The Rome Call and The Dynamics of Institutionalizing Ethics in Artificial Intelligence Governance

Saiman Pakpahan; Bambang Putra Ermansyah

doi:10.62870/jog.v10i2.32580

The Rome Call and The Dynamics of Institutionalizing Ethics in Artificial Intelligence Governance

Saiman Pakpahan, Bambang Putra Ermansyah

Abstract

This article examines the institutionalization of ethical norms in the governance of artificial intelligence (AI), focusing on the Rome Call for AI Ethics as a global initiative. The study addresses the ethical challenges posed by AI, including algorithmic bias, privacy violations, and social inequality. Using constructivism and the "norm life cycle" framework, it analyzes the emergence, diffusion, and internalization of ethical principles such as transparency, inclusion, and accountability. Findings highlight the critical roles of international organizations, private corporations, and civil society in advocating for these norms. However, challenges such as capacity disparities between nations and resistance from key actors persist. The study underscores the importance of cross-sectoral collaboration and localized approaches to ensure equitable adoption of AI ethics. By offering insights into global norm institutionalization, this research contributes to the discourse on creating responsible and sustainable AI governance frameworks that prioritize humanity's collective welfare.

Keywords

Artificial Intelligent; Institutionalization; Norm Life Cycle; Rome Call.

Full Text:

PDF 399-413

References

Binns, R. (2018). Fairness in machine learning: Lessons from political philosophy. Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 149–159. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1712.03586

Binns, R. (2018). Algorithmic accountability and public reason. Philosophy & Technology, 31, 543–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0263-5

Bryson, J. J., & Theodorou, A. (2019). How society can maintain human-centric artificial intelligence. In Toivonen, M., Saari, E. (eds) Human-Centered Digitalization and Services. Translational Systems Sciences, vol 19. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7725-9_16

Cath, C., Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2018). Artificial intelligence and the 'good society': The US, EU, and UK approach. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24, 505–528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9901-7

Choi, H., & Kim, S. (2022). Variability in AI ethics adoption: A comparative study. Technology in Society, 69, 101–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101892

Coeckelbergh, M. (2020). AI ethics. The MIT Press.

AGID. (2024). Italian Strategy for Artificial Intelligence 2024-2026. Accessed from https://www.agid.gov.it/sites/agid/files/2024-07/Italian_strategy_for_artificial_intelligence_2024-2026.pdf

Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin's Press.

European Parliament. (2024). Artificial Intelligence Act. Accessed from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2024-0138_EN.pdf

Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), 887–917. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550789

Floridi, L. (2018). Soft ethics and the governance of the digital. Philosophy & Technology, 31(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0303-9

Floridi, L. (2019). Establishing the rules for building trustworthy AI. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1, 261–262. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0055-y

Green, A., & Carter, J. (2022). Corporate responsibility in AI: Ethical frameworks and practices. Journal of Business Ethics, 175(3), 345–367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04890-z

Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1, 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2

LaForge, G., Muggah, R., Seiler, G. (2024). Bridging the AI Governance Divide. T20 Policy Brief. Accessed from https://www.t20brasil.org/media/documentos/arquivos/TF05_ST_05_Bridging_the_AI_gov66cdcbf06f991.pdf

Li, X., & Zhao, Y. (2022). Resistance to global AI norms: Challenges in authoritarian regimes. AI & Society, 37(2), 150–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01267-3

Meijer, A., & Bijl, P. (2022). The EU Artificial Intelligence Act: Opportunities and challenges for ethical AI. European Policy Studies, 14(1), 23–45. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41301-021-00352-9

Mittelstadt, B. D. (2019). Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1, 501–507. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0114-4

Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679679

Nemitz, P. (2018). Constitutional democracy and technology in the age of artificial intelligence. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A. 376 : 20180089. http://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0089

OECD (2019), Artificial Intelligence in Society, Accessed from https://doi.org/10.1787/eedfee77-en.

Patel, R., & Kumar, N. (2021). Bridging the AI ethics gap: Capacity building in developing nations. Development and Change, 52(6), 1208–1231. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12674

RenAIssance Foundation. (2022). Rome Call for AI Ethics. Accessed from https://www.romecall.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/RomeCall_Paper_web.pdf

RenAIssance Foundation. (2024). Mission Report : The Activities of the Renaissance Foundation October 2022 – October 2023. Accessed from https://www.romecall.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/RomeCall_report-web.pdf

Roff, H., & Danks, D. (2018). “Trust but verify”: The difficulty of trusting autonomous systems. Journal of Military Ethics, 17(1), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15027570.2018.1481907

Standard Ethics. (2023). Unmasking Sustainibility in AI : An Overview of Global Company Practices. Accessed from https://www.standardethics.eu/edocman/research-methodology/Research_Unmasking%20AI_21.11.2023_final.pdf

Samudio, R.E.R. (2023). AI Decision-making in Smart Cities, Japan’s Society 5.0 dalam Challenges of Law and Technology - Herausforderungen des Rechts und der Technologie - Retos del Derecho y de la Tecnología. Universitätsverlag Göttingen.

Tanaka, K., & Suzuki, T. (2021). Society 5.0 and the ethical use of AI: Lessons from Japan. AI Policy Research, 9(4), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/2158379X.2021.1984126

Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics First Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Whittaker, M., Crawford, K., Dobbe, R., Fried, G., Kaziunas, E., Mathur, V., ... & Schwartz, O. (2018). AI Now Report 2018. AI Now Institute. Dapat diakses di https://ainowinstitute.org/AI_Now_2018_Report.pdf

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.62870/jog.v10i2.32580