Fairness in Algorithmic Policing

Journal of the American Philosophical Association 8 (4):741-761 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Predictive policing, the practice of using of algorithmic systems to forecast crime, is heralded by police departments as the new frontier of crime analysis. At the same time, it is opposed by civil rights groups, academics, and media outlets for being ‘biased’ and therefore discriminatory against communities of color. This paper argues that the prevailing focus on racial bias has overshadowed two normative factors that are essential to a full assessment of the moral permissibility of predictive policing: fairness in the social distribution of the benefits and burdens of policing as well as the distinctive role of consent in determining fair distribution. When these normative factors are given their due attention, several requirements emerge for the fair implementation of predictive policing. Among these requirements are that police departments inform and solicit buy-in from affected communities about strategic decision-making and that departments favor non-enforcement-oriented interventions.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Limits of Reallocative and Algorithmic Policing.Luke William Hunt - 2022 - Criminal Justice Ethics 41 (1):1-24.
Rawls’s Original Position and Algorithmic Fairness.Ulrik Franke - 2021 - Philosophy and Technology 34 (4):1803-1817.
Democratizing Algorithmic Fairness.Pak-Hang Wong - 2020 - Philosophy and Technology 33 (2):225-244.
A Moral Framework for Understanding of Fair ML through Economic Models of Equality of Opportunity.Hoda Heidari - 2019 - Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency 1.
On algorithmic fairness in medical practice.Thomas Grote & Geoff Keeling - 2022 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 31 (1):83-94.
What's Fair about Individual Fairness?Will Fleisher - 2021 - Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society.
On statistical criteria of algorithmic fairness.Brian Hedden - 2021 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 49 (2):209-231.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-04-08

Downloads
38 (#397,063)

6 months
10 (#213,340)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Duncan Purves
University of Florida

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Role obligations.Michael O. Hardimon - 1994 - Journal of Philosophy 91 (7):333-363.
Agency Laundering and Information Technologies.Alan Rubel, Clinton Castro & Adam Pham - 2019 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 22 (4):1017-1041.
Justice, deviance, and the dark ghetto.Tommie Shelby - 2007 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 35 (2):126–160.

View all 8 references / Add more references