# Modelling the long-term fairness dynamics of data-driven targeted help on job seekers

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.08881 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.08881/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 14 of its 47 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Aug 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 14 of 14)

- [Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1610.02413/) (2016)
- [AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting, Understanding, and Mitigating Unwanted Algorithmic Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.01943/) (2018)
- [Differential Privacy Has Disparate Impact on Model Accuracy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.12101/) (2019)
- [Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.05239/) (2018)
- [Delayed Impact of Fair Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1803.04383/) (2018)
- [On the Apparent Conflict Between Individual and Group Fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.06883/) (2019)
- [Automated Experiments on Ad Privacy Settings: A Tale of Opacity, Choice, and Discrimination](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1408.6491/) (2014)
- [Why Fairness Cannot Be Automated: Bridging the Gap Between EU Non-Discrimination Law and AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.05906/) (2020)
- [Mathematical Notions vs. Human Perception of Fairness: A Descriptive Approach to Fairness for Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.04783/) (2019)
- [A Short-term Intervention for Long-term Fairness in the Labor Market](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1712.00064/) (2017)
- [From Fair Decision Making to Social Equality](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1812.02952/) (2018)
- [Downstream Effects of Affirmative Action](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1808.09004/) (2018)
- [Efficient candidate screening under multiple tests and implications for fairness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.11361/) (2019)
- [How Costly is Noise? Data and Disparities in Consumer Credit](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2105.07554/) (2021)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Toward Structure Fairness in Dynamic Graph Embedding: A Trend-aware Dual Debiasing Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.13201/) (2024)
- [A conceptual model for leaving the data-centric approach in machine learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.03361/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The use of data-driven decision support by public agencies is becoming more widespread and already influences the allocation of public resources. This raises ethical concerns, as it has adversely affected minorities and historically discriminated groups. In this paper, we use an approach that combines statistics and data-driven approaches with dynamical modeling to assess long-term fairness effects of labor market interventions. Specifically, we develop and use a model to investigate the impact of decisions caused by a public employment authority that selectively supports job-seekers through targeted help. The selection of who receives what help is based on a data-driven intervention model that estimates an individual's chances of finding a job in a timely manner and rests upon data that describes a population in which skills relevant to the labor market are unevenly distributed between two groups (e.g., males and females). The intervention model has incomplete access to the individual's actual skills and can augment this with knowledge of the individual's group affiliation, thus using a protected attribute to increase predictive accuracy. We assess this intervention model's dynamics -- especially fairness-related issues and trade-offs between different fairness goals -- over time and compare it to an intervention model that does not use group affiliation as a predictive feature. We conclude that in order to quantify the trade-off correctly and to assess the long-term fairness effects of such a system in the real-world, careful modeling of the surrounding labor market is indispensable.