Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Artificial Intelligence and Gender Equality: A Study on Legal Scholars’ Understanding of Gender Discrimination and Suggested Solutions

Alkan Olsson, Elsa LU (2022) LAGM01 20221
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
The thesis aims to identify the dominant narrative within the legal research field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and discuss the merit of the prevalent solutions offered by scholars in relation to substantive gender equality. The thesis finds the solutions from a systematic legal literature review covering AI and gender. It develops an analytical framework by applying the theory of social change to assess the recommended solutions’ compatibility with the aim of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).

The literature review reveals that scholars focus on technological solutions to combat discrimination within AI. The thesis argues that these ‘technocentric’ solutions suffer from a... (More)
The thesis aims to identify the dominant narrative within the legal research field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and discuss the merit of the prevalent solutions offered by scholars in relation to substantive gender equality. The thesis finds the solutions from a systematic legal literature review covering AI and gender. It develops an analytical framework by applying the theory of social change to assess the recommended solutions’ compatibility with the aim of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).

The literature review reveals that scholars focus on technological solutions to combat discrimination within AI. The thesis argues that these ‘technocentric’ solutions suffer from a significant methodological limitation: they define AI exclusively as a technological concept, detached from the social context. The findings suggest that the proposed solutions, similar to formal equality, may play a part in achieving social change. However, they fail to fulfil CEDAW’s goal of substantive equality. Ultimately, eradicating discrimination solely through technological solutions is not adequate. Instead, legal scholars must broaden their scope of understanding; AI must not be viewed as an exclusively technological concept but as a system shaped by its social setting. Masquerading these so-called solutions as progress risks doing more harm than good, leaving substantive equality out of reach. (Less)
Popular Abstract (Swedish)
Syftet med denna uppsats är att identifiera den rådande diskursen inom juridisk forskning på området artificiell intelligens (AI) och genus, och att diskutera för- och nackdelar med de lösningar forskare presenterat i relation till substantiell jämställdhet. De rekommenderade lösningarna identifieras genom en systematisk juridisk litteraturgenomgång av AI och genus. Genom att tillämpa teorin om social förändring utvecklar uppsatsen ett analytiskt ramverk för att bedöma lösningarnas kompatibilitet med kvinnokonventionens (CEDAW) syfte.

Litteraturgenomgången visar att forskarna fokuserar på teknologiska lösningar i bekämpningen av könsdiskriminering inom AI. Dessa teknologiskt fokuserade lösningar lider av en metodologisk begränsning. AI... (More)
Syftet med denna uppsats är att identifiera den rådande diskursen inom juridisk forskning på området artificiell intelligens (AI) och genus, och att diskutera för- och nackdelar med de lösningar forskare presenterat i relation till substantiell jämställdhet. De rekommenderade lösningarna identifieras genom en systematisk juridisk litteraturgenomgång av AI och genus. Genom att tillämpa teorin om social förändring utvecklar uppsatsen ett analytiskt ramverk för att bedöma lösningarnas kompatibilitet med kvinnokonventionens (CEDAW) syfte.

Litteraturgenomgången visar att forskarna fokuserar på teknologiska lösningar i bekämpningen av könsdiskriminering inom AI. Dessa teknologiskt fokuserade lösningar lider av en metodologisk begränsning. AI definieras uteslutande som ett teknologiskt koncept, fristående från den sociala kontexten. I uppsatsen fastslås att de föreslagna lösningarna, likt formell jämställdhet, till viss del kan bidra till social förändring. Dock misslyckas de med att uppnå CEDAW:s långsiktiga mål om substantiell jämställdhet. Därmed är teknologiska lösningar otillräckliga medel i förhindrandet av diskriminering. Forskare måste därför vidga sin förståelse och inse att AI inte uteslutande kan förstås som ett teknologiskt koncept men som ett system format av sitt sociala sammanhang. Att maskera dessa lösningar som framgång riskerar att göra mer skada än nytta för substantiell jämställdhet. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Alkan Olsson, Elsa LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGM01 20221
year
type
M3 - Professional qualifications ( - 4 Years)
subject
keywords
Artificial Intelligence, Gender-based discrimination, Human Rights, CEDAW, Substantive Equality
language
English
id
9088702
date added to LUP
2022-06-27 14:01:18
date last changed
2022-06-27 14:01:18
@misc{9088702,
  abstract     = {{The thesis aims to identify the dominant narrative within the legal research field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and discuss the merit of the prevalent solutions offered by scholars in relation to substantive gender equality. The thesis finds the solutions from a systematic legal literature review covering AI and gender. It develops an analytical framework by applying the theory of social change to assess the recommended solutions’ compatibility with the aim of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).

The literature review reveals that scholars focus on technological solutions to combat discrimination within AI. The thesis argues that these ‘technocentric’ solutions suffer from a significant methodological limitation: they define AI exclusively as a technological concept, detached from the social context. The findings suggest that the proposed solutions, similar to formal equality, may play a part in achieving social change. However, they fail to fulfil CEDAW’s goal of substantive equality. Ultimately, eradicating discrimination solely through technological solutions is not adequate. Instead, legal scholars must broaden their scope of understanding; AI must not be viewed as an exclusively technological concept but as a system shaped by its social setting. Masquerading these so-called solutions as progress risks doing more harm than good, leaving substantive equality out of reach.}},
  author       = {{Alkan Olsson, Elsa}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Artificial Intelligence and Gender Equality: A Study on Legal Scholars’ Understanding of Gender Discrimination and Suggested Solutions}},
  year         = {{2022}},
}