Who will hold providers of welfare technology accountable to the regulation’s safeguards?ġ3. Will the proposed regulation’s requirements on human oversight protect people from the failures of welfare automation?ġ2. Will the regulation’s transparency requirements help us know more about how governments use AI in social security administration?ġ1. Will the proposed regulation protect people who apply for or receive social security support from algorithmic discrimination?ġ0. The bulk of the regulation’s safeguards falls on “providers” of welfare technology rather than the agencies that simply use them. Does the regulation ban the use of facial recognition to screen people who apply for social security support?Ĩ. Does the regulation prevent government agencies from scoring or profiling people applying for benefits or job support?ħ. How is the regulation’s risk-based approach to regulating AI systems expected to work?Ħ. How else are governments using automation to allocate social security support?ĥ. Eligibility Assessment and Means TestingĤ. How are governments using automation to monitor and control access to benefits and social security programs?
Do EU member states have a duty to protect the right to social security?ģ. How does the regulation define “artificial intelligence”?Ģ. Part I: Algorithmic Decision-Making and the Right to Social Securityġ. It also examines how the proposed regulation fails to address these concerns, and what the European Parliament should do to fix these shortcomings. This Q&A highlights how algorithmic decision-making is transforming the administration of welfare benefits and other social protection measures in Europe, and the human rights concerns created by this transition to algorithmic governance. In particular, its narrow safeguards neglect how existing inequities and failures to adequately protect rights – such as the digital divide, social security cuts, and discrimination in the labor market – shape the design of automated systems, and become embedded by them. While the EU regulation broadly acknowledges these risks, it does not meaningfully protect people’s rights to social security and an adequate standard of living.
0 kommentar(er)
