Good governance as a response to discontents? Déjà vu, or lessons for AI from other emerging technologies

References

• The 2015 panel. 2016. “Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030. One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence.” Report of the 2015 Study Panel.
   Google Scholar
• Accenture. 2017. “Embracing Artificial Intelligence.” Enabling Strong and Inclusive AI Driven Growth.
   Google Scholar
• Adams, Rachel. 2021. “Decolonising Artificial Intelligence: A Theoretical Critique.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 46 (1).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aggarwal, Nikita. 2020. “Introduction to the Special Issue on Intercultural Digital Ethics.” Philosophy & Technology 33 (4): 547–550. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00428-1.
   Google Scholar
• Aicardi, Christine, Simisola Akintoye, B. Tyr Fothergill, Manuel Guerrero, Gudrun Klinker, William Knight, Lars Klüver, et al. 2020. “Ethical and Social Aspects of Neurorobotics.” Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (5): 2533–2546. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00248-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beauchamp, Tom L., and James F. Childress. 2009. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 6th ed. New York: OUP USA.
   Google Scholar
• Bernal, John D. (1939) 1967. The Social Function of Science. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• BIC/APPGAI (Big Innovation Centre/All-Party Parliamentary Group on Artificial Intelligence). 2017a. Governance, Social and Organisational Perspective for AI. 11 September 2017.
   Google Scholar
• BIC/APPGAI (Big Innovation Centre/All-Party Parliamentary Group on Artificial Intelligence). 2017b. International Perspective and Exemplars. 30 October 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Blackwell, Alan. 2021. “Ethnographic Artificial Intelligence.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 46 (1).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borras, Susana, and Jakob Edler, eds. 2014. The Governance of Socio-Technical Systems: Explaining Change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Borras, Susana, and Jakob Edler. 2020. “The Roles of the State in the Governance of Socio-Technical Systems’ Transformation.” Research Policy 49 (5): 103971.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowser, Anne, Michael Sloan, Pietro Michelucci, and Eleonore Pauwels. 2017. Artificial Intelligence: A Policy-Oriented Introduction. Washington, DC: Wilson Briefs. Wilson Center.
   Google Scholar
• Campolo, Alex, Medelyn Sanfilippo, Meredith Whittaker, and Kate Crawford. 2017. AI Now 2017 Report. AI Now Institute. New York: New York University.
   Google Scholar
• Clouser, K. Danner, and Bernard, Gert. 1990. “A Critique of Principlism.” Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 15: 219–236. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/15.2.219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coeckelbergh, Mark, and Thomas Metzinger. 2020. “Europe Needs More Guts When it Comes to AI Ethics.” Tagesspiegel, April 14.
   Google Scholar
• Crawford, Kate, and Meredith Whittaker. 2016. The AI Now Report. The Social and Economic Implications of Artificial Intelligence Technologies in the Near-Term. New York: AI Now Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Datta Burton, Saheli, Tara Mahfoud, Christine Aicardi, and Nikolas Rose. 2021. “Clinical translation of computational brain models: understanding the salience of trust in clinician-researcher relationships.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 46 (1).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Saille, Stevienna. 2015. “Innovating Innovation Policy: The Emergence of ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 2 (2): 152–168. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2015.1045280.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Saille, Stevienna, Fabien Medvecky, Michiel van Oudheusden, Kevin Albertson, Effie Amanatudou, Timothy Birabi, and Mario Pansera. 2020. Responsibility Beyond Growth. A Case for Responsible Stagnation. Bristol: Bristol University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Diercks, Gijs, Henrik Larsen, and Fred Steward. 2019. “Transformative Innovation Policy: Addressing Variety in an Emerging Policy Paradigm.” Research Policy 48 (4): 880–894.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EESC (European Economic and Social Committee). 2017. “Artificial Intelligence - the Consequences of Artificial Intelligence on the (Digital) Single Market, Production, Consumption, Employment and Society.” Opinion.
   Google Scholar
• EGE (European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies). 2018. “Statement on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and ‘Autonomous’ Systems.”
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2017. AI Policy Seminar: Towards and EU Strategic Plan for AI. Brussels: Digital Transformation Monitor.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2018a. Artificial Intelligence: A European Perspective. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2018b. “Coordinated Plan on Artificial Intelligence.” Communication COM(2018) 795 final. Brussels 7.12.2018.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2018c. “Artificial Intelligence for Europe. Communication.” COM(2018) 237 final. Brussels 25.4.2018.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2019. “Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI. Independent High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence set up by the European Commission.” Brussels. 8.4.2019.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2020. “On Artificial Intelligence – A European Approach to Excellence and Trust.” White Paper. COM(2020) 65 final. Brussels 19.2.2020.
   Google Scholar
• European Parliament. 2016. “European Civil Law Rules in Robotics.” Study for the JURI Committee.
   Google Scholar
• Executive Office of the President. 2016a. The National Artificial Intelligence Research and Development Strategic Plan. Washington, DC: National Science and Technology Council.
   Google Scholar
• Flink, Tim, and Nicolas Rüffin. 2019. “The Current State of the Art of Science Diplomacy.” In Handbook on Science and Public Policy, edited by Dagmar Simon, Stefan Kuhlmann, Julia Stamm, and Weert Canzler, 104–121. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Floridi, Luciano. 1999. “Information Ethics: On the Philosophical Foundation of Computer Ethics.” Ethics and Information Technology 1: 33–52.
   Google Scholar
• Freyhofer, Horst H. 2004. The Nuremberg Medical Trial: The Holocaust and the Origin of the Nuremberg Medical Code, 2nd Revised ed. New York: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Garvey, Colin Shunryu. 2021. “Unsavory Medicine for Technoscientific Civilization: Introduction to AI & its Discontents.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 46 (1).
   Google Scholar
• Gotterbarn, Donald. 1995. “Computer Ethics – Responsibility Regained.” In Computers, Ethics and Social Values, edited by Deborah G. Johnson and Helen Nissenbaum, 18–24. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Hagendorff, Thilo. 2020. “The Ethics of AI Ethics: An Evaluation of Guidelines.” Minds and Machines 30: 99–120. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09517-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holzmeyer Cheryl. 2021. “Beyond “AI for Social Good” (AI4SG): Social Transformations - Not Tech-Fixes - for Health Equity.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 46 (1).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IEEE. 2017. “Ethically Aligned Design. A Vision for Prioritizing Human Well-Being with Autonomous and Intelligent Systems.” Version 2 – for Public Discussion.
   Google Scholar
• ITU (International Telecommunication Union). 2017. AI for Good Global Summit Report 2017, Geneva, 7–9 June 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila. 2016. The Ethics of Invention: Technology and the Human Future. New York: W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Jobin, Anna, Marcello Ienca, and Effy Vayena. 2019. “The Global Landscape of AI Ethics Guidelines.” Nature Machine Intelligence 1: 389–399. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, Deborah G. 2001. Computer Ethics. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Juma, Calestous. 2016. Innovation and Its Enemies. Why People Resist New Technologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Klitzman, Robert. 2015. The Ethics Police?: The Struggle to Make Human Research Safe. 1st ed. Oxford; New York: OUP USA.
   Google Scholar
• Krugman, Paul. 1994. “Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession.” Foreign Affairs 73 (2): 28–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhlmann, Stefan, Peter Stegmaier, and Kornelia Konrad. 2019. “The Tentative Governance of Emerging Science and Technology – a Conceptual Introduction.” Research Policy 48 (5): 1091–1097. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.01.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loeb, Zachary. 2021. “The Lamp and the Lighthouse: Joseph Weizenbaum, contextualizing the critic.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 46 (1).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcus, Gary, and Ernest Davis. 2019. Rebooting AI: Building Artificial Intelligence we Can Trust. New York: Pantheon Books.
   Google Scholar
• Metzinger, Thomas. 2019. “Ethics Washing Made in Europe.” Tagesspiegel, April 8.
   Google Scholar
• Mittelstadt, Brent. 2019. “Principles Alone Cannot Guarantee Ethical AI.” Nature Machine Intelligence 1 (11): 501–507. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0114-4.
   Google Scholar
• Moor, James H. 1985. “What is Computer Ethics.” Metaphilosophy 16: 266–275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 1979. The Belmont Report - Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. Richard. 1977. The Moon and the Ghetto. An Essay on Public Policy Analysis. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. Richard. 2011. “The Moon and The Ghetto Revisited.” Science and Public Policy 38 (9): 681–690.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ochigame, Rodrigo. 2019. “How Big Tech Manipulates Academia to Avoid Regulation.” The Intercept, December 20. https://theintercept.com/2019/12/20/mit-ethical-ai-artificial-intelligence/.
   Google Scholar
• Olson, Mancur. 1974. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Owen, Richard., and Mario. Pansera. 2019. “Responsible Innovation and Responsible Research and Innovation.” In Handbook on Science and Public Policy, edited by Dagmar. Simon, Stefan. Kuhlmann, Julia. Stamm, and Weert. Canzler, 26–48. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Pierre, Jon, and B. Guy Peters. 2000. Governance, Politics and the State. Houndmills: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Rathenau Institute. 2017. “Human Rights in the Robot Age. Challenges Arising from the Use of Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, and Virtual and Augmented Reality.” Report for the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
   Google Scholar
• Rotolo, Daniele, Diana Hicks, and Ben R. Martin. 2015. “What is an Emerging Technology?” Research Policy 44 (10): 1827–1843. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.06.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schrag, Zachary. M. 2010. Ethical Imperialism: Institutional Review Boards and the Social Sciences, 1965–2009. 1st ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schwab, Klaus. 2017. The Fourth Industrial Revolution. London: Penguin.
   Google Scholar
• Stahl, Bernd Carsten, Job Timmermans, and Brent Daniel Mittelstadt. 2016. “The Ethics of Computing: A Survey of the Computing-Oriented Literature.” ACM Computing Surveys 48 (4): 55:1–55:38. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/2871196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stark, Laura. 2011. Behind Closed Doors: IRBs and the Making of Ethical Research. 1st ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, Jack, Richard Owen, and Phil Macnaghten. 2013. “Developing a Framework for Responsible Innovation.” Research Policy 42 (9): 1568–1580. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thierer, Adam, Andrea Castillo O’Sullivan, and Raymond Russell. 2017. Artificial Intelligence and Public Policy. Report. Arlington: Mercatus Center, George Mason University.
   Google Scholar
• Ulnicane, Inga, William Knight, Tonii Leach, Bernd Carsten Stahl, and Winter-Gladys Wanjiku. 2020. Framing Governance for a Contested Emerging Technology: Insights from AI Policy. Policy and Society. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2020.1855800.
   Google Scholar
• Ulnicane, Inga. 2021. “Artificial Intelligence in the European Union: Policy, Ethics and Regulation.” In Routledge Handbook of European Integrations, edited by Thomas Hoerber, Ignazio Cabras, and Gabriel Weber. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ulnicane, Inga, William Knight, Tonii Leach, Bernd Carsten Stahl, and Winter-Gladys Wanjiku. Forthcoming. “Governance of Artificial Intelligence: Emerging International Trends and Policy Frames.” In Global Politics of Artificial Intelligence, edited by Maurizio Tinnirello. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• UNI Global Union. 2017. “Top 10 Principles for Ethical Artificial Intelligence.” The Future World of Work.
   Google Scholar
• Van Oudheusden, Michiel. 2014. “Where Are the Politics in Responsible Innovation? European Governance, Technology Assessments, and Beyond.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 1 (1): 67–86. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.882097.
   Google Scholar
• Vesnic-Alujevic, Lucia, Susana Nascimento, and Alexandre Polvora. 2020. “Societal and Ethical Impacts of Artificial Intelligence: Critical Notes on European Policy Frameworks.” Telecommunications Policy 44 (6): 101961.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villani, Cedric. 2018. For a Meaningful Artificial Intelligence. Towards a French and European Strategy. Paris.
   Google Scholar
• Vinnova. 2018. Artificial Intelligence in Swedish Business and Society. Stockholm: Vinnova.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, Caroline, Travis Whetsell, and Satyam Mukherjee. 2019. “International Research Collaboration: Novelty, Conventionality, and Atypicality in Knowledge Recombination.” Research Policy 48: 1260–1270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wanzenbock, Iris, Joeri H. Wesseling, Koen Frenken, Marko P. Hekkert, and K. Matthias Weber. 2020. “A Framework for Mission-Oriented Innovation Policy: Alternative Pathways Through the Problem-Solution Space.” Science and Public Policy. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scaa027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiener, Norbert. 1954. The Human Use of Human Beings. New York: Doubleday.
   Google Scholar
• Woodhouse, Edward J., and Daniel Sarewitz. 2007. “Science Policies for Reducing Societal Inequities.” Science and Public Policy 34 (2): 139–150.
   Google Scholar
• World Medical Association. 2008. “Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects.”
   Google Scholar