Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Ethics and Information Technology 1/2022

Open Access 01.03.2022 | Original Paper

Weapons of moral construction? On the value of fairness in algorithmic decision-making

verfasst von: Benedetta Giovanola, Simona Tiribelli

Erschienen in: Ethics and Information Technology | Ausgabe 1/2022

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Fairness is one of the most prominent values in the Ethics and Artificial Intelligence (AI) debate and, specifically, in the discussion on algorithmic decision-making (ADM). However, while the need for fairness in ADM is widely acknowledged, the very concept of fairness has not been sufficiently explored so far. Our paper aims to fill this gap and claims that an ethically informed re-definition of fairness is needed to adequately investigate fairness in ADM. To achieve our goal, after an introductory section aimed at clarifying the aim and structure of the paper, in section “Fairness in algorithmic decision-making” we provide an overview of the state of the art of the discussion on fairness in ADM and show its shortcomings; in section “Fairness as an ethical value”, we pursue an ethical inquiry into the concept of fairness, drawing insights from accounts of fairness developed in moral philosophy, and define fairness as an ethical value. In particular, we argue that fairness is articulated in a distributive and socio-relational dimension; it comprises three main components: fair equality of opportunity, equal right to justification, and fair equality of relationship; these components are grounded in the need to respect persons both as persons and as particular individuals. In section “Fairness in algorithmic decision-making revised”, we analyze the implications of our redefinition of fairness as an ethical value on the discussion of fairness in ADM and show that each component of fairness has profound effects on the criteria that ADM ought to meet. Finally, in section “Concluding remarks”, we sketch some broader implications and conclude.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
For example, we can cite the Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT) conference, which hosts the major contributions and papers on fairness in AI and algorithms each year (see, e.g., Hoffmann et al., 2018; Shin & Park, 2019).
 
2
There are cases, for example, in housing advertisements, where the removal from ADM of a proxy like users’ postal codes can be beneficial, as they can be intentionally used by real estate agencies or private sellers to infer the race of potential applicants in order to exclude them. There are also other cases where the removal of data on (and proxies for) protected categories can be highly detrimental. For instance, Corbett-Davies and Goel (2018) point out how the consideration in ADM of the protected category of gender is highly crucial in recidivism algorithms used in the criminal justice system. Considering the lower rates of female re-offense, excluding data or proxies for gender as an input in ADM would result in disproportionately high-risk scores for women and lead to unfair decisions by ADM or by people on the basis of ADM ratings.
 
3
Here, we are paraphrasing the well-known distinction between negative and positive liberty introduced by Berlin (1969).
 
4
Foundational questions about discrimination are familiar to legal scholars, too, and in recent years, in particular, there has been a renewed interest in philosophical questions about anti-discrimination law (Hellman & Moreau, 2013; Khaitan, 2015) aimed mainly at defining under what conditions discrimination ought to be prohibited. The focus of these inquiries, however, is on discrimination rather than on the relationship between discrimination and fairness.
 
5
However, drawing on Dworkin (2000), Waldron (2017, p. 14) acknowledges that not every discrimination is wrongful; in fact, there might also be forms of unequal treatment or “surface-level” discrimination that do not imply any moral wrongdoing but rather are justifiable by an appeal to the whole range of human interests, as in the case, discussed by Waldron, of firefighters being selected for their physical fitness.
 
6
Darwall (1977) introduces the well-known distinction between recognition respect and appraisal respect, whereby the latter depends on the appraisal of a person’s character. Darwall’s account of recognition respect has been further elaborated on by Carter (2011), who developed the notion of opacity-respect, that is, recognition respect expressed through the idea that we have to treat every person as “opaque,” respecting them on the footing of moral equality, without engaging in an assessment of their personal merits or demerits (Carter, 2011).
 
7
Following Rawls (1971), fair equality of opportunity is to be complemented with a difference principle, which requires that – once fair equality of opportunity is guaranteed – the overall scheme of cooperation and distribution do not discriminate the (expectations of the) worst-off. Even if we do not dig into this principle here, we would like to stress that it is consistent with our discussion on discrimination and fairness.
 
8
On the importance of asymmetries of power, as a central issue of fairness in ML, framed through a relational ethics perspective, see Birhane (2021).
 
9
Following Noggle and expanding on the importance of concrete agency, some scholars have proposed calling the respect for persons as particular agents “agency respect” (Valentini, 2019).
 
10
As highlighted by Richards (2008), the freedom to express new ideas and ground projects requires the preservation of a private sphere where persons can make up their minds. He calls this intellectual privacy.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Abebe, R., Barocas, S., Kleinberg, J., Levy, K., Raghavan, M., & Robinson, D. G. (2020). Roles for computing in social change. Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 252–260.https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372871. Abebe, R., Barocas, S., Kleinberg, J., Levy, K., Raghavan, M., & Robinson, D. G. (2020). Roles for computing in social change. Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 252–260.https://​doi.​org/​10.​1145/​3351095.​3372871.
Zurück zum Zitat Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new jim code. Polity. Benjamin, R. (2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new jim code. Polity.
Zurück zum Zitat Berlin, I. (1969). Two concepts of freedom. Oxford University Press. Berlin, I. (1969). Two concepts of freedom. Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Coll, S. (2013). Consumption as biopower: Governing bodies with loyalty cards. Journal of Consumer Culture, 13(3), 201–220.CrossRef Coll, S. (2013). Consumption as biopower: Governing bodies with loyalty cards. Journal of Consumer Culture, 13(3), 201–220.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Danks, D., & London, A. J. (2017). Algorithmic bias in autonomous systems. Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 4691–4697. https://doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2017/654 Danks, D., & London, A. J. (2017). Algorithmic bias in autonomous systems. Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 4691–4697. https://​doi.​org/​10.​24963/​ijcai.​2017/​654
Zurück zum Zitat Dworkin, R. (2000). Sovereign virtue: The theory and practice of equality. Harvard University Press. Dworkin, R. (2000). Sovereign virtue: The theory and practice of equality. Harvard University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Eidelson, B. (2015). Discrimination and disrespect. Oxford University Press.CrossRef Eidelson, B. (2015). Discrimination and disrespect. Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating Inequality. How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St Martin’s Publishing. Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating Inequality. How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St Martin’s Publishing.
Zurück zum Zitat Ferguson, A. G. (2017). The rise of big dtata policing. Surveillance, race, and the future of law enforcement. New York University Press.CrossRef Ferguson, A. G. (2017). The rise of big dtata policing. Surveillance, race, and the future of law enforcement. New York University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Forst, R. (2014). Two pictures of justice. Justice, Democracy and the right to justification. Rainer forst in dialogue (pp. 3–26). Bloomsbury.CrossRef Forst, R. (2014). Two pictures of justice. Justice, Democracy and the right to justification. Rainer forst in dialogue (pp. 3–26). Bloomsbury.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gilbert, M. (2006). A theory of political obligation: Membership, commitment, and the bonds of society. Oxford University Press.CrossRef Gilbert, M. (2006). A theory of political obligation: Membership, commitment, and the bonds of society. Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Giovanola, B. (2018). Giustizia sociale. Eguaglianza e rispetto nelle società diseguali. Il Mulino. Giovanola, B. (2018). Giustizia sociale. Eguaglianza e rispetto nelle società diseguali. Il Mulino.
Zurück zum Zitat Green, B., & Chen, Y. (2019). Disparate interactions: An algorithm-in-the-loop analysis of fairness in risk assessments. Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency - FAT* ’19, 90–99. Atlanta, GA, USA: ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287563 Green, B., & Chen, Y. (2019). Disparate interactions: An algorithm-in-the-loop analysis of fairness in risk assessments. Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency - FAT* ’19, 90–99. Atlanta, GA, USA: ACM Press. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1145/​3287560.​3287563
Zurück zum Zitat Grgić-Hlača, N., Redmiles, M. E., Gummadi, K. P., & Weller, A. (2018). Human perceptions of fairness in algorithmic decision making: A case study of criminal risk prediction. Retrieved March 11, 2021, from http://arxiv.org/abs/1802.09548. Grgić-Hlača, N., Redmiles, M. E., Gummadi, K. P., & Weller, A. (2018). Human perceptions of fairness in algorithmic decision making: A case study of criminal risk prediction. Retrieved March 11, 2021, from http://​arxiv.​org/​abs/​1802.​09548.
Zurück zum Zitat Hellman, D., & Moreau, S. (2013). Philosophical foundations of discrimination law. Oxford University Press.CrossRef Hellman, D., & Moreau, S. (2013). Philosophical foundations of discrimination law. Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hill, T. E., Jr. (2000). Respect, pluralism, and justice. Kantian perspectives. Oxford University Press.CrossRef Hill, T. E., Jr. (2000). Respect, pluralism, and justice. Kantian perspectives. Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hinman, L. M. (2008). Searching ethics: The role of search engines in the construction and distribution of knowledge. In A. Spink & M. Zimmer (Eds.), Web search. Information science and knowledge management. Springer. Hinman, L. M. (2008). Searching ethics: The role of search engines in the construction and distribution of knowledge. In A. Spink & M. Zimmer (Eds.), Web search. Information science and knowledge management. Springer.
Zurück zum Zitat Katell, M., Young, M., Dailey, D., Herman, B., Guetler, V., Tam, A., Binz, C., Raz, D., & Krafft, P. M. (2020). Toward situated interventions for algorithmic equity: Lessons from the field. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 45–55. Barcelona Spain: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372874. Katell, M., Young, M., Dailey, D., Herman, B., Guetler, V., Tam, A., Binz, C., Raz, D., & Krafft, P. M. (2020). Toward situated interventions for algorithmic equity: Lessons from the field. In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 45–55. Barcelona Spain: ACM. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1145/​3351095.​3372874.
Zurück zum Zitat Khaitan, T. (2015). A theory of discrimination law. Oxford University Press.CrossRef Khaitan, T. (2015). A theory of discrimination law. Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Lippert-Rasmussen, K. (2013). Born free and equal? A philosophical inquiry into the nature of discrimination. Oxford University Press.CrossRef Lippert-Rasmussen, K. (2013). Born free and equal? A philosophical inquiry into the nature of discrimination. Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Mowshowitz, A., & Kawaguchi, A. (2002). Bias on the web. Communications of the ACM, 45(9), 56–60.CrossRef Mowshowitz, A., & Kawaguchi, A. (2002). Bias on the web. Communications of the ACM, 45(9), 56–60.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York University Press.CrossRef Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown. O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown.
Zurück zum Zitat Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble. Penguin. Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble. Penguin.
Zurück zum Zitat Parsell, M. (2008). Pernicious virtual communities: Identity, polarisation and the web 2.0. Ethics and Information Technology, 10(1), 41–56.CrossRef Parsell, M. (2008). Pernicious virtual communities: Identity, polarisation and the web 2.0. Ethics and Information Technology, 10(1), 41–56.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Pasquale, F. (2015). The Black Box Society: the secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press.CrossRef Pasquale, F. (2015). The Black Box Society: the secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Richards, N.M. (2008). Intellectual privacy. Texas Law Review, Vol. 87, Washington U. School of Law Working Paper No. 08-08-03. Richards, N.M. (2008). Intellectual privacy. Texas Law Review, Vol. 87, Washington U. School of Law Working Paper No. 08-08-03.
Zurück zum Zitat Sangiovanni, A. (2017). Humanity without dignity. Moral equality, respect, and human rights. Harvard University Press.CrossRef Sangiovanni, A. (2017). Humanity without dignity. Moral equality, respect, and human rights. Harvard University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Saxena, N., Huang, K., DeFilippis, E., Radanovic, G., Parkes, D., & Liu, Y. (2019). How do fairness definitions fare? Examining public attitudes towards algorithmic definitions of fairness’. Retrieved March 11, 2021, from http://arxiv.org/abs/1811.03654. Saxena, N., Huang, K., DeFilippis, E., Radanovic, G., Parkes, D., & Liu, Y. (2019). How do fairness definitions fare? Examining public attitudes towards algorithmic definitions of fairness’. Retrieved March 11, 2021, from http://​arxiv.​org/​abs/​1811.​03654.
Zurück zum Zitat Selbst, A. D., Boyd, D., Friedler, A. S., Venkatasubramanian, S., & Vertesi, J. (2019). Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency—FAT* ’19, 59–68. Atlanta, GA, USA: ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287598. Selbst, A. D., Boyd, D., Friedler, A. S., Venkatasubramanian, S., & Vertesi, J. (2019). Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency—FAT* ’19, 59–68. Atlanta, GA, USA: ACM Press. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1145/​3287560.​3287598.
Zurück zum Zitat Sunstein, C. (2008). Democracy and the internet. In J. van den Hoven & J. Weckert (Eds.), Information technology and moral philosophy (pp. 93–110). Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Sunstein, C. (2008). Democracy and the internet. In J. van den Hoven & J. Weckert (Eds.), Information technology and moral philosophy (pp. 93–110). Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Waldron, J. (2017). One another’s equal. The basis of human equality. Harvard University Press.CrossRef Waldron, J. (2017). One another’s equal. The basis of human equality. Harvard University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Williams, B. (1981). Persons, character and morality. Moral luck: Philosophical papers 1973–1980 (pp. 1–19). Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Williams, B. (1981). Persons, character and morality. Moral luck: Philosophical papers 1973–1980 (pp. 1–19). Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Weapons of moral construction? On the value of fairness in algorithmic decision-making
verfasst von
Benedetta Giovanola
Simona Tiribelli
Publikationsdatum
01.03.2022
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Ethics and Information Technology / Ausgabe 1/2022
Print ISSN: 1388-1957
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-8439
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-022-09622-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2022

Ethics and Information Technology 1/2022 Zur Ausgabe

Premium Partner