-justified distributive justice principles. Moving beyond the one-sided focus on algorithmic fairness, we thereby make a first step toward the explicit implementation of distributive justice into data-driven decision-making
Context (archaeology · Distributive justice · Distributive property · Economic Justice · Economics · Epistemology · Law and economics · Management science · Microeconomics · Property (philosophy · Sociology · Task (project management · Computer Science · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Mathematics · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
The Oxford Handbook of Justice in the Workplace
Which Is the Fairest One of All? A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories
Algorithmic Fairness
Big Data's Disparate Impact
Fair Prediction with Disparate Impact
An index to quantify an individual's scientific research output
Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations
A Theory of Justice
Egalitarianism New Essays on the Nature and Value of Equality
Distributive Justice
Equality and Priority
Predicting the future impact of Computer Science researchers
What is Equality? Part 1
Fair, Transparent, and Accountable Algorithmic Decision-making Processes
Prioritarianism
Lokale Gerechtigkeit
Equity, Equality, and Need
Bounded justice
Fairness in Criminal Justice Risk Assessments
Distributive justice
Adaptive justice
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,5 |
| Citation span | 2024 - 2025 (2) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |