Responsible AI Adoption in the Public Sector: A Data-Centric Taxonomy of AI Adoption Challenges

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09634v1
• Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2025 18:42:09 GMT
• Title: Responsible AI Adoption in the Public Sector: A Data-Centric Taxonomy of AI Adoption Challenges
• Authors: Anastasija Nikiforova, Martin Lnenicka, Ulf Melin, David Valle-Cruz, Asif Gill, Cesar Casiano Flores, Emyana Sirait, Mariusz Luterek, Richard Michael Dreyling, Barbora Tesarova,
• Abstract summary: This study develops a taxonomy of data-related challenges to responsible AI adoption in government.<n>Based on a systematic review of 43 studies and 21 expert evaluations, the taxonomy identifies 13 key challenges across technological, organizational, and environmental dimensions.<n> Annotated with institutional pressures, the taxonomy serves as a diagnostic tool to surface'symptoms' of high-risk AI deployment.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Despite Artificial Intelligence (AI) transformative potential for public sector services, decision-making, and administrative efficiency, adoption remains uneven due to complex technical, organizational, and institutional challenges. Responsible AI frameworks emphasize fairness, accountability, and transparency, aligning with principles of trustworthy AI and fair AI, yet remain largely aspirational, overlooking technical and institutional realities, especially foundational data and governance. This study addresses this gap by developing a taxonomy of data-related challenges to responsible AI adoption in government. Based on a systematic review of 43 studies and 21 expert evaluations, the taxonomy identifies 13 key challenges across technological, organizational, and environmental dimensions, including poor data quality, limited AI-ready infrastructure, weak governance, misalignment in human-AI decision-making, economic and environmental sustainability concerns. Annotated with institutional pressures, the taxonomy serves as a diagnostic tool to surface 'symptoms' of high-risk AI deployment and guides policymakers in building the institutional and data governance conditions necessary for responsible AI adoption.

Related papers

• Trust and Transparency in AI: Industry Voices on Data, Ethics, and Compliance [0.7099737083842057]
  The rapid adoption of AI in the industry has outpaced ethical evaluation frameworks.<n>This paper investigates practical approaches and challenges in the development and assessment of Trustworthy AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-23T20:58:01Z)
• Never Compromise to Vulnerabilities: A Comprehensive Survey on AI Governance [211.5823259429128]
  We propose a comprehensive framework integrating technical and societal dimensions, structured around three interconnected pillars: Intrinsic Security, Derivative Security, and Social Ethics.<n>We identify three core challenges: (1) the generalization gap, where defenses fail against evolving threats; (2) inadequate evaluation protocols that overlook real-world risks; and (3) fragmented regulations leading to inconsistent oversight.<n>Our framework offers actionable guidance for researchers, engineers, and policymakers to develop AI systems that are not only robust and secure but also ethically aligned and publicly trustworthy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-12T09:42:56Z)
• Enterprise Architecture as a Dynamic Capability for Scalable and Sustainable Generative AI adoption: Bridging Innovation and Governance in Large Organisations [55.2480439325792]
  Generative Artificial Intelligence is a powerful new technology with the potential to boost innovation and reshape governance in many industries.<n>However, organisations face major challenges in scaling GenAI, including technology complexity, governance gaps and resource misalignments.<n>This study explores how Enterprise Architecture Management can meet the complex requirements of GenAI adoption within large enterprises.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-09T07:41:33Z)
• Artificial Intelligence in Government: Why People Feel They Lose Control [44.99833362998488]
  The use of Artificial Intelligence in public administration is expanding rapidly.<n>While AI promises greater efficiency and responsiveness, its integration into government functions raises concerns about fairness, transparency, and accountability.<n>This article applies principal-agent theory to AI adoption as a special case of delegation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-02T07:46:41Z)
• Who is Responsible When AI Fails? Mapping Causes, Entities, and Consequences of AI Privacy and Ethical Incidents [31.53910982726317]
  We analyzed 202 real-world AI privacy and ethical incidents to develop a taxonomy.<n>Our findings reveal widespread harms from poor organizational decisions and legal non-compliance.<n>Our findings provide actionable guidance for policymakers and practitioners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-28T21:57:38Z)
• HH4AI: A methodological Framework for AI Human Rights impact assessment under the EUAI ACT [1.7754875105502606]
  The paper highlights AIs transformative nature, driven by autonomy, data, and goal-oriented design.<n>A key challenge is defining and assessing "high-risk" AI systems across industries.<n>It proposes a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (FRIA) methodology, a gate-based framework designed to isolate and assess risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-23T19:10:14Z)
• AI and the Transformation of Accountability and Discretion in Urban Governance [1.9152655229960793]
  The study synthesizes insights to propose guiding principles for responsible AI integration in decision-making processes.<n>The analysis argues that AI does not simply restrict or enhance discretion but redistributes it across institutional levels.<n>It may simultaneously strengthen managerial oversight, enhance decision-making consistency, and improve operational efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T18:11:39Z)
• Open Problems in Technical AI Governance [102.19067750759471]
  Technical AI governance refers to technical analysis and tools for supporting the effective governance of AI.<n>This paper is intended as a resource for technical researchers or research funders looking to contribute to AI governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T21:13:56Z)
• AI in ESG for Financial Institutions: An Industrial Survey [4.893954917947095]
  The paper surveys the industrial landscape to delineate the necessity and impact of AI in bolstering ESG frameworks. Our survey categorizes AI applications across three main pillars of ESG, illustrating how AI enhances analytical capabilities, risk assessment, customer engagement, reporting accuracy and more. The paper also addresses the imperative of responsible and sustainable AI, emphasizing the ethical dimensions of AI deployment in ESG-related banking processes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-03T02:14:47Z)
• An interdisciplinary conceptual study of Artificial Intelligence (AI) for helping benefit-risk assessment practices: Towards a comprehensive qualification matrix of AI programs and devices (pre-print 2020) [55.41644538483948]
  This paper proposes a comprehensive analysis of existing concepts coming from different disciplines tackling the notion of intelligence. The aim is to identify shared notions or discrepancies to consider for qualifying AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-07T12:01:31Z)
• Toward Trustworthy AI Development: Mechanisms for Supporting Verifiable Claims [59.64274607533249]
  AI developers need to make verifiable claims to which they can be held accountable. This report suggests various steps that different stakeholders can take to improve the verifiability of claims made about AI systems. We analyze ten mechanisms for this purpose--spanning institutions, software, and hardware--and make recommendations aimed at implementing, exploring, or improving those mechanisms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-15T17:15:35Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.