算法治理的伦理风险及其纾解

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (1)

Download: PDF (525 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Algorithm governance is a social governance process in which social governance subjects comprehensively use algorithm technology to accurately meet the needs of governance objects, and accurately identify, judge, and make decisions on issues in social governance. As a new type of social governance, algorithmic governance has powerful functions, that is, algorithmic governance can accurately identify governance issues, accurately predict social conflicts and accurately meet the diversified needs of governance objects. Therefore, algorithmic governance has greatly improved the level of modernization of social governance system and governance capacity. However, due to the immaturity of algorithm technology and its misuse in the process of social governance, many social ethics problems have arisen, which are mainly reflected in four aspects: the opacity of algorithm governance process leads to social trust crisis, the uncertainty of algorithm governance behavior leads to social justice problems, the imprecision of algorithm governance scheme leads to social equity problems, and the inappropriate rule of algorithm governance leads to social value problems. In practice, we should start from the reasons behind the social ethical problems arising from algorithm governance, tame the algorithm technology in a targeted way, welcome the arrival of the algorithm era from multiple levels such as ideology, culture, and system, and promote algorithm governance towards the goal of a better human life.

Key words： algorithm governance ethical risk modernization of social governance intelligent social governance risk mitigation

Received: 13 November 2022

PACS:

B82-057

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	WANG Hai-jian

Cite this article:

WANG Hai-jian. Ethical Risk of Algorithmic Governance and Its Mitigation[J]. , 2023, 40(1): 152-160.

URL:

https://xb.szu.edu.cn/EN/ OR https://xb.szu.edu.cn/EN/Y2023/V40/I1/152

[1] Scott Lash.Power after Hegemony:Cultural Studies in Mutation?[J].Theory,Culture & Society,2007,24(3):55-78.
[2] 马克思恩格斯选集·第1卷[M].北京:人民出版社,2012.
[3] 胡键. 算法治理及其伦理[J].行政论坛,2021,28(4):41-49.
[4] 马长山. 算法治理的正义尺度[J].人民论坛·学术前沿,2022,(10):68-76.
[5] Nicolas Berberich, Diepold Klaus.The Virtuous Machine-Old Ethics for New Technology?[J].Computer Science, 2018,2(6):1-25.
[6] 刘升. 从“关系权”到“信息权”:大数据促进精准扶贫的影响机制研究——以精准识别为例[J].江海学刊,2019,(6):118-124.
[7] 习近平. 更好把握和运用党的百年奋斗历史经验[J].共产党员,2022,(15):4-13.
[8] 黄兴瑞. 新时代“枫桥经验”视野下社会稳定风险防控机制研究[J].中国人民公安大学学报(社会科学版),2019,35(2):128-137.
[9] 薛晓源,刘兴华.数字全球化、数字风险与全球数字治理[J].东北亚论坛,2022,31(3):3-18+127.
[10] “红棉指数”首次发布贡献市域社会治理“广州智慧”[EB/OL].广州日报, https://www.gzdaily.cn/amucsite/web/index.html#/detail/1779280,2022-02-25.
[11] 陈水生.城市治理数字化转型:动因、内涵与路径[J].理论与改革,2022,(1):33-46+156.
[12] 颜佳华,王张华.数字治理、数据治理、智能治理与智慧治理概念及其关系辨析[J].湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2019,43(5):25-30+88.
[13] Anna Jobin, Marcello Lenca, Vayena Effy.The Global Landscape of AI Ethics Guidelines[J].Nature Machine In-telligence,2019,1(9):389-399.
[14] 习近平.以史为鉴、开创未来,埋头苦干、勇毅前行[N].人民日报,2022-01-02(001).
[15] (英)杰弗雷·库伯特.作为恰当性的正义[M].马新晶译.南昌:江西人民出版社,2020.46.
[16] Min Kyung Lee.Understanding Perception of Algorithmic Decisions:Fairness,Trust and Emotion in Response to Al-gorithmic Management[J].Big Data & Society,2018,5(1):1-16.
[17] (美)凯斯·桑坦斯.信息乌托邦:众人如何生产知识[M].毕竞悦译.北京:法律出版社,2008.7-8.
[18] 马克思恩格斯文集·第4卷[M]马克思恩格斯文集·第4卷[M].北京:人民出版社,2009. 307.
[19] (德)尤尔根·哈贝马斯.重建历史唯物主义[M].郭官义译.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2000.159.
[20] 马克思恩格斯选集·第2卷[M]马克思恩格斯选集·第2卷[M].北京:人民出版社,2012. 239.
[21] 成素梅,张帆.人工智能的哲学问题[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2020.178.
[22] (美)赫伯特·马尔库塞.单向度的人:发达工业社会意识形态研究[M].张峰,吕世平译.重庆:重庆出版社,1988.7.
[23] 习近平.把中国文明历史研究引向深入推动增强历史自觉坚定文化自信[N].人民日报,2022-05-29(001).
[24] (美)阿尔温·托夫勒.第三次浪潮[M].朱志焱等译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1984.125.
[25] (美)丹尼尔·贝尔.资本主义文化矛盾[M].赵一凡等译.北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店,1989.198.