09273387_covr
Rss

Bestuurskunde

Over dit tijdschrift  

Meld u zich hier aan voor de attendering op dit tijdschrift zodat u direct een mail ontvangt als er een nieuw digitaal nummer is verschenen en u de artikelen online kunt lezen.

Aflevering 4, 2020 Alle samenvattingen uitklappen
Thema-artikel

Access_open Transparantie van algoritmen: naar een empirische onderzoeksagenda

Auteurs Dr. Haiko van der Voort en Joanna Strycharz Msc
Auteursinformatie

Dr. Haiko van der Voort
Dr. H.G. van der Voort is universitair docent Organisatie & Governance aan de TU Delft, Faculteit Techniek, Bestuur en Management.

Joanna Strycharz Msc
J. Strycharz, Msc is universitair docent Persuasive Communication aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam, Faculteit Maatschappij- en Gedragswetenschappen.
Thema-artikel

Verantwoorde algoritmisering: zorgen waardengevoeligheid en transparantie voor meer vertrouwen in algoritmische besluitvorming?

Trefwoorden algorithms, algorithmization, value-sensitivity, transparency, trust
Auteurs Dr. Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen en Prof. dr. Albert Meijer
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Algorithms are starting to play an increasingly prominent role in government organizations. The argument is that algorithms can make more objective and efficient decisions than humans. At the same time, recent scandals have highlighted that there are still many problems connected to algorithms in the public sector. There is an increasing emphasis on ethical requirements for algorithms and we aim to connect these requirements to insights from public administration on the use of technologies in the public sector. We stress the need for responsible algorithmization – responsible organizational practices around the use of algorithms – and argue that this is needed to maintain the trust of citizens. We present two key components of responsible algorithmization – value-sensitivity and transparency – and show how these components connect to algorithmization and can contribute to citizen trust. We end the article with an agenda for research into the relation between responsible algorithmization and trust.


Dr. Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen
Dr. S.G. Grimmelikhuijsen is universitair hoofddocent Publiek Management aan de Universiteit Utrecht, Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap.

Prof. dr. Albert Meijer
Prof. dr. A.J. Meijer is hoogleraar Publiek Management aan de Universiteit Utrecht, Departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap.
Titel

Transparantie en Explainable Artificial Intelligence: beperkingen en strategieën

Trefwoorden transparency, Explainable artificial intelligence, Algorithms
Auteurs Prof. mr. dr. Hans de Bruijn, Prof. dr. ir. Marijn Janssen en Dr. Martijn Warnier
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    This article contains a critical reflection on eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): the idea that AI based decision-making using AI should be transparent to people faced with these decisions. We discuss the main objections to XAI. XAI focuses on a variety of explainees, with different expectations and values; XAI is not a neutral activity, but very value-sensitive; AI is dynamic and so XAI quickly becomes obsolete; many problems are ‘wicked’, which further complicates XAI. In addition, the context of XAI matters – a high level of politicization and a high perceived impact of AI-based decisions, will often result in much criticism of AI and will limit the opportunities of XAI. We also discuss a number of alternative or additional strategies – more attention to negotiated algorithms; to competing algorithms; or to value-sensitive algorithms, which may contribute to more trust in AI-based decision-making.


Prof. mr. dr. Hans de Bruijn
Prof. mr. dr. J.A. de Bruijn is hoogleraar Organisatie & Governance aan de TU Delft, Faculteit Techniek, Bestuur en Management.

Prof. dr. ir. Marijn Janssen
Prof. dr. ir. M.F.W.H.A. Janssen is hoogleraar ICT & Governance aan de TU Delft, Faculteit Techniek, Bestuur en Management.

Dr. Martijn Warnier
Dr. M.E. Warnier is universitair hoofddocent Systeemkunde aan de TU Delft, Faculteit Techniek, Bestuur en Management.
Thema-artikel

Een transparant debat over algoritmen

Trefwoorden AI, ethics, Big Data, human rights, governance
Auteurs Dr. Oskar J. Gstrein en Prof. dr. Andrej Zwitter
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    The police use all sorts of information to fulfil their tasks. Whereas collection and interpretation of information traditionally could only be done by humans, the emergence of ‘Big Data’ creates new opportunities and dilemmas. On the one hand, large amounts of data can be used to train algorithms. This allows them to ‘predict’ offenses such as bicycle theft, burglary, or even serious crimes such as murder and terrorist attacks. On the other hand, highly relevant questions on purpose, effectiveness, and legitimacy of the application of machine learning/‘artificial intelligence’ drown all too often in the ocean of Big Data. This is particularly problematic if such systems are used in the public sector in democracies, where the rule of law applies, and where accountability, as well as the possibility for judicial review, are guaranteed. In this article, we explore the role transparency could play in reconciling these opportunities and dilemmas. While some propose making the systems and data they use themselves transparent, we submit that an open and broad discussion on purpose and objectives should be held during the design process. This might be a more effective way of embedding ethical and legal principles in the technology, and of ensuring legitimacy during application.


Dr. Oskar J. Gstrein
Dr. O.J. Gstrein is universitair docent Governance & Innovation aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Campus Fryslân, Data Research Centre.

Prof. dr. Andrej Zwitter
Prof. dr. A.J. Zwitter is hoogleraar Governance & Innovation aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Campus Fryslân, Data Research Centre.
Thema-artikel

Inzicht in transparantie

Een essay over trade-offs achter algoritmische besluitvorming

Trefwoorden transparency, value conflict, algorithms, trade-offs, public values, ethics
Auteurs Joanna Strycharz Msc, Dr. ir. Bauke Steenhuisen en Dr. Haiko van der Voort
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Algorithms applied in public administration are often criticized for lack of transparency. Lawmakers and citizens alike expect that automated decisions based on algorithmic recommendations to be explainable. The focus of this article is the organizational context behind the idea of transparent algorithms. Transparency is portrayed as one of numerous values that are at play when algorithms are applied in public administration. The article shows that applying algorithms may lead to conflicts between these values. Such conflicts often result in trade-off decisions. Looking from the organizational perspective, we describe how such trade-offs can be made both explicitly and implicitly. The article thus shows the complexity of algorithmic trade-offs. As a result of this complexity, we not only call for more transparency about algorithms, but also more transparency about trade-offs that take place in public administration. Finally, we present a research agenda focused on studying the organization of trade-offs.


Joanna Strycharz Msc
J. Strycharz, Msc is universitair docent Persuasive Communication aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam, Faculteit Maatschappij- en Gedragswetenschappen.

Dr. ir. Bauke Steenhuisen
Dr. ir. B.S. Steenhuisen is universitair docent Organisatie & Governance aan de TU Delft, Faculteit Techniek, Bestuur en Management.

Dr. Haiko van der Voort
Dr. H.G. van der Voort is universitair docent Organisatie & Governance aan de TU Delft, Faculteit Techniek, Bestuur en Management.
Vrij artikel

Duwtjes of druk?

De percepties van zorgprofessionals aangaande ‘nudging’ in ziekenhuizen

Trefwoorden nudging, ethics, autonomy, healthcare, professionals
Auteurs Nienke Maria Huis in ’t Veld MSc, Rosanna Nagtegaal MSc en Prof. dr. Mirko Noordegraaf
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    ‘Nudging’ has been introduced as a policy and management tool as a way to influence behaviour without limiting choice. Nudging is mainly used to influence citizens’ behaviour but can also be used to influence the behavior of healthcare professionals. Examples include posters used to improve hand-hygiene compliance, or ‘default’ options in systems to reduce excessive prescriptions of specific medication. However, using nudges raises major worries and ethical issues, also in relation to the independence of healthcare professionals. While the scientific discussion about the desirability of nudges is extensive, the voices of healthcare professionals, who are the subjects of nudges, remain unheard. In this qualitative research we explore the perceptions of nudging held by various healthcare professionals. The interviews reveal that healthcare professionals are generally unfamiliar with the concept of nudging, but they do recognize nudges in their own field of practice. Furthermore, while they are predominantly positive about nudging, they also express concerns about the pressure on their autonomy. These concerns are related to changing professionalism and regulatory pressures in healthcare.


Nienke Maria Huis in ’t Veld MSc
N.M. Huis in ’t Veld, MSc is alumna aan de Universiteit Utrecht, departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap.

Rosanna Nagtegaal MSc
R. Nagtegaal, MSc is promovenda aan de Universiteit Utrecht, departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap.

Prof. dr. Mirko Noordegraaf
Prof. dr. M. Noordegraaf is hoogleraar Publiek Management aan de Universiteit Utrecht, departement Bestuurs- en Organisatiewetenschap.
Kroniek

Kantelpunt: op naar een nieuwe aanpak van problemen in de uitvoering van beleid

Trefwoorden executive agencies, policy implementation, blame, ministries, parliament
Auteurs Prof. dr. Sandra van Thiel
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Over the past three years a number of reports and initiatives have emerged which seem to point to a different approach to solve problems in and with executive agencies. In the past, most problems were blamed on the agencies, by the media and politicians alike. However, these new reports and initiatives seem to allow room for a different, more realistic explanation. This article lists five of these reports and initiatives. First a letter on the results of the new coalition formation in 2017, concluding that executive agencies are under too much pressure and blame, and drawing more attention to the role of the legislature and the executive powers. Second, a report has been written by the Senior Civil Service – commissioned by a group of ministries – that offers a powerful analysis of the various causes of problems in and with executive agencies, leading to a number of prescriptions for all parties involved. Third, a ministerial committee has been established to discuss these problems and possible solutions on a regular basis. Fourth, the House of Representatives has launched a parliamentary inquiry into this topic. And finally, an unsolicited advisory report by the Council of State has been published on the dilemmas around ministerial accountability, stating that the blame for problems in and with executive agencies is often attributed in a false way. Together these five reports and initiatives call for a broader approach in handling such problems and hence more effective solutions.


Prof. dr. Sandra van Thiel
Prof. dr. S. van Thiel is hoogleraar Publiek Management aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam en de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen. Zij doet al 25 jaar onderzoek naar uitvoeringsorganisaties en schreef daarover ‘Leren loslaten’ met 10 lessen voor de sturingsrelaties tussen ministeries en uitvoeringsorganisaties (uitgegeven bij Boom bestuurskunde).
Dissertatie

Breaking the bank

The regulatory implications of knowledge production through indicators

Auteurs Shirley Kempeneer

Shirley Kempeneer
Dissertatie

The governance of self-organization

Analyzing the governance relationship between municipalities and community-based collectives

Auteurs José Nederhand

José Nederhand
Dissertatie

Inside the behavioural state

Auteurs Joram Feitsma

Joram Feitsma