지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2019.11
- 수록면
- 116 - 127 (12page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The development of ethical or responsible AI poses significant regulatory and policy challenges, including those focused on how to balance the need for promoting technological innovation against ensuring that harms to individual and social rights and interests are minimised. Balancing these competing imperatives self-evidently depends upon the ethical or regulatory frameworks from which policy issues are identified and analysed. This article introduces, surveys and evaluates Australian policy responses to the ethical and legal challenges posed by Artificial Intelligence (AI), with a focus on emerging Australian AI and ethics frameworks.
The article begins with an introduction to some general features of the Australian approach to regulating new technologies, which we characterise as overwhelmingly ‘enabling and pragmatic’. These general features are then illustrated by examples taken from current Australian policy processes aimed at responding to the challenges posed by AI. First, the article explains the Australian initiatives taken in relation to the regulation of autonomous vehicles which, to date, is the most developed part of the Australian response to AI-based technologies. Secondly, the main elements of the Australian government’s ‘responsible AI’ framework are outlined, with an emphasis on the Data61 ‘AI and Ethics’ process, but including the Standards Australia process, which aims eventually to produce an AI Standards Roadmap. Thirdly, the article introduces the Australian Human Rights Commission’s (AHRC’s) project on human rights and technology, which has developed a particular focus on the human rights challenges posed by AI. Finally, mainly as a point of comparison with the consequentialist emphasis of the mainstream Australian regulatory tradition, the article explains The Ethics Centre’s ‘Ethical by Design’ approach, which adopts a non-instrumentalist framework, and points to the importance of taking ethical considerations into account in the design of AI applications.
In the conclusion to the article, a number of observations are drawn from the analysis of the Australian policy responses to developing responsible AI that are explained in the article, bearing in mind that the policy processes are not yet fully developed. First, it seems clear that in balancing the promotion of technological innovation and protection against individual and social harms, that, based upon the Australian tradition of pragmatically enabling new technologies, Australia will favour approaches that promote and facilitate the introduction of AI-based technologies. Secondly, while the article identifies clear tensions between approaches that are essentially pragmatic and consequentialist, such as the Data61 approach to developing a national AI ethics framework, and those that adopt a more human rights or human-centred approach, such as the AHRC approach to its human rights and technology project, it seems likely that Australia will favour the former approach, so that any regulatory intervention will be ‘light touch’ and minimalist, probably consisting largely of self-regulatory (or co-regulatory) codes of practice. Thirdly, the Australian pragmatic and technology-enabling approach is likely to prevail, even though it effectively overlooks some of the most significant policy and ethical challenges arising from AI technologies, especially those concerned with protecting human-centred values, such as human dignity and autonomy, in the face of highly instrumentalist technologies. Fourthly, the rise of AI technologies poses novel regulatory dilemmas, including how to best build ethical considerations into the design of technologies and how to devise regulatory strategies that are appropriately ‘adaptive’ or ‘anticipatory’. Although these issues are likely to be raised in public debates relating to the policy processes introduced in this article, we conclude that it is unlikely that Australia will take the lead in pioneering policies and regulatory responses in this area, which we argue need to be as innovative and inventive as the technologies themselves.
The article begins with an introduction to some general features of the Australian approach to regulating new technologies, which we characterise as overwhelmingly ‘enabling and pragmatic’. These general features are then illustrated by examples taken from current Australian policy processes aimed at responding to the challenges posed by AI. First, the article explains the Australian initiatives taken in relation to the regulation of autonomous vehicles which, to date, is the most developed part of the Australian response to AI-based technologies. Secondly, the main elements of the Australian government’s ‘responsible AI’ framework are outlined, with an emphasis on the Data61 ‘AI and Ethics’ process, but including the Standards Australia process, which aims eventually to produce an AI Standards Roadmap. Thirdly, the article introduces the Australian Human Rights Commission’s (AHRC’s) project on human rights and technology, which has developed a particular focus on the human rights challenges posed by AI. Finally, mainly as a point of comparison with the consequentialist emphasis of the mainstream Australian regulatory tradition, the article explains The Ethics Centre’s ‘Ethical by Design’ approach, which adopts a non-instrumentalist framework, and points to the importance of taking ethical considerations into account in the design of AI applications.
In the conclusion to the article, a number of observations are drawn from the analysis of the Australian policy responses to developing responsible AI that are explained in the article, bearing in mind that the policy processes are not yet fully developed. First, it seems clear that in balancing the promotion of technological innovation and protection against individual and social harms, that, based upon the Australian tradition of pragmatically enabling new technologies, Australia will favour approaches that promote and facilitate the introduction of AI-based technologies. Secondly, while the article identifies clear tensions between approaches that are essentially pragmatic and consequentialist, such as the Data61 approach to developing a national AI ethics framework, and those that adopt a more human rights or human-centred approach, such as the AHRC approach to its human rights and technology project, it seems likely that Australia will favour the former approach, so that any regulatory intervention will be ‘light touch’ and minimalist, probably consisting largely of self-regulatory (or co-regulatory) codes of practice. Thirdly, the Australian pragmatic and technology-enabling approach is likely to prevail, even though it effectively overlooks some of the most significant policy and ethical challenges arising from AI technologies, especially those concerned with protecting human-centred values, such as human dignity and autonomy, in the face of highly instrumentalist technologies. Fourthly, the rise of AI technologies poses novel regulatory dilemmas, including how to best build ethical considerations into the design of technologies and how to devise regulatory strategies that are appropriately ‘adaptive’ or ‘anticipatory’. Although these issues are likely to be raised in public debates relating to the policy processes introduced in this article, we conclude that it is unlikely that Australia will take the lead in pioneering policies and regulatory responses in this area, which we argue need to be as innovative and inventive as the technologies themselves.
목차
Abstract
Ⅰ. Introduction
Ⅱ. AI Regulation and Ethics: the Australian Approach
Ⅲ. Regulation of Autonomous Vehicles
Ⅳ. Australia’s Responsible AI Framework
Ⅴ. The AHRC Human Rights and Technology Project
Ⅵ. The Ethics Centre’s ‘Ethical Principles by Design’
Ⅶ. Conclusion
References
참고문헌 (21)
참고문헌 신청
Armstrong, Harry / 2017 / A working model for anticipatory regulation: A working paper / nesta
Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) / 2019 / Digital Platforms Inquiry
Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) / 2018 / Human Rights and Technology Issues Paper
Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) / 2019 / Artificial Intelligence: governance and leadership
Beard, Matt / The Ethics Centre, Ethical By Design: Principles for Good Technology
Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) / 2019 / Digital Platforms Inquiry
Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) / 2018 / Human Rights and Technology Issues Paper
Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) / 2019 / Artificial Intelligence: governance and leadership
Beard, Matt / The Ethics Centre, Ethical By Design: Principles for Good Technology
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
[국문번역문] 호주의 관점에서 바라본 인공지능, 윤리 및 규제 과제
경제규제와 법
2019 .11
-
AI 윤리 기준을 활용한 AI 윤리교육 방안 연구
초등도덕교육
2022 .01
-
규범적 AI윤리 가이드라인과 초등 AI윤리교육 적용 방안 모색
한국초등교육
2024 .06
-
AI와 윤리: 문헌의 종합적 분석과 정보시스템 분야의 향후 연구 방향
지식경영연구
2024 .09
-
인공지능 윤리의 주요 쟁점과 필수 고려사항
열린교육연구
2022 .11
-
탈인본주의적 AI 윤리란 무엇인가?: ‘윤리적 AI’를 중심으로
컴퓨터교육학회 논문지
2022 .11
-
AI 윤리 교육의 필요성에 대한 연구
한국초등교육
2020 .01
-
인공지능(AI)의 윤리적 지위: 인간과 비인간 사이에서 어울리기
사회와이론
2023 .11
-
Liberal Arts Education in the AI Era : Education with AI
교양학연구
2024 .10
-
AI 학습경험, AI 교육 관심도 및 전공학과에 따른 예비교사의 AI 교육 인식
정보교육학회논문지
2021 .01
-
AI 시대 역량 함양을 위한 실과 소프트웨어교육의 방향
실과교육연구
2020 .01
-
초중등 학생을 위한 인공지능 윤리 교육 프로그램 개발 및 적용
컴퓨터교육학회 논문지
2022 .09
-
과학기술정책에서 혁신정책도구가 인공지능 신뢰성에 미치는 영향에 관한 탐색 연구 - 인공지능 윤리의 조절효과를 중심으로 -
한국자치행정학보
2020 .01
-
US Developments in AI Ethics and Governance
경제규제와 법
2019 .11
-
디자인씽킹 프로세스 기반의 인공지능(AI) 교육 프로그램 적용 효과분석
컴퓨터교육학회 논문지
2020 .07
-
중국 AI행정의 운영현황과 법적 문제에 관한 고찰
중국법연구
2022 .11
-
학교 교육과정에서 융복합적 AI윤리교육의 과제- 교육대학원 AI융합교육전공과 ‘AI 윤리’수업 사례를 중심으로 -
윤리교육연구
2022 .01
-
한국 학생의 인공지능에 대한 태도 분석: 학교급을 중심으로
교원교육
2021 .01
-
인공지능 스피커의 활용 경험에 따른 초등학생의 인식 변화
경인교육대학교 교육연구원 교육논총
2022 .12
-
도덕과에서 AI 윤리교육의 필요성과 과제
The SNU Journal of Education Research
2022 .03
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
The Impact and Implications of AI on Legal Professionals
Jong-Ryeol Pa
,
k
,
Sang-Ouk Noe
한국컴퓨터정보학회논문지
2023
.04
인공지능(AI) 기술 발달에 따른 사이버 위협과 이에 대한 대응 방안
김명주
,
이수경
한국통신학회지(정보와통신)
2022
.11
가상 인간의 프라이버시 침해 예방을 위한 인공지능 윤리 및 개인정보보호법 동향 연구
이희진
,
이수빈
,
김지연
한국통신학회지(정보와통신)
2022
.11
A Conceptual Architecture for Ethic-Friendly AI
Yustus-Eko Oktian
,
Stanley B
,
ian
외 1명
한국컴퓨터정보학회논문지
2022
.04
A Review on the Role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Psychotherapy & its Feasibility in Real Life Situations
Satyab
,
ata Aich
,
Sabyasachi Chak
외 4명
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FUTURE INFORMATION & COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING
2019
.06
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2020-366-000352913