Ethics and Governance in Data Analytics: Balancing Innovation with Responsibility

Authors

  • Chioma Susan Nwaimo  Independent Researcher, Chicago Illinois, USA
  • Oluchukwu Modesta Oluoha  Independent Researcher, Lagos, Nigeria
  • Oyewale Oyedokun  Independent Researcher, Texas, USA

Keywords:

Data ethics, governance, data analytics, responsible innovation, algorithmic bias, privacy, transparency, digital accountability, AI regulation, ethical frameworks.

Abstract

In the contemporary digital age, the widespread integration of data analytics has transformed how organizations innovate, make decisions, and interact with society. From healthcare and finance to public administration and marketing, data-driven systems are increasingly relied upon to guide strategic direction and operational efficiency. However, this innovation is paralleled by growing ethical concerns regarding privacy, bias, transparency, accountability, and consent. This journal explores the intricate relationship between ethics and governance in data analytics, particularly in the context of rapid technological advancements and expanding regulatory expectations. It highlights the dual imperative: advancing data innovation while ensuring ethical responsibility and adherence to governance standards. The study recognizes that traditional frameworks of data governance are being challenged by emerging practices such as machine learning, algorithmic profiling, and large-scale data collection from digital footprints. As a result, ethical dilemmas have intensified, raising critical questions about the protection of individual rights, data ownership, algorithmic fairness, and the role of human oversight. Drawing upon interdisciplinary literature and empirical insights, this paper investigates the effectiveness of current governance models in mitigating risks and aligning data practices with societal values. The methodology section outlines a qualitative approach involving content analysis of institutional policies, legal frameworks, and case studies from sectors heavily reliant on data analytics. The paper then explores specific domains where ethical breaches have occurred, examining how weak governance exacerbated harm. Furthermore, it evaluates global trends in data regulation—such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), and emerging AI ethics policies—and their impact on fostering responsible innovation. Ultimately, this journal argues that ethical governance must not be a reactive afterthought but an integral pillar of data analytics infrastructure. A proactive balance between innovation and responsibility can only be achieved through enforceable standards, ethical literacy among practitioners, public participation, and agile governance mechanisms that evolve with technology. This research contributes to the ongoing discourse by proposing a scalable framework for embedding ethical and governance principles into data analytics systems, supporting both innovation and trust in an increasingly data-reliant society.

References

  1. A Ejibenam, T Onibokun, KD Oladeji, HA Onayemi, N Halliday Journal of Frontiers in Multidisciplinary Research 2 (01), 113-120 The relevance of Customer Retention to Organizational Growth
  2. Ada Lovelace Institute, 2020. Rethinking data: A new approach to data governance. [online] https://www.adalovelaceinstitute.org/report/rethinking-data/
  3. Ada Lovelace Institute, 2021. Examining the black box: Tools for assessing algorithmic systems. [online] https://www.adalovelaceinstitute.org/project/examining-the-black-box
  4. Adesemoye, O.E., Chukwuma-Eke, E.C., Lawal, C.I., Isibor, N.J., Akintobi, A.O. & Ezeh, F.S., 2022. .
  5. Adikwu, F.E., Ozobu, C.O., Odujobi, O., Onyekwe, F.O. & Nwulu, E.O., 2023. Advances in EHS Compliance: A Conceptual Model for Standardizing Health, Safety, and Hygiene Programs Across Multinational Corporations. IRE Journals, 7(5).
  6. AI Now Institute, 2019. AI Now Report 2019. [online] https://ainowinstitute.org/AI_Now_2019_Report.html . .
  7. Akpe, O.E.E., Kisina, D., Owoade, S., Uzoka, A.C. and Chibunna, B., 2021. Advances in Federated Authentication and Identity Management for Scalable Digital Platforms.
  8. Alonge, E.O., Eyo-Udo, N.L., Chibunna, b., Ubanadu, A.I.D., Balogun, E.D. And Ogunsola, K.O., 2021. Digital transformation in retail banking to enhance customer experience and profitability. Iconic Research and Engineering Journals, 4(9).
  9. Alonge, E.O., Eyo-Udo, N.L., Chibunna, B.R.I.G.H.T., Ubanadu, A.I.D., Balogun, E.D. and Ogunsola, K.O., 2023. The role of predictive analytics in enhancing customer experience and retention. Journal of Business Intelligence and Predictive Analytics, 9(1), pp.55-67.
  10. Alonge, E.O., Eyo-Udo, N.L., Ubanadu, B.C., Daraojimba, A.I., Balogun, E.D. and Ogunsola, K.O., 2021. Enhancing data security with machine learning: A study on fraud detection algorithms. Journal of Data Security and Fraud Prevention, 7(2), pp.105-118.
  11. Amoore, L. and Piotukh, V., 2015. Life beyond big data: Governing with little analytics. Economy and Society, 44(3), pp.341–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085147.2015.1043793
  12. Ananny, M. and Crawford, K., 2018. Seeing without knowing: Limitations of the transparency ideal and its application to algorithmic accountability. New Media & Society, 20(3), pp.973–989. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816676645
  13. Aniebonam, E.E., Chukwuba, K., Emeka, N. and Taylor, G., 2023. Transformational leadership and transactional leadership styles: systematic review of literature. International Journal of Applied Research, 9(1), pp.07-15.
  14. Arrieta, A.B., Díaz-Rodríguez, N., Del Ser, J. et al., 2020. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI): Concepts, taxonomies, opportunities and challenges toward responsible AI. Information Fusion, 58, pp.82–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2019.12.012
  15. Barocas, S., Hardt, M. and Narayanan, A., 2019. Fairness and machine learning: Limitations and opportunities. [Online book] https://fairmlbook.org/ 
  16. Binns, R., 2017. Algorithmic accountability and public reason. Philosophy & Technology, 31(4), pp.543–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0263-5
  17. Binns, R., 2018. Fairness in machine learning: Lessons from political philosophy. In: Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency (FAT*), pp.149–159. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287560.3287583
  18. Binns, R., 2020. On the apparent conflict between individual and group fairness. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp.514–524. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372864
  19. Binns, R., Veale, M., Van Kleek, M. and Shadbolt, N., 2018. Algorithmic accountability and public reasoning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 376(2133), p.20180081. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0081
  20. Binns, R., Veale, M., Van Kleek, M. and Shadbolt, N., 2018. ’It's reducing a human being to a percentage’: perceptions of justice in algorithmic decisions. In: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp.1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173951
  21. Bozdag, E., 2013. Bias in algorithmic filtering and personalization. Ethics and Information Technology, 15(3), pp.209–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-013-9321-6
  22. Capurro, R., 2010. Ethical challenges of the information society in the 21st century. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 8(2), pp.200–207.
  23. Cath, C., 2018. Governing artificial intelligence: Ethical, legal and technical opportunities and challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 376(2133), p.20180080. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0080
  24. Cath, C., 2021. Governing artificial intelligence: Ethical, legal and technical opportunities and challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 376(2133), p.20180080. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0080
  25. Cowls, J. and Floridi, L., 2018. Prolegomena to a white paper on an ethical framework for a good AI society. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3198732
  26. Cowls, J. and Floridi, L., 2021. The Artificial Intelligence Act of the European Commission: A critical assessment. Minds and Machines, 31, pp.1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-021-09558-2
  27. Crawford, K. and Paglen, T., 2019. Excavating AI: The politics of training sets for machine learning. [online] https://excavating.ai
  28. Crawford, K., 2017. The hidden biases in big data. Harvard Business Review, 2017. [online] https://hbr.org/2017/04/the-hidden-biases-in-big-data
  29. Crawford, K., 2021. Atlas of AI: Power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. Yale University Press.
  30. Dastin, J., 2018. Amazon scrapped ‘sexist AI’ recruiting tool. Reuters. [online] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-amazon-com-jobs-automation-insight-idUSKCN1MK08G
  31. Dignum, V., 2018. Ethics in artificial intelligence: Introduction to the special issue. Ethics and Information Technology, 20(1), pp.1–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9450-z
  32. Ebuka Emmanuel Aniebonam , Uloma Stella Nwabekee, Oluwafunmike O Elumilade, A Digital Transformation Maturity Model for Improving Financial ReportingAccuracy and Scalability in Small-to-Medium Enterprises OYO International Journal of Management and Organizational Research 1 (1), 113-126
  33. Edwards, L. and Veale, M., 2017. Slave to the algorithm? Why a right to an explanation is probably not the remedy you are looking for. Duke Law & Technology Review, 16(1), pp.18–84.
  34. Eitel-Porter, R., 2021. How to practise responsible AI. Nature, 598(7880), pp.171–173. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02469-x
  35. Eubanks, V., 2018. Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. New York: St. Martin's Press.
  36. European Commission, 2019. Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. [online] Available at: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai
  37. European Parliamentary Research Service, 2020. The ethics of artificial intelligence: Issues and initiatives. [online] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_STU(2020)634452
  38. Fjeld, J., Achten, N., Hilligoss, H., Nagy, A. and Srikumar, M., 2020. Principled Artificial Intelligence: Mapping Consensus in Ethical and Rights-Based Approaches to Principles for AI. Berkman Klein Center Research Publication No. 2020-1.
  39. Floridi, L. and Taddeo, M., 2016. What is data ethics?. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 374(2083), p.20160360. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2016.0360
  40. Floridi, L. and Taddeo, M., 2016. What is data ethics?. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 374(2083), p.20160360. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2016.0360
  41. Gasser, U. and Almeida, V.A.F., 2017. A layered model for AI governance. IEEE Internet Computing, 21(6), pp.58–62. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2017.4180835
  42. Gillingham, P., 2016. Predictive risk modelling to prevent child maltreatment and other adverse outcomes for service users: Inside the ‘black box’ of machine learning. British Journal of Social Work, 46(4), pp.1044–1058.
  43. Greene, D., Hoffmann, A.L. and Stark, L., 2019. Better, nicer, clearer, fairer: A critical assessment of the movement for ethical artificial intelligence and machine learning. In: Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/59651
  44. Halliday, N.N., 2021. Assessment of Major Air Pollutants, Impact on Air Quality and Health Impacts on Residents: Case Study of Cardiovascular Diseases (Master's thesis, University of Cincinnati).
  45. Helbing, D., 2019. Societal, economic, ethical and legal challenges of the digital revolution: From big data to deep learning, artificial intelligence, and manipulative technologies. In: Towards Digital Enlightenment. Springer, pp.47–72.
  46. Jain, S., 2021. Explainable AI: Where accountability meets transparency. Communications of the ACM, 64(1), pp.58–64. https://doi.org/10.1145/3424002
  47. Jebari, K., 2018. AI and moral enhancement: A new dimension of cognitive development. Ethics and Information Technology, 20(2), pp.125–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9461-9
  48. Jobin, A., Ienca, M. and Vayena, E., 2019. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), pp.389–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2
  49. John, A.O. and Oyeyemi, B.B., 2022. The Role of AI in Oil and Gas Supply Chain Optimization. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation, 3(1), pp.1075-1086.
  50. Koene, A., Smith, C., Guerses, S., Millard, C. and Singh, J., 2019. A taxonomy of accountability mechanisms for algorithms. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(8), pp.508–512. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0105-5
  51. Lepri, B., Oliver, N., Letouzé, E., Pentland, A. and Vinck, P., 2017. Fair, transparent, and accountable algorithmic decision-making processes. Philosophy & Technology, 31, pp.611–627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-017-0279-x
  52. Leslie, D., 2019. Understanding artificial intelligence ethics and safety. The Alan Turing Institute. [online] https://www.turing.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2019-06/understanding-artificial-intelligence-ethics-and-safety.pdf
  53. McGregor, L., Murray, D. and Ng, V., 2019. International human rights law as a framework for algorithmic accountability. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 68(2), pp.309–343. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020589319000046
  54. Mittelstadt, B., 2017. Automation, algorithms, and politics| Auditing for transparency in content personalization systems. International Journal of Communication, 11, pp.1002–1020.
  55. Mittelstadt, B., 2019. Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(11), pp.501–507. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0114-4
  56. Mittelstadt, B.D., 2021. AI ethics–too principled to fail?. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.06668. [online] https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.06668
  57. Mittelstadt, B.D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S. and Floridi, L., 2016. The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2), pp.1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679679
  58. Morley, J., Floridi, L., Kinsey, L. and Elhalal, A., 2020. From what to how: An initial review of publicly available AI ethics tools, methods and research to translate principles into practices. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26, pp.2141–2168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00165-5
  59. Morley, J., Kinsey, L., Elhalal, A. and Floridi, L., 2021. Operationalising AI ethics: Barriers, enablers and next steps. AI & Society, 38, pp.1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01253-7
  60. Nemitz, P., 2018. Constitutional democracy and technology in the age of artificial intelligence. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 376(2133), p.20180089.
  61. Nemitz, P., 2019. Technological convergence, social innovation, and global governance: The case of artificial intelligence. European Journal of Futures Research, 7(1), pp.1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40309-019-0157-3
  62. Nissenbaum, H., 2009. Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press.
  63. Nwabekee, U.S., Aniebonam, E.E., Elumilade, O.O. and Ogunsola, O.Y., 2021. Integrating Digital Marketing Strategies with Financial Performance Metrics to Drive Profitability Across Competitive Market Sectors. Journal of Marketing and Financial Performance, 5(2), pp.76-91.
  64. Nwabekee, U.S., Aniebonam, E.E., Elumilade, O.O. and Ogunsola, O.Y., 2021. Predictive Model for Enhancing Long-Term Customer Relationships and Profitability in Retail and Service-Based. 
  65. O'Neil, C., 2016. Big data: Ethical issues. In: E. Gordon and P. Mihailidis, eds., Civic Media: Technology, Design, Practice. MIT Press, pp.457–464.
  66. Oguejiofor, B.B., Omotosho, A., Abioye, K.M., Alabi, A.M., Oguntoyinbo, F.N., Daraojimba, A.I. and Daraojimba, C., 2023. A review on data-driven regulatory compliance in Nigeria. International Journal of applied research in social sciences, 5(8), pp.231-243.
  67. Ogundipe, F., Bakare, O.I., Sampson, E. and Folorunso, A., 2023. Harnessing Digital Transformation for Africa’s Growth: Opportunities and Challenges in the Technological Era.The impact of Personalization on Customer Satisfaction
  68. Ogunnowo, E.O., Adewoyin, M.A., Fiemotongha, J.E., Igunma, T.O. & Adeleke, A.K., 2022.
  69. Ojika, F.U., Owobu, O., Abieba, O.A., Esan, O.J., Daraojimba, A.I. and Ubamadu, B.C., 2021. A conceptual framework for AI-driven digital transformation: Leveraging NLP and machine learning for enhanced data flow in retail operations. IRE Journals, 4(9).
  70. Ojika, F.U., Owobu, W.O., Abieba, O.A., Esan, O.J., Ubamadu, B.C. and Daraojimba, A.I., 2023. Enhancing User Interaction through Deep Learning Models: A Data-Driven Approach to Improving Consumer Experience in E-Commerce.
  71. Oni, O., Adeshina, Y.T., Iloeje, K.F. and Olatunji, O.O., Artificial intelligence model fairness auditor for loan systems. Journal ID, 8993, p.1162. 
  72. Oyeyemi, B.B., 2022. Artificial Intelligence in Agricultural Supply Chains: Lessons from the US for Nigeria.
  73. Oyeyemi, B.B., 2023. Data-Driven Decisions: Leveraging Predictive Analytics in Procurement Software for Smarter Supply Chain Management in the United States.
  74. Ozobu, C.O., Adikwu, F.E., Odujobi, O., Onyekwe, F.O., Nwulu, E.O. & Daraojimba, A.I., 2023. Leveraging AI and Machine Learning to Predict Occupational Diseases: A Conceptual Framework for Proactive Health Risk Management in High-Risk Industries. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation, 4(1), pp.928–938. DOI: 10.54660/.IJMRGE.2023.4.1.928-938.Here is the citation for the additional publication in Harvard style format:
  75. Ozobu, C.O., Adikwu, F.E., Odujobi, O., Onyekwe, F.O., Nwulu, E.O. and Daraojimba, A.I., 2023. Leveraging AI and machine learning to predict occupational diseases: A conceptual framework for proactive health risk management in high-risk industries. Journal name and details missing.
  76. Ozobu, C.O., Onyekwe, F.O., Adikwu, F.E., Odujobi, O. & Nwulu, E.O., 2023. Developing a National Strategy for Integrating Wellness Programs into Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems in Nigeria: A Conceptual Framework. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation, 4(1), pp.914–927.
  77. O’Neil, C., 2016. Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. New York: Crown Publishing.
  78. Pasquale, F., 2015. The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press.
  79. Powles, J. and Nissenbaum, H., 2018. The seductive diversion of ‘solving’ bias in artificial intelligence. OneZero. [online] https://onezero.medium.com/the-seductive-diversion-of-solving-bias-in-artificial-intelligence-890df5e5ef53
  80. Project Management Innovations for Strengthening Cybersecurity Compliance across Complex Enterprises. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation, 2(1), pp.871-881. DOI: 10.54660/.IJMRGE.2021.2.1.871-881.
  81. Rahwan, I., Cebrian, M., Obradovich, N. et al., 2019. Machine behaviour. Nature, 568(7753), pp.477–486. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1138-y
  82. Raji, I.D. and Buolamwini, J., 2019. Actionable auditing: Investigating the impact of publicly naming biased performance results of commercial AI products. In: Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp. 429–435. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314244
  83. Raji, I.D. and Buolamwini, J., 2019. Actionable auditing: Investigating the impact of publicly naming biased performance results of commercial AI products. In: Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, pp.429–435. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306618.3314244
  84. Raji, I.D., Smart, A., White, R.N., Mitchell, M., Gebru, T. and Hutchinson, B., 2020. Closing the AI accountability gap: Defining an end-to-end framework for internal algorithmic auditing. In: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT*), pp.33–44. https://doi.org/10.1145/3351095.3372873
  85. Richardson, R., Schultz, J.M. and Crawford, K., 2019. Dirty data, bad predictions: How civil rights violations impact police data, predictive policing systems, and justice. NYU Law Review, 94(2), pp.192–233.
  86. Selbst, A.D., Boyd, D., Friedler, S.A., Venkatasubramanian, S. and Vertesi, J., 2019. Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, pp.59–68.
  87. Sharma, A., Adekunle, B.I., Ogeawuchi, J.C., Abayomi, A.A. and Onifade, O., 2019. IoT-enabled Predictive Maintenance for Mechanical Systems: Innovations in Real-time Monitoring and Operational Excellence.
  88. Stahl, B.C., 2011. IT for a better future: How to integrate ethics, politics and innovation. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 9(3), pp.140–156. https://doi.org/10.1108/14779961111167660 .
  89. T Onibokun, A Ejibenam, PC Ekeocha, HA Onayemi, N Halliday The use of AI to improve CX in SAAS environment International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Growth Evaluation 3.
  90. T Onibokun, A Ejibenam, PC Ekeocha, KD Oladeji, N Halliday Journal of Frontiers in Multidisciplinary Research 4 (01), 333-341
  91. Taddeo, M. and Floridi, L., 2018. How AI can be a force for good. Science, 361(6404), pp.751–752. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat5991
  92. Taddeo, M. and Floridi, L., 2021. The ethics of digital well-being: A thematic review. Science and Engineering Ethics, 27(2), p.17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00301-4
  93. Taylor, L., 2017. What is data justice? The case for connecting digital rights and freedoms globally. Big Data & Society, 4(2), pp.1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951717736335
  94. Tufekci, Z., 2015. Algorithmic harms beyond Facebook and Google: Emergent challenges of computational agency. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 13(2), pp.203–218.
  95. Uwaoma, P.U., Eboigbe, E.O., Eyo-Udo, N.L., Ijiga, A.C., Kaggwa, S. and Daraojimba, A.I., 2023. Mixed reality in US retail: A review: Analyzing the immersive shopping experiences, customer engagement, and potential economic implications. World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, 20(3), pp.966-981.
  96. Van den Hoven, J., Lokhorst, G.J. and Van de Poel, I., 2012. Engineering and the problem of moral overload. Science and Engineering Ethics, 18(1), pp.143–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9277-z
  97. Veale, M. and Brass, I., 2019. Administration by algorithm? Public management meets public sector machine learning. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300760
  98. Veale, M., Van Kleek, M. and Binns, R., 2018. Fairness and accountability design needs for algorithmic support in high-stakes public sector decision-making. In: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference, pp.1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174014
  99. Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B. and Floridi, L., 2017. Why a right to explanation of automated decision-making does not exist in the General Data Protection Regulation. International Data Privacy Law, 7(2), pp.76–99. https://doi.org/10.1093/idpl/ipx005
  100. Wagner, B., 2019. Ethics as an escape from regulation: From ethics-washing to ethics-shopping?. In: H. Krings, K. Kathrani and W. Edelman, eds. Research Handbook on Human Rights and Digital Technology. Edward Elgar Publishing, pp.1–16.
  101. Winfield, A.F.T. and Jirotka, M., 2018. Ethical governance is essential to building trust in robotics and artificial intelligence systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 376(2133), p.20180085. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2018.0085
  102. Winfield, A.F.T., Michael, K. and Pitt, J., 2021. The case for an IEEE standard on algorithmic bias. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 40(2), pp.82–85. https://doi.org/10.1109/MTS.2021.3066762
  103. Yeung, K., 2018. Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation. Regulation & Governance, 12(4), pp.505–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12160
  104. Zarsky, T.Z., 2016. The trouble with algorithmic decisions: An analytic road map to examine efficiency and fairness in automated and opaque decision making. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(1), pp.118–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915605575
  105. Zliobaite, I., 2017. Measuring discrimination in algorithmic decision making. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 31(4), pp.1060–1089. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10618-017-0506-1
  106. Zuboff, S., 2019. The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. New York: PublicAffairs.
  107. Zuboff, S., 2021. The coup we are not talking about. The New York Times, 29, p.2021.

IInternational Journal of Scientific Research in Computer Science, Engineering and Information Technology

Downloads

Published

2023-06-25

Issue

Volume 9, Issue 3, May-June-2023

Section

Research Articles

License

Copyright (c) IJSRCSEIT

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

[1]
Chioma Susan Nwaimo, Oluchukwu Modesta Oluoha, Oyewale Oyedokun, " Ethics and Governance in Data Analytics: Balancing Innovation with Responsibility" International Journal of Scientific Research in Computer Science, Engineering and Information Technology(IJSRCSEIT), ISSN : 2456-3307, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp.823-856, May-June-2023.