Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10400.5/30369 |
Resumo: | In public and private sectors alike, decision-making is increasingly carried out through the employment of ‘algorithmic actors’ and artificial intelligence. The apparent efficiency of these means in the eyes of politicians and the public has made recourse to them possible. Along with this belief in their efficiency, however, fears emerge that nonhuman actors have displaced judicious human decision-making. This article examines this belief and its contestation, drawing on overlapping notions of ‘delegation’ in the political sociologies of Bruno Latour and Pierre Bourdieu. We undertake two case studies of attempts to delegate decision-making to algorithms: the 2020 UK ‘A-level’ grade determination and the Australian ‘robodebt’ welfare fundsrecovery scheme. In both cases, the decision-making delegated to algorithms was publicly discredited as critics invoked a different form of fairness than the one used by those deploying the technology. In the ‘A-level’ case, complainants drew on a grammar of individual merit, while complainants in the ‘robodebt’ case made a technical critique of the algorithm’s efficiency. Using a theory of delegation, we contribute to understanding how publics articulate resistance to automated decision-making. |
id |
RCAP_11678ec37965656e642694e207f50afc |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:www.repository.utl.pt:10400.5/30369 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and AustraliaA-level; algorithm; Bruno Latour; Delegation; Pierre BourdieuIn public and private sectors alike, decision-making is increasingly carried out through the employment of ‘algorithmic actors’ and artificial intelligence. The apparent efficiency of these means in the eyes of politicians and the public has made recourse to them possible. Along with this belief in their efficiency, however, fears emerge that nonhuman actors have displaced judicious human decision-making. This article examines this belief and its contestation, drawing on overlapping notions of ‘delegation’ in the political sociologies of Bruno Latour and Pierre Bourdieu. We undertake two case studies of attempts to delegate decision-making to algorithms: the 2020 UK ‘A-level’ grade determination and the Australian ‘robodebt’ welfare fundsrecovery scheme. In both cases, the decision-making delegated to algorithms was publicly discredited as critics invoked a different form of fairness than the one used by those deploying the technology. In the ‘A-level’ case, complainants drew on a grammar of individual merit, while complainants in the ‘robodebt’ case made a technical critique of the algorithm’s efficiency. Using a theory of delegation, we contribute to understanding how publics articulate resistance to automated decision-making.Repositório da Universidade de LisboaMead, GeoffreyBarbosa Neves, Barbara2024-03-13T17:51:00Z2022-08-082022-08-08T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.5/30369engMead, G., & Barbosa Neves, B. (2022). Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia. The Sociological Review, 71(3), 601-623. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038026122110538010.1177/00380261221105380metadata only accessinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2024-03-17T01:34:03Zoai:www.repository.utl.pt:10400.5/30369Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-20T04:01:47.573766Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia |
title |
Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia |
spellingShingle |
Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia Mead, Geoffrey A-level; algorithm; Bruno Latour; Delegation; Pierre Bourdieu |
title_short |
Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia |
title_full |
Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia |
title_fullStr |
Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia |
title_full_unstemmed |
Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia |
title_sort |
Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia |
author |
Mead, Geoffrey |
author_facet |
Mead, Geoffrey Barbosa Neves, Barbara |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Barbosa Neves, Barbara |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Repositório da Universidade de Lisboa |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Mead, Geoffrey Barbosa Neves, Barbara |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
A-level; algorithm; Bruno Latour; Delegation; Pierre Bourdieu |
topic |
A-level; algorithm; Bruno Latour; Delegation; Pierre Bourdieu |
description |
In public and private sectors alike, decision-making is increasingly carried out through the employment of ‘algorithmic actors’ and artificial intelligence. The apparent efficiency of these means in the eyes of politicians and the public has made recourse to them possible. Along with this belief in their efficiency, however, fears emerge that nonhuman actors have displaced judicious human decision-making. This article examines this belief and its contestation, drawing on overlapping notions of ‘delegation’ in the political sociologies of Bruno Latour and Pierre Bourdieu. We undertake two case studies of attempts to delegate decision-making to algorithms: the 2020 UK ‘A-level’ grade determination and the Australian ‘robodebt’ welfare fundsrecovery scheme. In both cases, the decision-making delegated to algorithms was publicly discredited as critics invoked a different form of fairness than the one used by those deploying the technology. In the ‘A-level’ case, complainants drew on a grammar of individual merit, while complainants in the ‘robodebt’ case made a technical critique of the algorithm’s efficiency. Using a theory of delegation, we contribute to understanding how publics articulate resistance to automated decision-making. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-08-08 2022-08-08T00:00:00Z 2024-03-13T17:51:00Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.5/30369 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10400.5/30369 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Mead, G., & Barbosa Neves, B. (2022). Contested delegation: Understanding critical public responses to algorithmic decision-making in the UK and Australia. The Sociological Review, 71(3), 601-623. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380261221105380 10.1177/00380261221105380 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
metadata only access info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
metadata only access |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799138190739636224 |