Suing the algorithm: the mundanization of automated decision-making in public services through litigation

References

• Alfter, B. (2019). Denmark. In M. Spielkamp (Ed.), Automating society: Taking stock of automated decision-making in the EU. A Report by AlgorithmWatch in Cooperation with Bertelsmann Stiftung, supported by Open Society Foundations. AlgorithmWatch. Retrieved May 7, 2021, from https://www.algorithmwatch.org/automating-society
   Google Scholar
• Alston, P. (2019). Report of the Special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights. A/74/48037. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=25156
   Google Scholar
• Ananny, M. (2016). Toward an ethics of algorithms. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41, 93–117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen, D. F., & Dawes, S. (1991). Government information management: A primer and casebook. Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Bleses, P., & Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2004). The dual transformation of the German welfare state. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Bonoli, G., & Natali, D. (2012). The politics of the ‘new’ welfare states: Analysing reforms in Western Europe. In G. Bonoli & D. Natali (Eds.), The politics of the new welfare state (pp. 3–20). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bowker, G., & Leigh Star, S. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, M. (2007). Understanding e-government benefits: An examination of leading-edge local governments. The American Review of Public Administration, 37(2), 178–197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074006291635
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucher, T. (2017a). ‘Machines don't have instincts’: Articulating the computational in journalism. New Media and Society, 19(6), 918–933. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815624182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bucher, T. (2017b). The algorithmic imaginary: Exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1154086
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choroszewicz, M., & Mäihäniemi, B. (2020). Developing a digital welfare state: Data protection and the use of automated decision-making in the public sector across six EU countries. Global Perspectives, 1(1), 12910. https://doi.org/10.1525/gp.2020.12910
   Google Scholar
• Dagenssamhälle. (2020). Känsliga uppgifter spreds via kod till biståndsrobot [Sensitive data were distributed via code of a benefit robot]. https://www.dagenssamhalle.se/nyhet/kansliga-uppgifter-spreds-kod-till-bistandsrobot-31911?fbclid=IwAR3LsYY0uxmI64JR9yDSh4sFgSlwj6HvCq2UY7ABPbPCWU3rqpjcLsrdfAk
   Google Scholar
• Dencik, L., Hintz, A., Redden, J., & Warne, H. (2018). Data scores as governance: Investigating uses of citizen scoring in public services. https://datajusticelab.org/data-scores-as-governance/
   Google Scholar
• Dencik, L., & Kaun, A. (2020). Datafication and the welfare state. Global Perspectives, 1(1), 12912.
   Google Scholar
• Dreyer, S., & Schulz, W. (2019). The general data protection regulation and automated decision-making: Will it deliver? https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/en/publications/publication/did/the-general-data-protection-regulation-and-automated-decision-making-will-it-deliver
   Google Scholar
• DuGay, P. (2005). The values of bureaucracy. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Edmiston, K. D. (2003). State and local e-government: Prospects and challenges. The American Review of Public Administration, 33(1), 20–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0275074002250255
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engin, Z., & Treleaven, P. (2019). Algorithmic government: Automating public services and supporting civil servants in using data science technologies. The Computer Journal, 62(3), 448–460. https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/bxy082
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eubanks, V. (2017). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St Martin's Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Council. (2018). Declaration pf cooperation on artificial intelligence. Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• Gilbert, N. (2002). Transformation of the welfare state: The silent surrender of public responsibility. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gitelman, L. (2008). Always already new. Media, history, and the data of culture. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goodman, B., & Flaxman, S. (2016, June 23). EU regulations on algorithmic decision-making and a “right to explanation” [Paper presentation]. ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning, New York.
   Google Scholar
• Government Offices of Sweden. (2018). National approach to artificial intelligence. Ministry of Enterprise and Innovation. Retrieved May 7, 2021, from https://www.regeringen.se/4aa638/contentassets/a6488ccebc6f418e9ada18bae40bb71f/national-approach-to-artificial-intelligence.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hemerijck, A. (2012). Two or three waves of welfare state transformation? In N. Morel, B. Palier, & J. Palme (Eds.), Welfare state? Ideas, policies and challenges (pp. 33–60). Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ho, A. T.-K. (2002). Reinventing local governments and the e-government initiative. Public Administration Review, 62(4), 434–444. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hockenhull, M., & Cohen, M. L. (2020). Hot air and corporate sociotechnical imaginaries: Performing and translating digital futures in the Danish tech scene. New Media & Society, Online First, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820929319
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. (2005). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. (2015). Future imperfect: Science, technology, and the imaginations of modernity. In S. Jasanoff, & S.-H. Kim (Eds.), Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power (pp. 1–33). University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Justitieombudsmannen, JO. (2014). A Parliamentary Agency. https://www.jo.se/en/About-JO/The-Parliamentary-agency/2020-12-28
   Google Scholar
• Kaun, A., & Taranu, G. (2020). Sweden / Research. In F. Chiusi, S. Fischer, N. Kayser-Bril, & M. Spielkamp (Eds.), Automating society 2020. A Report by AlgorithmWatch in Cooperation with Bertelsmann Stiftung. AlgorithmWatch. Retrieved May 7, 2021, from https://automatingsociety.algorithmwatch.org
   Google Scholar
• Kaun, A., & Velkova, J. (2019). Sweden. In M. Spielkamp (Ed.), Automating society: Taking stock of automated decision-making in the EU. A Report by AlgorithmWatch in Cooperation with Bertelsmann Stiftung, supported by Open Society Foundations. AlgorithmWatch. Retrieved May 7, 2021, from https://www.algorithmwatch.org/automating-society
   Google Scholar
• Kayser-Bril, N. (2019). France. In M. Spielkamp (Ed.), Automating society: Taking stock of automated decision-making in the EU. A Report by AlgorithmWatch in Cooperation with Bertelsmann Stiftung, supported by Open Society Foundations. AlgorithmWatch. Retrieved May 7, 2021, from https://www.algorithmwatch.org/automating-society
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy, H. (2016). Post, mine, repeat: Social media data mining becomes ordinary. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kitchin, R. (2017). Thinking critically about and researching algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 14–29.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawton, A. (2005). Public service ethics in a changing world. Futures, 37(2-3), 231–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2004.03.029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Layne, K., & Lee, J. (2001). Developing fully functional e-government: A four stage model. Government Information Quarterly, 18(2), 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0740-624X(01)00066-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mager, A., & Katzenbach, C. (2020). Future imaginaries in the making and governing of digital technology: Multiple, contested, commodified. New Media & Society, Online First, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820929321
   Google Scholar
• Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
   Google Scholar
• Morley, D., & Silverstone, R. (1990). Domestic communication – technologies and meanings. Media, Culture & Society, 12(1), 31–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/016344390012001003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mosco, V. (2017). Becoming digital: Toward a post-internet society. Emerald.
   Google Scholar
• O'Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, J. D. (2015). The marvellous clouds. Towards a philosophy of†elemental media. The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C., Van Thiel, S., & Homburg, V. (Eds.). (2007). New public management in Europe. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Rakar, F. (2018). Lärprojekt Trelleborgsmodellen - Från Rebell till Modell [Project Trelleborg model – From rebel to model] www.moten.trelleborg.se/arbetsmarknadsnamnden/agenda
   Google Scholar
• Ranerup, A., & Henriksen, H. Z. (2019, January 30–31). Robot takeover? Analysing technological agency in automated decision-making in social services [Paper presentation]. 16th Scandinavian Workshop on e-Government, University of South-Eastern Norway.
   Google Scholar
• Ranerup, A., & Henriksen, H. Z. (2020). Digital discretion: Unpacking human and technological agency in automated decision making in Sweden’s social services. Social Science Computer Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439320980434
   Google Scholar
• Reisman, D., Schultz, J., Crawford, K., & Whittaker, M. (2018). Algorithmic impact assessments: A practical framework for public agency accountability. https://ainowinstitute.org/aiareport2018.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sandvig, C., Hamilton, K., Karahalios, K., & Langbort, C. (2016). Automation, algorithms, and politics| when the algorithm itself is a racist: Diagnosing ethical harm in the basic components of software. International Journal of Communication, 10, 19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silverstone, R. (2005). Domesticating domestication. Reflections on the life of a concept. In T. Berker, M. Hartmann, Y. Punie, & K. J. Ward (Eds.), Domestication of media and technology (pp. 229–248). Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Skocpol, T. (2003). Diminished democracy. From membership to management in American civic life. University of Oklahoma Press.
   Google Scholar
• SOU 2018:25. (2018). Juridicial support for the digitalisation of public administration [Juridik som stöd förförvaltningens digitalisering]. Retrieved May 7, 2021, from https://www.regeringen.se%2F495f60%2Fcontentassets%2Fe9a0044c745c4c9ca84fef309feafd76%2Fjuridik-som-stod-for-forvaltningens-digitalisering-sou-201825.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0uWx39jBfmo7E6yzdFAVV6
   Google Scholar
• Spielkamp, M. (2018). Automating society: Taking stock of automated decision-making in the EU. https://algorithmwatch.org/en/automating-society/
   Google Scholar
• Star, S. L., & Ruhleder, K. (1996). Steps towards an ecology of infrastructure: Design and access for large information spaces. Information Systems Research, 7(1), 111–134. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.7.1.111
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sumpter, D. (2018). Outnumbered: From Facebook and Google to fake news and filter-bubbles – the algorithms that control our lives. Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Svensson, L. (2020). Automatisering till nytta eller fördärv? [Automation to benefit or ruin?]. Socialvetenskaplig Tidskrift, 26(3-4), 341–362. https://doi.org/10.3384/SVT.2019.26.3-4.3094
   Google Scholar
• Swedish Television. (2018). Contested Robot decides who gets benefits in Trelleborg [Omdiskuterad robot avgör vem som får stöd i Trelleborg]. Retrieved May 7, 2021, from https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/skane/robot-avgor-vem-som-far-stod
   Google Scholar
• Trelleborg municipality. (2020). This way a digital application is handled [Så här hanteras en digital ansökan]. https://www.trelleborg.se/omsorg-och-hjalp/ekonomiskt-stod/ekonomiskt-bistand-forsorjningsstod/sa-har-hanteras-en-digital-ansokan/
   Google Scholar
• Van der Wal, Z., De Graaf, G., & Lasthuizen, K. (2008). What's valued most? Similarities and differences between the organisational values of the public and the private sector. Public Administration, 86(2), 465–482. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2008.00719.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veale, M., & Brass, I. (2019). Administration by algorithm? Public management meets public sector machine learning. In K. Yeung & M. Lodge (Eds.), Algorithmic regulation. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• The Verge. (2020). UK ditches exam results generated by biased algorithm after student protests. Retrieved May 7, 2021, from https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/17/21372045/uk-a-level-results-algorithm-biased-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic-university-applications
   Google Scholar
• Williamson, B. (2018). Silicon start-up schools: Technocracy, algorithmic imaginaries and venture philanthropy in corporate education reform. Critical Studies in Education, 59(2), 218–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2016.1186710
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willim, R. (2017). Imperfect imaginaries: Digitisation, mundanisation, and the ungraspable. In G. Koch (Ed.), Digitisation: Theories and concepts for empirical cultural research (pp. 53–77). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Willim, R. (2019, October 14). From a talk at: Man or machine? Who will decide in the future [Paper presentation]. Future Week at Lund University, Lund.
   Google Scholar
• Yeung, K. (2018). Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation. Regulation & Governance, 12(4), 505–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12158
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zarsky, T. (2016). The trouble with algorithmic decisions: An analytic road map to examine efficiency and fairness in automated and opaque decision making. Science, Technology and Human Values, 41(1), 118–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915605575
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar