International Human Rights Law as a Framework for Algorithmic Accountability
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9933877 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Lorna McGregor (Australian Human Rights Commission), Daragh Murray (0000-0002-3891-9130, Physicians for Human Rights), Vivian Ng (0000-0002-7293-2312, Australian Human Rights Commission, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 68 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 309-343 |
| Publication date | 2019-04-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International and Comparative Law Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-5893 • E-ISSN: 1471-6895 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s0020589319000046 |
| OpenAlex | W2940105172 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 29 |
| References cited | 6 |
Existing approaches to ‘algorithmic accountability’, such as transparency, provide an important baseline, but are insufficient to address the (potential) harm to human rights caused by the use of algorithms in decision-making. In order to effectively address the impact on human rights, we argue that a framework that sets out a shared understanding and means of assessing harm; is capable of dealing with multiple actors and different forms of responsibility; and applies across the full algorithmic life cycle, from conception to deployment, is needed. While generally overlooked in debates on algorithmic accountability, in this article, we suggest that international human rights law already provides this framework. We apply this framework to illustrate the effect it has on the choices to employ algorithms in decision-making in the first place and the safeguards required. While our analysis indicates that in some circumstances, the use of algorithms may be restricted, we argue that these findings are not ‘anti-innovation’ but rather appropriate checks and balances to ensure that algorithms contribute to society, while safeguarding against risks
Accountability · Baseline (sea · Business · Harm · Human rights · Law and economics · Order (exchange · Political science · Safeguarding · Sociology · Software deployment · Transparency (behavior · Blockchain Technology Applications and Security · Computer Science · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Law · Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
(Dis)Obedience in Digital Societies
The Content Governance Dilemma
The Human Rights Implications of the Use of AI in the Digital Welfare State
Migration Intelligence
Dinamika Kewarganegaraan Liberal
Future-proofing the city
Addressing Algorithmic Errors in Data-Driven Border Control Procedures
Expanding the Boundaries of Jurisprudence in the Era of Technological Advancements
Polycentrism, not polemics? Squaring the circle of non-discrimination law, accuracy metrics and public/private interests when addressing AI bias
Bias in AI-driven HRM systems
What rights matter? Examining the place of social rights in the EU’s artificial intelligence policy debate
Smart cities and cumulative effects on fundamental rights
Programming the machine
From human resources to human rights
The Promise and Perils of International Human Rights Law for AI Governance
Can human-centred participatory design turn AI into a pertinent tool for human rights research
Automated news recommendation in front of adversarial examples and the technical limits of transparency in algorithmic accountability
Beyond a Human Rights-Based Approach to AI Governance
A DC State of Mind? A Review of the World Development Report 2021
The Watchdogs Network
Reflections about the sameness of human rights online and offline
International migration management in the age of artificial intelligence
Ethical Implications and Human Rights Violations in the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Consensus and legitimation in global AI regulations
The algorithmic law of business and human rights
Criterios éticos y de derecho internacional humanitario en el uso de sistemas militares dotados de inteligencia artificial
AI for humanitarian action
Sociotechnical imaginaries of algorithmic governance in EU policy on online disinformation and FinTech
State responsibility in relation to military applications of artificial intelligence
| Unique citing works | 29 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 4,83 |
| Citation span | 2020 - 2026 (7) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 29 |