scholarly journals A Critical Take on the Policy Recommendations of the EU High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael VEALE

The European Commission recently published the policy recommendations of its “High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence”: a heavily anticipated document, particularly in the context of the stated ambition of the new Commission President to regulate in that area. This article argues that these recommendations have significant deficits in a range of areas. It analyses a selection of the Group’s proposals in context of the governance of artificial intelligence more broadly, focusing on issues of framing, representation and expertise, and on the lack of acknowledgement of key issues of power and infrastructure underpinning modern information economies and practices of optimisation.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Veale

Cite as Michael Veale, ‘A Critical Take on the Policy Recommendations of the EU High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence’ (2020) __ European Journal of Risk Regulation __. doi:10/ggjdjsThe European Commission recently published the policy recommendations of its ‘High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence’: a heavily anticipated document, particularly in the context of the stated ambition of the new Commission President to regulate in that area. This essay argues that these recommendations have significant deficits in a range of areas. It analyses a selection of the Group’s proposals in context of the governance of artificial intelligence more broadly, focussing on issues of framing, representation and expertise, and on the lack of acknowledgement of key issues of power and infrastructure underpinning modern information economies and practices of optimisation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 683-692
Author(s):  
Giovanni SILENO

This short paper aims to unpack some of the assumptions underlying the “Policy and Investment Recommendation for Trustworthy AI” provided by the High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence (AI) appointed by the European Commission. It elaborates in particular on three aspects: on the technical-legal dimensions of trustworthy AI; on what we mean by AI; and on the impact of AI. The consequent analysis results in the identification, amongst others, of three recurrent simplifications, respectively concerning the definition of AI (sub-symbolic systems instead of “intelligent” informational processing systems), the interface between AI and institutions (neatly separated instead of continuity) and a plausible technological evolution (expecting a plateau instead of a potentially near-disruptive innovation).


First Monday ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gry Hasselbalch

This article makes a case for a data interest analysis of artificial intelligence (AI) that explores how different interests in data are empowered or disempowered by design. The article uses the EU High-Level Expert Group on AI’s Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI as an applied ethics approach to data interests with a human-centric ethical governance framework and accordingly suggests ethical questions that will help resolve conflicts between data interests in AI design


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Stefan LARSSON

Abstract This article uses a socio-legal perspective to analyze the use of ethics guidelines as a governance tool in the development and use of artificial intelligence (AI). This has become a central policy area in several large jurisdictions, including China and Japan, as well as the EU, focused on here. Particular emphasis in this article is placed on the Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI published by the EU Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence in April 2019, as well as the White Paper on AI, published by the EU Commission in February 2020. The guidelines are reflected against partially overlapping and already-existing legislation as well as the ephemeral concept construct surrounding AI as such. The article concludes by pointing to (1) the challenges of a temporal discrepancy between technological and legal change, (2) the need for moving from principle to process in the governance of AI, and (3) the multidisciplinary needs in the study of contemporary applications of data-dependent AI.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 26-41
Author(s):  
Guillermo Lazcoz Moratinos

On 20 October 2020, the European Parliament adopted a resolution (2020/2012(INL)) with recommendations to the Commission regarding artificial intelligence, robotics and related technologies, which included a legislative proposal for a Regulation on the ethical principles for the development, deployment and use of these technologies. The content of this proposal undoubtedly follows from the regulatory vision that the European Commission has maintained in documents such as the White Paper on Artificial Intelligence (COM(2020) 65 final) or the Ethical guidelines for trustworthy AI drawn up by the High-Level Expert Group on AI. Given this new legislative horizon, it is more necessary than ever to address a constructive criticism on the proposal, highlighting the possibility of reformulating its markedly soft-law character despite its location in a regulatory source of general application and directly applicable, such as regulations, or the adopted approach for certain key principles such as human supervision or discrimination.


Author(s):  
Andrea Renda

This chapter assesses Europe’s efforts in developing a full-fledged strategy on the human and ethical implications of artificial intelligence (AI). The strong focus on ethics in the European Union’s AI strategy should be seen in the context of an overall strategy that aims at protecting citizens and civil society from abuses of digital technology but also as part of a competitiveness-oriented strategy aimed at raising the standards for access to Europe’s wealthy Single Market. In this context, one of the most peculiar steps in the European Union’s strategy was the creation of an independent High-Level Expert Group on AI (AI HLEG), accompanied by the launch of an AI Alliance, which quickly attracted several hundred participants. The AI HLEG, a multistakeholder group including fifty-two experts, was tasked with the definition of Ethics Guidelines as well as with the formulation of “Policy and Investment Recommendations.” With the advice of the AI HLEG, the European Commission put forward ethical guidelines for Trustworthy AI—which are now paving the way for a comprehensive, risk-based policy framework.


2021 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Oleksandr Vyshnevskyi ◽  
Ihor Stashkevych ◽  
Olena Shubna ◽  
Svetlana Barkova

The article discusses the dynamics of economic development based on the level of digitalization of the countries. Economic development is evaluated through the dynamics of GDP changes. Digitalization level is evaluated through the Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI), which is calculated on a regular basis by the European Commission. Object of study – 28 EU‑member countries. The hypothesis of the investigation: a high level of digitalization leads to an acceleration of economic growth on national level. This hypothesis did not find any statistically significant confirmation. Thus, we can conclude that the level of the economy digitalization at the present stage of development of technologies and institutions in the EU countries does not have a decisive effect on the rate of economic growth.


Subject The possible economic impact of the EU investment plan (the 'Juncker Plan'). Significance The EU investment plan launched by European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker just over a year ago has made a slow start. This will encourage doubts that have existed since the scheme's inception about its operation and likely impact. Impacts Even by 2020, the EU economy will still probably require every effort to boost growth and make up for lost investment. Given continuing strong demand for high-grade bonds and equity investments, it should be possible to achieve the fundraising target. The plan could become a vehicle for Chinese investment into the EU: China is talking of 5-10 billion euros in future investments. The geographical distribution of funded projects could be politically sensitive within the EU. The plan could come under scrutiny during the UK EU referendum campaign; UK projects may come too late to have an impact before the vote.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document