The following article is in the Edition 1.0 Research stage. Additional work is needed. Please use the form at the bottom of the page to recommend improvements.
Allocative harms refer to the negative consequences that arise when artificial intelligence (AI) systems unfairly withhold services, resources, or opportunities from certain individuals or groups. These harms occur when AI algorithms, often unintentionally, perpetuate existing biases present in their training data or decision-making processes. As a result, marginalized or underrepresented groups may face discrimination in critical areas such as employment, lending, housing, and healthcare.
Allocative harms have been a significant focus for those working to ensure fair AI systems because they are, in theory, quantifiable and can be addressed through technical interventions. By analyzing the outputs of AI systems, developers can identify patterns of unfair treatment and adjust algorithms to mitigate bias. Techniques such as reweighting training data, modifying decision thresholds, or implementing fairness constraints are employed to reduce these disparities.
However, while allocative harms deal with the unequal distribution of tangible resources and opportunities, there is also a need to address representational harms. Representational harms involve AI systems that reinforce harmful stereotypes or societal biases, impacting how certain groups are perceived and treated beyond resource allocation. Both types of harms contribute to systemic inequality but require different approaches to identify and remediate.
In the context of AI ethics and law, addressing allocative harms is crucial for promoting equity and preventing discrimination. Legal frameworks, such as anti-discrimination laws, are increasingly being applied to AI systems to hold organizations accountable for biased outcomes. Ethical guidelines emphasize the importance of fairness, transparency, and accountability in AI development and deployment.
By proactively identifying and correcting allocative harms, stakeholders can work towards AI systems that distribute services and opportunities more justly. This not only improves the fairness of individual systems but also contributes to broader efforts to reduce societal inequalities amplified by technology.
