P27 The implications of the digital transformation of government services for social equity and inclusion

Panel chairs

Corresponding and review group chair

Erna Ruijer, assistant professor Utrecht University School of Governance. h.j.m.ruijer@uu.nl

Co-chairs

Federica Fusi, assistant professor Department of Public Policy, Management and Analytics, University of Illinois Chicago

Suzanne J. Piotrowski, Professor, School of Public Affairs and Administration, Rutgers University, Newark

Digitalization in the form of online public services, social media, open government data, public engagement tools, algorithms and Artificial Intelligence, has fundamentally re-shaped the interaction between government bureaucracy and the public (Peeters & Widlak 2023; Ruijer et al 2023; Mergel et al 2019). This digital transformation has been justified by efficiency and effectiveness goals, while less scholarly research has focused on the relationship between digitalization and other public values, particularly social equity and inclusion.

Most studies of social equity and inclusion in a digital society have been produced outside of the public administration field, with little attention to the implications for public service delivery (Ruijer et al 2023). Some studies show that the digital transformation contributes to equity and inclusion goals by expanding access to government services and reducing administrative errors and biases in interactions with bureaucrats (Compton et al 2023). Others point out that digital technologies may trigger exclusionary mechanisms for vulnerable groups in their access to benefits and services and exacerbate unequal outcomes because of skill and access divides (Busuioc 2021; Peeters & Widlak 2023; Young et al 2019). Furthermore, digital technologies developed by companies and used by the government also brings new complexities in terms of ownership, transparency, and accountability that might impact equity and inclusion and even justice in service provision (Ruijer et al 2023). 

While the challenges and opportunities associated with the digital transformation for social equity and inclusion are increasingly on the public sector agenda, our academic understanding of their implications and impacts is still limited and fragmented. This panel is therefore specifically interested in bringing together scholars with empirical and conceptual papers examining the implementation of policies, programs and initiatives that address the relationship between the digital transformation and social equity, inclusion or justice and/or investigating their impact and implications for public administration practice and research.

Our panel seeks high quality papers that focus on topics such as:

• State-of-the-art academic thinking about the digital transformation and inclusion/exclusion of individuals and different groups in society;
• Theoretical and practical explorations of the different types of equity (distributional, procedural fairness, process equity and outcomes; Gooden 2015) and how it relates to the digital transformation of public engagement;
• Critical analysis of the relations between the digital transformation and social equity, inclusion and justice, and service delivery and program implementation;
• Studies of the impact of digitalization on social equity and inclusion in different policy domains such as welfare, housing, education, health, criminal justice, environmental justice, and civic space;
• Studies of open government programs, and how these programs can facilitate diverse participation in policy making and ensure that government data and policies align with the needs and preferences of underrepresented groups; 
• Organizational and institutional studies exploring more inclusive approaches to the design, deployment, and implementation of government digital technologies;
• Best practices of initiatives, policies, programs, and administrative processes that advance social equity, inclusion, and justice through digitalization;
• Mechanisms and measures for assessing digital transformation impacts on social equity and inclusion.

References

Busuioc, M. (2021). Accountable artificial intelligence: Holding algorithms to account. Public administration review, 81(5), 825-836.

Compton, M. E., Young, M. M., Bullock, J. B., & Greer, R. (2023). Administrative Errors and Race: Can technology mitigate inequitable administrative outcomes?. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 33(3), 512-528.

Gooden, Susan T. Race and social equity: A nervous area of government. Routledge, 2015. 

Mergel, I., Edelmann, N., & Haug, N. (2019). Defining digital transformation: Results from expert interviews. Government information quarterly, 36(4), 101385.

Peeters, R., & Widlak, A. (2018). The digital cage: Administrative exclusion through information architecture–The case of the Dutch civil registry's master data management system. Government Information Quarterly, 35(2), 175-183.

Ruijer, E., Porumbescu, G., Porter, R., & Piotrowski, S. (2023). Social equity in the data era: A systematic literature review of data‐driven public service research. Public Administration Review, 83(2), 316-332.

Young, M. M., Bullock, J. B., & Lecy, J. D. (2019). Artificial discretion as a tool of governance:  a framework for understanding the impact of artificial intelligence on public  

administration. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 2(4), 301-313.