Do Responsible AI Artifacts Advance Stakeholder Goals? Four Key Barriers Perceived by Legal and Civil Stakeholders
<|reference_start|>Do Responsible AI Artifacts Advance Stakeholder Goals? Four Key Barriers Perceived by Legal and Civil Stakeholders: The responsible AI (RAI) community has introduced numerous processes and artifacts (e.g., Model Cards, Transparency Notes, Data Cards) to facilitate transparency and support the governance of AI systems. While originally designed to scaffold and document AI development processes in technology companies, these artifacts are becoming central components of regulatory compliance under recent regulations such as the EU AI Act. Much prior work has explored the design of new RAI artifacts or their use by practitioners within technology companies. However, as RAI artifacts begin to play key roles in enabling external oversight, it becomes critical to understand how stakeholders--particularly those situated outside of technology companies who govern and audit industry AI deployments--perceive the efficacy of RAI artifacts. In this study, we conduct semi-structured interviews and design activities with 19 government, legal, and civil society stakeholders who inform policy and advocacy around responsible AI efforts. While participants believe that RAI artifacts are a valuable contribution to the broader AI governance ecosystem, many are concerned about their potential unintended, longer-term impacts on actors outside of technology companies (e.g., downstream end-users, policymakers, civil society stakeholders). We organize these beliefs into four barriers that help explain how RAI artifacts may (inadvertently) reconfigure power relations across civil society, government, and industry, impeding civil society and legal stakeholders' ability to protect downstream end-users from potential AI harms. Participants envision how structural changes, along with changes in how RAI artifacts are designed, used, and governed, could help redirect the role of artifacts to support more collaborative and proactive external oversight of AI systems. We discuss research and policy implications for RAI artifacts.<|reference_end|>
@article{kawakami2024do,
    title={Do Responsible AI Artifacts Advance Stakeholder Goals? Four Key Barriers
  Perceived by Legal and Civil Stakeholders},
    author={Anna Kawakami, Daricia Wilkinson, Alexandra Chouldechova},
    journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.12047},
    year={2024},
    archivePrefix={arXiv},
    eprint={2408.12047},
    primaryClass={cs.CY cs.HC}
}