Automated, administrative decision-making and good governance: Synergies, trade-offs, and limits

21Citations
Citations of this article
86Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Automated, administrative decision-making (AADM) is a key component in digital government reforms. It represents an aspiration for a better and more efficient administration but also presents challenges to values of public administration. We systematically review the emerging literature on use of AADM from the perspective of good governance. Recognizing the inherent tensions of values of public administration, the broad review identifies key synergies, trade-offs, and limits of AADM and good governance associated with nine values: Accountability, efficiency, equality, fairness, resilience, responsiveness, right-to-privacy, rule-of-law, and transparency. While synergies represent “low-hanging fruits”, trade-offs and limits are “hard cases” representing challenges to good governance. Taking the specific decision-making context into account, practitioners and scholars should attempt to nurture the “fruits” and lessen the tensions of the “hard-cases” thereby increasing the desirable societal outcomes of use of AADM.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Roehl, U. B. U., & Hansen, M. B. (2024). Automated, administrative decision-making and good governance: Synergies, trade-offs, and limits. Public Administration Review, 84(6), 1184–1199. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13799

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free