Responsible Autonomy

As intelligent systems are increasingly making decisions that directly affect society, perhaps the most important upcoming research direction in AI is to rethink the ethical implications of their actions. Means are needed to integrate moral, societal and legal values with technological developments in AI, both during the design process as well as part of the deliberation algorithms employed by these systems. In this paper, we describe leading ethics theories and propose alternative ways to ensure ethical behavior by artificial systems. Given that ethics are dependent on the socio-cultural context and are often only implicit in deliberation processes, methodologies are needed to elicit the values held by designers and stakeholders, and to make these explicit leading to better understanding and trust on artificial autonomous systems.Comment: IJCAI2017 (International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Responsible autonomy: The interplay of autonomy, control and trust for knowledge professionals working remotely during COVID-19

This article revisits the concept of responsible autonomy, analysing the interplay of employee autonomy, management control and trust experienced by knowledge professionals in the UK compelled to work remotely during the coronavirus pandemic. The authors theorise about the tensions and paradoxes of responsible autonomy in the contemporary context of the COVID-19 crisis, drawing on empirical findings gathered in May 2020 and May 2021. Many participants experienced increased autonomy and discretion, but also work intensification and blurred work–life boundaries. Interestingly, many accepted this paradox as a palatable trade-off for the autonomy of being able to work from home, particularly where there was reciprocal trust between employee and manager. Trust is the glue in responsible autonomy, yet exists in tension with intrusive managerial control

Governing in the Anthropocene: are there cyber-systemic antidotes to the malaise of modern governance?

The Anthropocene imposes new challenges for governments, demanding capabilities for dealing with complexity and uncertainty. In this paper we examine how effective governing of social-biophysical dynamics is constrained by current processes and systems of government. Framing choices and structural determinants combine to create governance deficits in multiple domains, particularly in relation to the governing of complex larger-scale social – biophysical systems. Attempts to build capability for governing ‘wicked problems’ are relevant to sustainability science and Anthropocene governance, but these have mostly failed to become institutionalised. Two cases studies are reported to elucidate how the systemic dynamics of governing operate and fail in relation to espoused purpose. In the UK attempts to enact ‘joined-up’ government’ during the years of New Labour government reveal systemic flaws and consistent praxis failures. From Australia we report on water governance reforms with implications for a wide range of complex policy issues. We conclude that innovations are needed to build capacity for governing the unfolding surprises and inherent uncertainties of the Anthropocene. These include institutionalising, or structural incorporation, of cyber-systemic thinking/practices that can also enhance empowerment and creativity that underpins sustainability science

Sisyphus & the Labor of Imagination: Autonomy, Cultural Production and the Antinomies of Worker Self-Management

Is there any radical potential left in the notion and practices of worker self-management? What I want do in this essay is to try and see if it is possible to distill something of a radical kernel from the many difficulties and complications that confront it, particularly within fields of cultural production. How can self-management contribute to what Jacques Ranciere describes as a movement not of slaves filled with ressentiment, but of people living and embodying a new time of sociability and cooperation, creating resources and skills that can spread out from this, rather than being caught and contained by the conditions of is own creation? Drawing from my own experiences working in Ever Reviled Records, a worker owned and run record label, I want to ferret out--conducting something akin to an organizational autoethnography--hints as to whether or not self-management could be useful for radical social struggles today

Worker Control in Worker Co-operatives?

This paper (presented at ICA Research Conference, Paris, May, 2015) is based on research conducted in the 1980s. It has been updated, and addresses the timeless questions: if worker co-operatives embody the principle “Labour hires Capital”, does this mean that in co-operatives workers are able to control their own jobs? Can new work relations be constructed from grassroots in a democratic fashion? It is based on five case studies, which present possibly the most challenges to a positive response to these questions. The paper develops a theory based analytical framework embracing three different levels of control, and identifying four factors limiting worker influence: expert power, imported rationalities and expectations, external financing, market relations. Given these “worst case” scenarios, the findings demonstrate achievements regarding work organisation, different forms of supervision, and terms and conditions of employment

Inequality and identity in contemporary processes of labour market restructuring

Contemporary processes of labour market restructuring have resulted in increasing social and spacial inequalities in the United Kingdom. While the well discussed-issues of class, race and gender continue to be correlated to inequality, the decline in manufacturing jobs and rise in low-level service work has brought a new reality of identity-correlation. To remain employed, workers must increasingly transcend their geography and current job role; presenting an identity that is appealing to employers. Thus, in today's labour market with its increasing economic polarisation, previously strong social and work identities are now challenged by the logic of capital

A utilidade do conhecimento: Da relevância social á mobilização do conhecimento

En los últimos años ha emergido un vocabulario más sofisticado en el campo de la educación superior. Categorías como investigación socialmente relevante; movilización del conocimiento; impacto de la investigación; innovación; han aparecido en las prioridades fijadas para la universidad. A primera vista, estos términos pueden parecer neutrales, simples y libres de conflictos de intereses. Sin embargo, se argumenta aquí que cada uno de ellos requiere un análisis más profundo, especialmente en relación con las políticas públicas científicas y universitarias actuales, ya que su uso tiene consecuencias e/o impactos tanto a nivel institucional (instituciones de educación superior) como en los agentes (académicos, directores de proyectos, etc.). Por lo tanto, al arrojar luz sobre el hecho de que la “relevancia social” de la universidad es una categoría comúnmente abordada en los documentos que regulan la actividad universitaria, se afirma que tales categorías indican un concepto reduccionista de “relevancia” que es utilizado como un sustituto del sentido, la misión y los objetivos de la universidad. Con el fin de identificar y analizar estos nuevos términos y categorías utilizados como medidas de conocimiento académico, este trabajo se centra en los sistemas universitarios públicos en Argentina y Canadá. Desde una perspectiva comparativa, se pretende obtener una mejor comprensión de los cambios en la movilización del conocimiento.In recent years, a more sophisticated vocabulary has emerged in the field of higher education. Categories such as socially relevant research; knowledge mobilization; research impact; innovation; and university priorities have appeared. At first glance, these words may appear neutral, simple and free from conflicts of interest. However, I argue that each of them requires deeper analysis, especially in relation to current scientific and university public policies, as their use has consequences and/or impacts both at the institutional level (higher education institutions) and actor-level (scholars, project managers, etc.). Therefore, by shedding light on the fact that “social relevance” of university is a commonly addressed category in documents regulating university activities, I postulate that such categories indicate a reductionist notion of “relevance” that is used haphazardly as a substitute for the ideas of meaning, mission, and the aims of a university. In order to pinpoint and discuss these new terms and categories that are used as measures of academic knowledge, the paper focuses on public university systems in Argentina and Canada. From a comparative perspective, I aim at grasping a better understanding of the changes in knowledge mobilization.Nos últimos anos, surgiu um vocabulário mais sofisticado em matéria de ensino superior. Categorias e investigação socialmente relevantes; mobilização do conhecimento; impacto da investigação; inovação; têm aparecido sobre as prioridades para a universidade. À primeira vista, esses termos podem parecer neutro, simples e livre de conflitos de interesse. No entanto, argumenta-se aqui que cada um deles exige uma mais profunda, especialmente no que diz respeito à análise de políticas públicas científica e universitária atual, porque seu uso tem conseqüências e/ou impactos a nível institucional (instituições de ensino superior), como os agentes (acadêmicos, gestores de projecto, etc.) Portanto, para lançar luz sobre o fato de que a "relevância social" da universidade é uma categoria comumente abordados nos documentos que regem a actividade da universidade, afirma que tais categorias indicam um conceito reducionista de "relevância" é usado como um substituto para o sentido, a missão e os objetivos da universidade. A fim de identificar e analisar esses novos termos e categorias utilizadas como medidas de conhecimento acadêmico, este trabalho concentra-se em sistemas universitários públicos na Argentina e no Canadá. A partir de uma perspectiva comparativa , é obter uma melhor compreensão das mudanças na mobilização do conhecimento.Fil: Naidorf, Clara Judith. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentin