This article addresses the increasing use of participatory approaches in the development of artificial intelligence (AI), examining their democratic potential and associated risks. While participatory AI promises to democratize technological design and enhance inclusive governance, it often falls short due to power imbalances, vague definitions, and superficial implementation—leading to what as been defined as participatory washing [1, 2]. Drawing from studies on participation in political science, public policy, and technology, the paper proposes a conceptual framework to critically assess participatory practices along four dimensions: power, goals, actors, and arenas. The goal is to support practitioners in avoiding instrumental uses of participation and to foster genuinely empowering and accountable AI development processes.
From inclusion to illusion: the pitfalls of ethicswashing in Participatory AI practices
Riccardo Corsi;Beatrice Melis;Gianluca De Ninno;
2025-01-01
Abstract
This article addresses the increasing use of participatory approaches in the development of artificial intelligence (AI), examining their democratic potential and associated risks. While participatory AI promises to democratize technological design and enhance inclusive governance, it often falls short due to power imbalances, vague definitions, and superficial implementation—leading to what as been defined as participatory washing [1, 2]. Drawing from studies on participation in political science, public policy, and technology, the paper proposes a conceptual framework to critically assess participatory practices along four dimensions: power, goals, actors, and arenas. The goal is to support practitioners in avoiding instrumental uses of participation and to foster genuinely empowering and accountable AI development processes.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
