English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Algorithmic decision-making in government has emerged rapidly in recent years, leading to a surge in attention for this topic by scholars from various fields, including public administration. Recent studies provide crucial yet fragmented insights on how the use of algorithms to support or fully automate decisions is transforming government. This article ties together these insights by applying the theoretical lenses of government legitimacy and institutional design. We identify how algorithmic decision-making challenges three types of legitimacy—input, throughput, and output—and identify institutional arrangements that can mitigate these threats. We argue that there is no silver bullet to maintain legitimacy of algorithmic government and that a multiplicity of different institutional mechanisms is required, ranging from legal structures and civic participation to closer monitoring of algorithmic systems. We conclude with a framework to guide future research to better understand the implications of institutional design for the legitimacy of algorithmic government.

Legitimacy of Algorithmic Decision-Making: Six Threats and the Need for a Calibrated Institutional Response