This article critically examines existing ethical frameworks that address major principles such as fairness, transparency, accountability, and inclusivity by their origin–governmental, corporate, academic, and algorithmic–and compares their applicability across diverse contexts.
Abstract
Responsible Artificial Intelligence (RAI) has emerged as a critical concern in the evolving technological landscape. With the widespread integration of AI across industries and research communities, it is imperative to evaluate its ethical principles and societal implications. Numerous real-world cases highlight the urgent need for such evaluations. This necessity can be addressed through ethical consideration frameworks that serve as guidelines for AI application development. Although terms such as "Trustworthy AI" and "Responsible AI" are frequently used, their practical implications warrant deeper investigation. This article critically examines existing ethical frameworks that address major principles such as fairness, transparency, accountability, and inclusivity. It categorizes these frameworks by their origin–governmental, corporate, academic, and algorithmic–and compares their applicability across diverse contexts. Furthermore, a simplified framework tailored for academic researchers is proposed to instill ethical awareness in early-stage AI development. By synthesizing diverse perspectives and highlighting practical implementations, this paper aims to contribute meaningfully to the ongoing discourse on Responsible AI.
A comprehensive model for integrating ethical standards into the phases of the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) is proposed, founded on the pillars of fairness, transparency, accountability, and sustainability, offering practical recommendations aimed at developers, organizations, and policymakers.
A. Alaswad· Al-Farooq Journal of Science...· 0 citations
A Multi-Layer Social-Theoretical AI Ethics Framework (MLST-AEF) that integrates normative ethical reasoning, stakeholder analysis, institutional context, bias and power assessment, and structured decision support is developed.
M. Fakrudeen, J. Otieno· AI and Ethics· 0 citations
Tanzania needs a context-aware, risk-based regulatory strategy that builds on current legal and institutional structures while incorporating AI-specific safeguards aligned with the risks of different AI applications to benefit from AI development while safeguarding fundamental rights and fostering responsible, safe, an...
Albert Andrew Kikuli· East African Journal of Law...· 0 citations
Three steps of the ENACT methodology are described and details three steps of the ENACT methodology and its potential and limitations for qualitative ethical risk assessment of AI in organisational settings are discussed.
N. Murashova, Leonora Onarheim Bergsjø, Heidi Dahl et al.· Nordic Machine Intelligence· 0 citations
The evidence shows strong convergence around fairness, transparency, privacy, accountability, human oversight, safety and inclusiveness, but weaker agreement on implementation, and an integrated framework for developing, deploying and monitoring AI systems in ways that are lawful, transparent, accountable, inclusive an...
Sunday Olusola Ladipo, Ifaka Queen Inazu· Direct Research Journal of E...· 0 citations
The proposed Lifecycle-Integrated Healthcare AI Governance Framework (LIHAG), a four-layer deployment-oriented governance model integrating technical robustness, ethical safeguards, regulatory compliance, regulatory compliance, and human oversight as interdependent dimensions of responsible AI deployment is proposed.
Shehu Mohammed, Neha Malhotra, Sourabh Kumar· AI and Ethics· 0 citations
Machine-learning networks can learn without detailed instructions from a designer. Those that do may offer insight into how the brain reorganizes itself during learning.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.