Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Typology of AI Applications in Politics

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Artificial Intelligence and Its Contexts

Abstract

Politics relates to the most fundamental questions of humans’ existence, and modern western societies tend to pride themselves on basing politics on democratic principles, including principles of inclusivity, participation, and autonomy and self-rule. Meanwhile, the continuously improving capabilities of various artificial intelligence (AI) based systems have led to the use of AI in an increasing amount of politically significant settings. AI is now also used in official government decision-making processes, and the political significance of using AI in the political system is the topic of this chapter. The purpose is to examine the potential for AI in official political settings, distinguishing between five types of AI used to support, assist, alleviate, augment or supplant decision makers. The chapter explores the practical and theoretical potential for AI applications in politics, and the main contribution of the chapter is the development of a typology that can guide the evaluation of the impacts of such applications. AI in politics has the potential to drastically change how politics is performed, and as politics entails answering some of society’s most fundamental questions the article concludes that the issues here discussed should be subject to public processes, both in politics and society at large.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Based on the Katzenbach and Ulbricht (2019).

  2. 2.

    Based on Sadowski and Selinger (2014).

References

  • Arrow, K., Bowles, S., & Durlauf, S. N. (2018). Meritocracy and economic inequality: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barley, S. R. (2020). Work and technological change. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batty, M. (2018). Digital twins. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 45(5). https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808318796416.

  • Boik, J. C. (2014). Economic direct democracy: A framework to end poverty and maximize well-being. Book.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boström, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruynseels, K., Santoni de Sio, F., & van den Hoven, J. (2018). Digital twins in health care: Ethical implications of an emerging engineering paradigm. Frontiers in Genetics, 9, 31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buolamwini, J., & Gebru, T. (2018). Gender shades: Intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification. Paper presented at the Conference on fairness, accountability and transparency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. (2000). Gender, girls, and computer technology: What’s the status now? The Clearing House, 73(4), 225–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, M., Hoane, A. J., Jr., & Hsu, F.-H. (2002). Deep blue. Artificial Intelligence, 134(1–2), 57–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., Chiang, R. H., & Storey, V. C. (2012). Business intelligence and analytics: From big data to big impact. MIS Quarterly, 1165–1188.https://doi.org/10.2307/41703503.

  • Chouard, T. (2016). The Go files: AI computer wraps up 4–1 victory against human champion. Nature News.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collingridge, D. (1980). The social control of technology. Frances Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Culpepper, P. D., & Thelen, K. (2020). Are we all amazon primed? Consumers and the politics of platform power. Comparative Political Studies, 53(2), 288–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A. (1985). Controlling nuclear weapons: Democracy versus guardianship. Syracuse University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danaher, J., Hogan, M. J., Noone, C., Kennedy, R., Behan, A., De Paor, A., Morison, J., et al. (2017). Algorithmic governance: Developing a research agenda through the power of collective intelligence. Big Data & Society, 4(2), 2053951717726554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Datta, S. (2017). Emergence of digital twins. Journal of Innovation Management, 5, 14–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Sousa, W. G., de Melo, E. R. P., Bermejo, P. H. D. S., Farias, R. A. S., & Gomes, A. O. (2019). How and where is artificial intelligence in the public sector going? A literature review and research agenda. Government Information Quarterly, 36(4), 101392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, J. (2014). Big data, data mining, and machine learning: Value creation for business leaders and practitioners. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dignum, V. (2019). Responsible artificial intelligence: How to develop and use AI in a responsible way. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (1997). The market and the forum: three varieties of political theory. In Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics (Vol. 3, p. 18).

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, J. M., & Axtell, R. (1996). Growing artificial societies: social science from the bottom up. Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erümit, A. K., & Çetin, İ. (2020). Design framework of adaptive intelligent tutoring systems. Education and Information Technologies, 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estlund, D. (2003). Why not epistocracy? In Desire, identity and existence: Essays in honor of TM Penner (pp. 53–69).

    Google Scholar 

  • Funk, P., & Gathmann, C. (2015). Gender gaps in policy making: Evidence from direct democracy in Switzerland. Economic Policy, 30(81), 141–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, T. (2010). The politics of ‘platforms.’ New Media & Society, 12(3), 347–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González, R. J. (2017). Hacking the citizenry? Personality profiling, ‘big data’ and the election of Donald Trump. Anthropology Today, 33(3), 9–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Google. (2020). AlphaZero: Shedding new light on the grand games of chess, shogi and Go. Retrieved from https://deepmind.com/blog/article/alphazero-shedding-new-light-grand-games-chess-shogi-and-go.

  • Gray, M., & Caul, M. (2000). Declining voter turnout in advanced industrial democracies, 1950 to 1997: The effects of declining group mobilization. Comparative Political Studies, 33(9), 1091–1122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. F. (2009). Why deliberative democracy? Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heaven, D. (2019). Two minds are better than one. New Scientist, 243(3244), 38–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe, M. (2014). Citizenship and participation. In L. De Luc, R. Niemi, & P. Norris (Eds.), Comparing democracies. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humble, N., & Mozelius, P. (2019). Teacher-supported AI or AI-supported teachers? Paper presented at the European Conference on the Impact of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics 2019 (ECIAIR 2019), Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • ITU. (2020). AI4Good Global Summit. Retrieved from https://aiforgood.itu.int

  • Janssen, M., & Kuk, G. (2016). The challenges and limits of big data algorithms in technocratic governance. Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katzenbach, C., & Ulbricht, L. (2019). Algorithmic governance. Internet Policy Review, 8(4), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurzweil, R. (2015). Superintelligence and Singularity. In S. Schneider (Ed.), Science fiction and philosophy: From time travel to superintelligence (pp. 146–170). Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, M. K., Kusbit, D., Kahng, A., Kim, J. T., Yuan, X., Chan, A., …, Psomas, A. (2019). WeBuildAI: Participatory framework for algorithmic governance. In Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction (Vol. 3(CSCW), pp. 1–35).

    Google Scholar 

  • Local Government Association. (2020). Using predictive analytics in local public services. Research. Retrieved from https://www.local.gov.uk/using-predictive-analytics-local-public-services

  • Ma, M. (2020). The Law’s new language? Harvard International Law Journal Frontiers, 61. Retrieved from https://harvardilj.org/2020/04/the-laws-new-language/

  • Marcus, G., & Davis, E. (2019). Rebooting AI: building artificial intelligence we can trust. Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meynaud, J. (1969). Technocracy. Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, D. C. (2003). Public choice III. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, V. C. (2020). Ethics of artificial intelligence and robotics. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Summer 2020 Ed.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Næss, A. (1989). Ecology, community and lifestyle: Outline of an ecosophy. Cambridge university press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nwana, H. S. (1990). Intelligent tutoring systems: An overview. Artificial Intelligence Review, 4(4), 251–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (2014). Politics of bureaucracy. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Radaelli, C. M. (2017). Technocracy in the European Union. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahwan, I. (2018). Society-in-the-loop: Programming the algorithmic social contract. Ethics and Information Technology, 20(1), 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringnes, I. F. (2019, March 18th). Kunstig intelligens kan hjelpe NAV med å gi bedre tjenester. Mennesker og muligheter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadowski, J., & Selinger, E. (2014). Creating a taxonomic tool for technocracy and applying it to Silicon Valley. Technology in Society, 38, 161–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sætra, H. S. (2018). Science as a vocation in the era of big data: The philosophy of science behind big data and humanity’s continued part in science. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 52(4), 508–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sætra, H. S. (2019a). Freedom under the gaze of Big Brother: Preparing the grounds for a liberal defence of privacy in the era of Big Data. Technology in Society, 58, 101160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sætra, H. S. (2019b). When nudge comes to shove: Liberty and nudging in the era of big data. Technology in Society, 59, 101130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sætra, H. S. (2020). Privacy as an aggregate public good. Technology in Society, 63, 101422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sætra, H. S. (2020b). A shallow defence of a technocracy of artificial intelligence: Examining the political harms of algorithmic governance in the domain of government. Technology in Society, 101283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sætra, H. S. (2021). AI in context and the sustainable development goals: Factoring in the unsustainability of the sociotechnical system. Sustainability, 13(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041738.

  • Sagers, C. (2019). Antitrust and tech monopoly: A general introduction to competition problems in big data platforms: Testimony before the committee on the Judiciary of the Ohio Senate. Available at SSRN 3471823.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sattarov, F. (2019). Power and technology: A philosophical and ethical analysis. Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (2013). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Solove, D. J. (2000). Privacy and power: Computer databases and metaphors for information privacy. Stanford Law Review, 53, 1393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C. R. (2018). # Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tocqueville, A. D. (2004). Democracy in America. The Library of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Truby, J., & Brown, R. (2020). Human digital thought clones: The Holy Grail of artificial intelligence for big data. Information & Communications Technology Law, 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veale, M., & Brass, I. (2019). Administration by algorithm? Public management meets public sector machine learning. In K. Yeung & M. Lodge (Eds.), Algorithmic regulation (pp. 121–149). Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Véliz, C. (2020). Privacy is power. Bantam Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yeung, K. (2017). ‘Hypernudge’: Big Data as a mode of regulation by design. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 118–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, M. D. (1994). The rise of the meritocracy. Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, S., Trott, A., Srinivasa, S., Naik, N., Gruesbeck, M., Parkes, D. C., & Socher, R. (2020). The ai economist: Improving equality and productivity with ai-driven tax policies. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.13332.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Business, Languages, and Social Sciences, Østfold University College, N-1757, Halden, Norway

    Henrik Skaug Sætra

Authors
  1. Henrik Skaug Sætra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Henrik Skaug Sætra .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Warsaw, Poland

    Anna Visvizi

  2. The General Kościuszko Military University of Land Forces, Wrocław, Poland

    Marek Bodziany

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sætra, H.S. (2021). A Typology of AI Applications in Politics. In: Visvizi, A., Bodziany, M. (eds) Artificial Intelligence and Its Contexts. Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88972-2_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation