Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHopkins, Aspen
dc.contributor.authorStruckman, Isabella
dc.contributor.authorKlyman, Kevin
dc.contributor.authorSilbey, Susan S.
dc.date.accessioned2025-12-18T22:35:40Z
dc.date.available2025-12-18T22:35:40Z
dc.date.issued2025-06-23
dc.identifier.isbn979-8-4007-1482-5
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/164414
dc.descriptionFAccT ’25, Athens, Greeceen_US
dc.description.abstractThe AI industry is exploding in popularity, with increasing attention to potential harms and unwanted consequences. In the current digital ecosystem, AI deployments are often the product of AI supply chains (AISC): networks of outsourced models, data, and tooling through which multiple entities contribute to AI development and distribution. AI supply chains lack the modularity, redundancies, or conventional supply chain practices that enable identification, isolation, and easy correction of failures, exacerbating the already difficult processes of responding to ML-generated harms. As the stakeholders participating in and impacted by AISCs have scaled and diversified, so too have the risks they face. In this stakeholder analysis of AI supply chains, we consider who participates in AISCs, what harms they face, where sources of harm lie, and how market dynamics and power differentials inform the type and probability of remedies. Because AI supply chains are purposely invented and implemented, they may be designed to account for, rather than ignore, the complexities, consequences, and risks of deploying AI systems. To enable responsible design and management of AISCs, we offer a typology of responses to AISC-induced harms: recourse, repair, reparation or prevention. We apply this typology to stakeholders participating in a health-care AISC across three stylized markets—vertical integration, horizontal integration, free market—to illustrate how stakeholder positioning and power within an AISC may shape responses to an experienced harm.en_US
dc.publisherACM|The 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparencyen_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttps://doi.org/10.1145/3715275.3732017en_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attributionen_US
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_US
dc.sourceAssociation for Computing Machineryen_US
dc.titleRecourse, Repair, Reparation, & Prevention: A Stakeholder Analysis of AI Supply Chainsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.citationAspen Hopkins, Isabella Struckman, Kevin Klyman, and Susan S. Silbey. 2025. Recourse, Repair, Reparation, & Prevention: A Stakeholder Analysis of AI Supply Chains. In Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT '25). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 209–227.en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Scienceen_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Anthropology Programen_US
dc.identifier.mitlicensePUBLISHER_POLICY
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/ConferencePaperen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/NonPeerRevieweden_US
dc.date.updated2025-08-01T08:32:59Z
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe author(s)
dspace.date.submission2025-08-01T08:33:00Z
mit.licensePUBLISHER_CC
mit.metadata.statusAuthority Work and Publication Information Neededen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record