Studying Up Public Sector AI: How Networks of Power Relations Shape Agency Decisions Around AI Design and Use
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As public sector agencies rapidly introduce new AI tools in high-stakes domains like social services, it becomes critical to understand how decisions to adopt these tools are made in practice. We borrow from the anthropological practice to ``study up'' those in positions of power, and reorient our study of public sector AI around those who have the power and responsibility to make decisions about the role that AI tools will play in their agency. Through semi-structured interviews and design activities with 16 agency decision-makers, we examine how decisions about AI design and adoption are influenced by their interactions with and assumptions about other actors within these agencies (e.g., frontline workers and agency leaders), as well as those above (legal systems and contracted companies), and below (impacted communities). By centering these networks of power relations, our findings shed light on how infrastructural, legal, and social factors create barriers and disincentives to the involvement of a broader range of stakeholders in decisions about AI design and adoption. Agency decision-makers desired more practical support for stakeholder involvement around public sector AI to help overcome the knowledge and power differentials they perceived between them and other stakeholders (e.g., frontline workers and impacted community members). Building on these findings, we discuss implications for future research and policy around actualizing participatory AI approaches in public sector contexts.
Key facts. Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 21 May 2024.
Builds on
22 of 59 references.
References · 22
- 2020Participation is not a Design Fix for Machine Learningcited by 111
- 2022The Fallacy of AI Functionalitycited by 88
- 2019Problem Formulation and Fairnesscited by 85
- 2018Fairness and Accountability Design Needs for Algorithmic Support in High-Stakes Public Sector Decision-Makingcited by 67
- 2019Unremarkable AI: Fitting Intelligent Decision Support into Critical, Clinical Decision-Making Processescited by 53
- 2022Improving Human-AI Partnerships in Child Welfare: Understanding Worker Practices, Challenges, and Desires for Algorithmic Decision Supportcited by 39
- 2022A Validity Perspective on Evaluating the Justified Use of Data-driven Decision-making Algorithmscited by 30
- 2023Understanding Frontline Workers' and Unhoused Individuals' Perspectives on AI Used in Homeless Servicescited by 29
- 2022Seeing Like a Toolkit: How Toolkits Envision the Work of AI Ethicscited by 28
- 2021Stakeholder Participation in AI: Beyond "Add Diverse Stakeholders and Stir"cited by 26
- 2020A Human-Centered Review of the Algorithms used within the U.S. Child Welfare Systemcited by 23
- 2021A Framework of High-Stakes Algorithmic Decision-Making for the Public Sector Developed through a Case Study of Child-Welfarecited by 23
10 more
- 2021Algorithms and Decision-Making in the Public Sectorcited by 20
- 2018Investigating Human + Machine Complementarity for Recidivism Predictionscited by 19
- 2021Sibyl: Understanding and Addressing the Usability Challenges of Machine Learning In High-Stakes Decision Makingcited by 19
- 2023Deliberating with AI: Improving Decision-Making for the Future through Participatory AI Design and Stakeholder Deliberationcited by 17
- 2020Keeping Community in the Loop: Understanding Wikipedia Stakeholder Values for Machine Learning-Based Systemscited by 16
- 2022Imagining new futures beyond predictive systems in child welfare: A qualitative study with impacted stakeholderscited by 15
- 2024The Situate AI Guidebook: Co-Designing a Toolkit to Support Multi-Stakeholder Early-stage Deliberations Around Public Sector AI Proposalscited by 15
- 2021Towards Accountability in the Use of Artificial Intelligence for Public Administrationscited by 12
- 2021Modeling Assumptions Clash with the Real World: Transparency, Equity, and Community Challenges for Student Assignment Algorithmscited by 11
- 2021Studying Up Machine Learning Data: Why Talk About Bias When We Mean Power?cited by 11
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 3.
6 papers.
- 2024Thoughtful Adoption of NLP for Civic Participation: Understanding Differences Among Policymakerscited by 3
- 2024Legacy Procurement Practices Shape How U.S. Cities Govern AI: Understanding Government Employees' Practices, Challenges, and Needscited by 3
- 2025Human-AI Narrative Synthesis to Foster Shared Understanding in Civic Decision-Makingcited by 1
- 2026The Algorithmic Gaze of Image Quality Assessment: An Audit and Trace Ethnography of the LAION-Aesthetics Predictorcited by 1
- 2026Designing Multi-Robot Ground Video Sensemaking with Public Safety Professionalscited by 1
- 2026To Build or Not to Build? Factors that Lead to Non-Development or Abandonment of AI Systemscited by 1
- 2026To Build or Not to Build? Factors that Lead to Non-Development or Abandonment of AI Systems30 Apr 2026
- 2026Designing Multi-Robot Ground Video Sensemaking with Public Safety Professionals9 Feb 2026
- 2026The Algorithmic Gaze of Image Quality Assessment: An Audit and Trace Ethnography of the LAION-Aesthetics Predictor14 Jan 2026
- 2025Human-AI Narrative Synthesis to Foster Shared Understanding in Civic Decision-Making23 Sep 2025
- 2024Legacy Procurement Practices Shape How U.S. Cities Govern AI: Understanding Government Employees' Practices, Challenges, and Needs7 Nov 2024
- 2024Thoughtful Adoption of NLP for Civic Participation: Understanding Differences Among Policymakers30 Oct 2024