Fault Lines: Navigating Ethics and Responsible AI Where National Policy Meets Local Practice in Public Sector Transformation
断层线:在公共部门转型中国家政策与地方实践交汇处的伦理与负责任AI导航
Sitong Lyu, Shabnam Taghiyeva, Mohit Kukadia, Denis Newman-Griffis
AI总结 本文以英国特殊教育需求与残疾(SEND)为案例,通过17次半结构化访谈的主题分析,揭示了国家政策与地方实践在负责任AI实施中的五大挑战,并提出了政策与结构改革建议。
详情
- Comments
- 10 pages plus references. This study was funded by the University of Sheffield
英国政府采取了支持AI的立场,以帮助在严重财政压力下转变公共服务交付,但将这一愿景转化为负责任的AI实践的道路仍然不明确。虽然英国政策通常在国家层面制定,但地方当局负责大多数公共服务交付,而公共部门中AI优先叙事的快速推进正在暴露这一国家-地方接口在知识和实践方面的断层线。本文以高风险的特殊教育需求与残疾(SEND)领域为案例,研究英国中央政府与地方当局之间接口处负责任AI的解释和实施方式。我们对17位政策制定者、从业者和第三部门专业人士进行了半结构化访谈,并进行了主题分析,以识别在国家政策与地方实践交汇处负责任AI的障碍和促成条件。我们发现了地方当局面临的五个相互关联的挑战:AI的影子使用和数据隐私风险、AI供应中的市场-政府不对称、劳动力准备不足、缺乏标准化定义和测量,以及人类问责制的缺口。针对每个挑战,参与者提出了可操作的步骤,从加强数据保护框架和重新平衡市场-政府关系到提升劳动力能力。我们对SEND的审查使这些挑战更加突出,展示了影响弱势儿童和家庭的高风险决策如何加剧了关于问责制、公平性和人类监督的紧张关系,暴露了基于原则的监管方法的局限性。我们认为,负责任的公共部门AI需要国家政策调整以及地方层面机构能力、价值观和治理机制的结构性改革。
The UK government has adopted a pro-AI stance to help transform public service delivery in the face of severe financial pressures, but the path to translate this vision into responsible AI practice remains ill-defined. While UK policy is often set at the national level, local authorities are responsible for most public service delivery, and the rapid advance of AI-first narratives in the public sector is exposing fault lines in knowledge and practice at this national-local interface. This paper examines how responsible AI is interpreted and implemented at the interface between the UK's central government and local authorities, taking the high-stakes area of Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) as a case study. We present a thematic analysis of 17 semi-structured interviews with policymakers, practitioners, and third-sector professionals to identify barriers and enabling conditions for responsible AI where national policy meets local practice. We identify five interconnected challenges facing local authorities: shadow usage of AI and data privacy risks, market-government asymmetry in AI provision, insufficient workforce readiness, a lack of standardised definitions and measurements, and gaps in human accountability. For each, participants proposed actionable steps, from strengthening data protection frameworks and rebalancing the market-government relationship to enhancing workforce capacity. Our examination of SEND brings these challenges into sharper focus, showing how high-stakes decisions affecting vulnerable children and families intensify tensions around accountability, fairness, and human oversight, exposing the limits of a principle-based regulatory approach. We argue that responsible public sector AI requires both national policy adjustments and structural reforms to institutional capacity, values, and governance mechanisms at the local level.