Recent Contributions to Theories of Discrimination

This paper surveys the literature on theories of discrimination, focusing mainly on new contributions. Recent theories expand on the traditional taste-based and statistical discrimination frameworks by considering specific features of learning and signaling environments, often using novel information- and mechanism-design language; analyzing learning and decision making by algorithms; and introducing agents with behavioral biases and misspecified beliefs. This survey also attempts to narrow the gap between the economic perspective on ``theories of discrimination'' and the broader study of discrimination in the social science literature. In that respect, I first contribute by identifying a class of models of discriminatory institutions, made up of theories of discriminatory social norms and discriminatory institutional design. Second, I discuss the classification of discrimination as direct or systemic, and compare it to other notions of discrimination in the economic literature

Algorithmic Fairness in Business Analytics: Directions for Research and Practice

The extensive adoption of business analytics (BA) has brought financial gains and increased efficiencies. However, these advances have simultaneously drawn attention to rising legal and ethical challenges when BA inform decisions with fairness implications. As a response to these concerns, the emerging study of algorithmic fairness deals with algorithmic outputs that may result in disparate outcomes or other forms of injustices for subgroups of the population, especially those who have been historically marginalized. Fairness is relevant on the basis of legal compliance, social responsibility, and utility; if not adequately and systematically addressed, unfair BA systems may lead to societal harms and may also threaten an organization's own survival, its competitiveness, and overall performance. This paper offers a forward-looking, BA-focused review of algorithmic fairness. We first review the state-of-the-art research on sources and measures of bias, as well as bias mitigation algorithms. We then provide a detailed discussion of the utility-fairness relationship, emphasizing that the frequent assumption of a trade-off between these two constructs is often mistaken or short-sighted. Finally, we chart a path forward by identifying opportunities for business scholars to address impactful, open challenges that are key to the effective and responsible deployment of BA

Long-Term Fairness with Unknown Dynamics

While machine learning can myopically reinforce social inequalities, it may also be used to dynamically seek equitable outcomes. In this paper, we formalize long-term fairness in the context of online reinforcement learning. This formulation can accommodate dynamical control objectives, such as driving equity inherent in the state of a population, that cannot be incorporated into static formulations of fairness. We demonstrate that this framing allows an algorithm to adapt to unknown dynamics by sacrificing short-term incentives to drive a classifier-population system towards more desirable equilibria. For the proposed setting, we develop an algorithm that adapts recent work in online learning. We prove that this algorithm achieves simultaneous probabilistic bounds on cumulative loss and cumulative violations of fairness (as statistical regularities between demographic groups). We compare our proposed algorithm to the repeated retraining of myopic classifiers, as a baseline, and to a deep reinforcement learning algorithm that lacks safety guarantees. Our experiments model human populations according to evolutionary game theory and integrate real-world datasets

What-is and How-to for Fairness in Machine Learning: A Survey, Reflection, and Perspective

Algorithmic fairness has attracted increasing attention in the machine learning community. Various definitions are proposed in the literature, but the differences and connections among them are not clearly addressed. In this paper, we review and reflect on various fairness notions previously proposed in machine learning literature, and make an attempt to draw connections to arguments in moral and political philosophy, especially theories of justice. We also consider fairness inquiries from a dynamic perspective, and further consider the long-term impact that is induced by current prediction and decision. In light of the differences in the characterized fairness, we present a flowchart that encompasses implicit assumptions and expected outcomes of different types of fairness inquiries on the data generating process, on the predicted outcome, and on the induced impact, respectively. This paper demonstrates the importance of matching the mission (which kind of fairness one would like to enforce) and the means (which spectrum of fairness analysis is of interest, what is the appropriate analyzing scheme) to fulfill the intended purpose

Fair machine learning under partial compliance

Typically, fair machine learning research focuses on a single decision maker and assumes that the underlying population is stationary. However, many of the critical domains motivating this work are characterized by competitive marketplaces with many decision makers. Realistically, we might expect only a subset of them to adopt any non-compulsory fairness-conscious policy, a situation that political philosophers call partial compliance. This possibility raises important questions: how does partial compliance and the consequent strategic behavior of decision subjects affect the allocation outcomes? If k% of employers were to voluntarily adopt a fairness-promoting intervention, should we expect k% progress (in aggregate) towards the benefits of universal adoption, or will the dynamics of partial compliance wash out the hoped-for benefits? How might adopting a global (versus local) perspective impact the conclusions of an auditor? In this paper, we propose a simple model of an employment market, leveraging simulation as a tool to explore the impact of both interaction effects and incentive effects on outcomes and auditing metrics. Our key findings are that at equilibrium: (1) partial compliance by k% of employers can result in far less than proportional (k%) progress towards the full compliance outcomes; (2) the gap is more severe when fair employers match global (vs local) statistics; (3) choices of local vs global statistics can paint dramatically different pictures of the performance vis-a-vis fairness desiderata of compliant versus non-compliant employers; (4) partial compliance based on local parity measures can induce extreme segregation. Finally, we discuss implications for auditors and insights concerning the design of regulatory frameworks