IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/telpol/v44y2020i6s0308596120300458.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ethics of autonomous weapons systems and its applicability to any AI systems

Author

Listed:
  • Gómez de Ágreda, Ángel

Abstract

Most artificial intelligence technologies are dual-use. They are incorporated into both peaceful civilian applications and military weapons systems. Most of the existing codes of conduct and ethical principles on artificial intelligence address the former while largely ignoring the latter. But when these technologies are used to power systems specifically designed to cause harm, the question must be asked as to whether the ethics applied to military autonomous systems should also be taken into account for all artificial intelligence technologies susceptible of being used for those purposes. However, while a freeze in investigations is neither possible nor desirable, neither is the maintenance of the current status quo. Comparison between general-purpose ethical codes and military ones concludes that most ethical principles apply to human use of artificial intelligence systems as long as two characteristics are met: that the way algorithms work is understood and that humans retain enough control. In this way, human agency is fully preserved and moral responsibility is retained independently of the potential dual-use of artificial intelligence technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Gómez de Ágreda, Ángel, 2020. "Ethics of autonomous weapons systems and its applicability to any AI systems," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:44:y:2020:i:6:s0308596120300458
    DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101953
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596120300458
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101953?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Straub, Jeremy, 2016. "Consideration of the use of autonomous, non-recallable unmanned vehicles and programs as a deterrent or threat by state actors and others," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 39-47.
    2. Logg, Jennifer M. & Minson, Julia A. & Moore, Don A., 2019. "Algorithm appreciation: People prefer algorithmic to human judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 90-103.
    3. Oecd, 2018. "AI: Intelligent machines, smart policies: Conference summary," OECD Digital Economy Papers 270, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yongping Bao & Ludwig Danwitz & Fabian Dvorak & Sebastian Fehrler & Lars Hornuf & Hsuan Yu Lin & Bettina von Helversen, 2022. "Similarity and Consistency in Algorithm-Guided Exploration," CESifo Working Paper Series 10188, CESifo.
    2. Daniel Woods & Mustafa Abdallah & Saurabh Bagchi & Shreyas Sundaram & Timothy Cason, 2022. "Network defense and behavioral biases: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 254-286, February.
    3. Siliang Tong & Nan Jia & Xueming Luo & Zheng Fang, 2021. "The Janus face of artificial intelligence feedback: Deployment versus disclosure effects on employee performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(9), pages 1600-1631, September.
    4. Bryce McLaughlin & Jann Spiess, 2022. "Algorithmic Assistance with Recommendation-Dependent Preferences," Papers 2208.07626, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    5. Markus Jung & Mischa Seiter, 2021. "Towards a better understanding on mitigating algorithm aversion in forecasting: an experimental study," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 495-516, December.
    6. Ekaterina Jussupow & Kai Spohrer & Armin Heinzl & Joshua Gawlitza, 2021. "Augmenting Medical Diagnosis Decisions? An Investigation into Physicians’ Decision-Making Process with Artificial Intelligence," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 713-735, September.
    7. Shiri Melumad & Rhonda Hadi & Christian Hildebrand & Adrian F. Ward, 2020. "Technology-Augmented Choice: How Digital Innovations Are Transforming Consumer Decision Processes," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 7(3), pages 90-101, October.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:3:p:449-451 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Kevin Bauer & Andrej Gill, 2024. "Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Algorithmic Assessments, Transparency, and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 226-248, March.
    10. Jean-Pierre Benoît & Juan Dubra & Giorgia Romagnoli, 2022. "Belief Elicitation When More than Money Matters: Controlling for "Control"," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 837-888, August.
    11. Chiara Longoni & Andrea Bonezzi & Carey K. Morewedge, 2020. "Resistance to medical artificial intelligence is an attribute in a compensatory decision process: response to Pezzo and Becksted (2020)," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 446-448, May.
    12. Chaohui Xu & Xingtong Chen & Wei Dai, 2022. "Effects of Digital Transformation on Environmental Governance of Mining Enterprises: Evidence from China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Chen Yang & Jing Hu, 2022. "When do consumers prefer AI-enabled customer service? The interaction effect of brand personality and service provision type on brand attitudes and purchase intentions," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(2), pages 167-189, March.
    14. Manav Raj & Justin Berg & Rob Seamans, 2023. "Art-ificial Intelligence: The Effect of AI Disclosure on Evaluations of Creative Content," Papers 2303.06217, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    15. Mahmud, Hasan & Islam, A.K.M. Najmul & Mitra, Ranjan Kumar, 2023. "What drives managers towards algorithm aversion and how to overcome it? Mitigating the impact of innovation resistance through technology readiness," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    16. Noemi Festic, 2022. "Same, same, but different! Qualitative evidence on how algorithmic selection applications govern different life domains," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 85-101, January.
    17. Zhang, Lixuan & Yencha, Christopher, 2022. "Examining perceptions towards hiring algorithms," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    18. Hemesath, Sebastian & Tepe, Markus, 2023. "Framing the approval to test self-driving cars on public roads. The effect of safety and competitiveness on citizens' agreement," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    19. Yoan Hermstrüwer & Pascal Langenbach, 2022. "Fair Governance with Humans and Machines," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2022_04, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, revised 01 Mar 2023.
    20. Sarah D. English & Stephanie Denison & Ori Friedman, 2022. "Expectations of how machines use individuating information and base-rates," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 17(3), pages 628-645, May.
    21. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:3:p:628-645 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Mesbah, Neda & Tauchert, Christoph & Buxmann, Peter, 2021. "Whose Advice Counts More – Man or Machine? An Experimental Investigation of AI-based Advice Utilization," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 124796, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:44:y:2020:i:6:s0308596120300458. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30471/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.