This chapter argues for a structural injustice approach to the governance of AI. Structural injustice has an analytical and an evaluative component. The analytical component consists of structural explanations that are well-known in the social sciences. The evaluative component is a theory of justice. Structural injustice is a powerful conceptual tool that allows researchers and practitioners to identify, articulate, and perhaps even anticipate, AI biases. The chapter begins with an example of racial bias in AI that arises from structural injustice. The chapter then presents the concept of structural injustice as introduced by the philosopher Iris Marion Young. The chapter moreover argues that structural injustice is well suited as an approach to the governance of AI and compares this approach to alternative approaches that start from analyses of harms and benefits or from value statements. The chapter suggests that structural injustice provides methodological and normative foundations for the values and concerns of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. The chapter closes with an outlook onto the idea of structure and on responsibility. The idea of a structure is central to justice. An open theoretical research question is to what extent AI is itself part of the structure of society. Finally, the practice of responsibility is central to structural injustice. Even if they cannot be held responsible for the existence of structural injustice, every individual and every organization has some responsibility to address structural injustice going forward.
翻译:本章主张对大赦国际的治理采取结构性不公正做法; 结构性不公正有一个分析和评估部分; 分析部分包括社会科学中众所周知的结构性解释; 评价部分是一个正义理论; 结构性不公正是一个强有力的概念工具,使研究人员和从业者能够识别、阐明、甚至预测大赦国际的偏见; 本章首先以大赦国际中结构性偏见的事例为例,源于结构性不公正; 本章随后介绍了哲学家Iris Marion Young提出的结构性不公正概念; 本章还主张结构性不公正作为大赦国际治理的一种方法十分合适,并将这一方法与从分析损害和惠益或价值声明开始的替代方法进行比较; 本章建议结构性不公正为多样性、公平和包容的价值和关切提供方法和规范基础; 本章最后对结构和责任的观念和职责进行审视; 结构概念是司法的核心; 公开的理论研究问题是,大赦国际本身在多大程度上是社会结构结构结构的一部分; 最后,责任实践是结构性不公正的核心。 即使它们不能对结构不公正的存在承担责任,每个个人和每个组织都应对结构不公正的责任。