Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/158512
|
| Title: | 風險社會理論下新興科技風險治理框架之建構研究
A Study on the Construction of a Governance Framework for Emerging Technology Risks under the Theory of Risk Society |
| Authors: | 廖晨旭
Liao, Chen-Hsu |
| Contributors: | 彭金隆
葉啟洲
廖晨旭
Liao, Chen-Hsu |
| Keywords: | 風險治理
新興科技
人工智慧
全球治理
前瞻治理
Risk governance
Emerging technologies
Artificial intelligence
Global governance
Anticipatory governance |
| Date: | 2025 |
| Issue Date: | 2025-08-04 14:09:47 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究以風險社會理論為基礎，回應新興科技風險所引發的不確定性、制度落差與治理正當性問題，建構具前瞻性與適應性的「風險治理框架」。本研究建構之框架區分為三層次：第一層「基本型風險治理框架」，係聚焦於風險分析、知識處理、參與機制、制度調適與治理正當性及合法性五大基本元素探討；第二層則是在不同新興科技應用上時，透過多國比較與人工智慧案例，經檢驗治理架構的延展性與調適機制而形成之「調適型風險治理框架」；第三層則係強調面對如AI代理人等最新跨域科技風險時，需納入全球與前瞻治理以提升永續性與國際協調力之「擴充型風險治理框架」。
本研究採質性方法，結合理論整合、文獻與制度比較分析，並主要以AI風險為實例驗證框架可用性。結果指出，唯有建立具層次性的治理架構，方能因應科技風險的複雜性與制度挑戰，並為未來科技治理提供具反思性與預警性的行動導引。
This study is grounded in the theory of the risk society and addresses the uncertainty, institutional discontinuities, and legitimacy crises triggered by emerging technological risks. It proposes a forward-looking and adaptive risk governance framework, conceptualized through a three-tiered structure. The first tier, termed the baseline risk governance framework, focuses on five foundational elements: risk analysis, knowledge processing, participatory mechanisms, institutional adaptability, and the legitimacy and legality of governance. The second tier, or the adaptive risk governance framework, emerges from cross-national comparative analysis and case studies in artificial intelligence (AI), examining the extensibility and adaptability of the baseline framework across different technological domains. The third tier, referred to as the extended risk governance framework, emphasizes the need to integrate global governance and anticipatory governance in response to novel, cross-sectoral risks—such as those associated with AI agents—to enhance long-term sustainability and international coordination.
Employing a qualitative methodology, the study synthesizes theoretical perspectives with literature and institutional comparisons, using AI-related risks as the primary case for empirical examination. The findings suggest that only a stratified governance architecture can effectively respond to the complexity of technological risks and institutional challenges, while providing a reflexive and anticipatory basis for guiding future governance of emerging technologies. |
| Reference: | 中文圖書：
周桂田 (2014)。風險社會典範轉移：打造為公眾負責的治理模式。台北市：遠流。
中文期刊：
林勤富 (2025)。論歐盟《人工智慧法》之制度設計、規範內涵與治理侷限。中研院法學期刊，(36)，頁1-119。
邱文聰 (2010)。科學研究自由與第三波科學民主化的挑戰。科技發展與法律規範雙年刊，頁 61-115。
周桂田、陳薪智 (2014)。脆弱性的資訊科技風險治理文化：考察病歷電子化之制度性無知。思與言，52(3)，頁53-97。
周桂田、徐健銘 (2016)。進擊的世界風險社會挑戰－紀念貝克逝世一周年。二十一世紀，(154)，頁13-29。
郭戎晉 (2023)。人工智慧風險治理與監管機制建構之研究－以歐盟監管專法（AIA）與美國風險管理標準為核心。世新法學，17(1)，頁109-221。
外文圖書：
Arthurs, H. (1985). Without the law: Administrative justice and legal pluralism in nineteenth century England. University of Toronto Press.
Aven, T., & Renn, O. (2010). Risk management and governance: Concepts, guidelines and applications. Springer.
Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive regulation: Transcending the deregulation debate. Oxford University Press.
Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Polity Press.
Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft: Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. Suhrkamp.
Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity (M. Ritter, Trans.). Sage. (Original work published 1986)
Beck, U. (1995). Ecological politics in an age of risk. Polity Press.
Beck, U. (1996). The reinvention of politics: Rethinking modernity in the global social order. Polity Press.
Beck, U. (1998a). Politics of risk society. In J. Franklin (Ed.), The politics of risk society (pp. 9–22). Polity Press.
Beck, U. (1998b). Democracy without enemies. Polity Press.
Beck, U. (1999). World risk society. Polity Press.
Beck, U. (2000a). Risk society revisited: Theory, politics and research programmes. In B. Adam, U. Beck, & J. Van Loon (Eds.), The risk society and beyond: Critical issues for social theory (pp. 211–229). Sage.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (1995). The normal chaos of love. Polity Press.
Beck, U., Giddens, A., & Lash, S. (1994). Reflexive modernization: Politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order. Polity Press.
Beierle, T. C., & Cayford, J. (2002). Democracy in practice: Public participation in environmental decisions. Resources for the Future.
Bernstein, P. L. (1996). Against the gods: The remarkable story of risk. John Wiley & Sons.
Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press.
Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. (Eds.). (1987). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in sociology and history of technology (25th anniversary ed.). MIT Press.
Braithwaite, J. (1985). To punish or persuade? State University of New York Press.
Braithwaite, J., & Drahos, P. (2000). Global business regulation. Cambridge University Press.
Bradford, A. (2020). The Brussels effect: How the European Union rules the world. Oxford University Press.
Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Blackwell.
Chandler, A. D. Jr. (1962). Strategy and structure. MIT Press.
Cohen De Lara, M., & Dron, D. (1997). Évaluation économique et environnement dans les décisions publiques. La Documentation Française.
Collingridge, D. (1980). The social control of technology. Frances Pinter.
Collingridge, D. (1996). Resilience, flexibility, and diversity in managing the risks of technologies. In C. Hood & D. K. C. Jones (Eds.), Accident and design: Contemporary debates in risk management (pp. 40–45). UCL Press.
Cook, B. (1996). Bureaucracy and self government: Reconsidering the role of public administration in American government. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Davies, A. (2001). Accountability: A public law analysis of government by contract . Oxford University Press.
de Jouvenel, B. (1967). The art of conjecture (N. Lary, Trans.). Basic Books.
de Sadeleer, N. (2002). Environmental principles: From political slogans to legal rules .Oxford University Press.
Deville, A., & Harding, R. (1997). Applying the precautionary principle. Federation Press.
Douglas, M. (1992). Risk and blame: Essays in cultural theory. Routledge.
Downes, L. (2009). The laws of disruption: Harnessing the new forces that govern life and business in the digital age. Basic Books.
Dumouchel, P. (1994). Rationality and the self-organization of preferences (Cahiers d'épistémologie No. 9419). Université du Québec.
Drahos, P. (2014). Intellectual property, indigenous people and their knowledge. Cambridge University Press.
Drahos, P., & Krygier, M. (2017). Regulation, institutions and networks. In P. Drahos (Ed.), Regulatory theory: Foundations and applications (pp. 1–22). ANU Press.
Easley, D., & Kleinberg, J. (2010). Networks, crowds, and markets: Reasoning about a highly connected world. Cambridge University Press.
Ewald, F. (1986). Histoire de l’état-providence: Les origines de la solidarité. Grasset.
Ewald, F. (1991). Insurance and risk. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality (pp. 197–210). Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Faure, M., & Hartlief, T. (2002). Nieuwe risico’s en vragen van verzekering en aansprakelijkheid. Kluwer.
Fisher, E. (2007). Risk regulation and administrative constitutionalism (Ch. 1). Hart Publishing.
Fisher, E., Jones, J., & von Schomberg, R. (Eds.). (2006). Implementing the precautionary principle: Perspectives and prospects. Edward Elgar.
Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S., & Keeney, R. (1981). Acceptable risk. Cambridge University Press.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge. Pantheon Books.
Garland, D. (2003). The rise of risk. In A. Doyle & D. Ericson (Eds.), Risk and morality (pp. 48–86). University of Toronto Press.
Gaskins, R. (1992). Burdens of proof in modern discourse. Yale University Press.
Geertz, C. (1993). Local knowledge. Fontana Press.
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1994a). Living in a post-traditional society. In U. Beck, A. Giddens, & S. Lash (Eds.), Reflexive modernization: Politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order (pp. 56–109). Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1994b). Beyond left and right: The future of radical politics. Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1996). In defence of sociology: Essays, interpretations and rejoinders. Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (1998). Risk society: The context of British politics. In J. Franklin (Ed.), The politics of risk society (pp. 23–34). Polity Press.
Giddens, A., & Pierson, C. (1998). Conversations with Anthony Giddens: Making sense of modernity. Polity Press.
Glenn, J. C. (2009). Futures research methodology (Version 3.0). The Millennium Project.
Goldblatt, D. (1996). Social theory and the environment. Polity Press.
Goodwin, P., & Wright, G. (2004). Decision analysis for management judgement (4th ed.). Wiley.
Graham, J. D., & Wiener, J. B. (1995). Risk vs. risk: Tradeoffs in protecting health and the environment. Harvard University Press.
Graham, J. D., & Rhomberg, L. (1996). How risks are identified and assessed. In H. Kunreuther & P. Slovic (Eds.), Challenges in risk assessment and risk management (pp. 15–24). The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Sage.
Greenwood, T. (1984). Knowledge and discretion in government regulation. Praeger.
Grossi, P., & Kunreuther, H. (Eds.). (2005). Catastrophe modeling: A new approach to managing risk. Springer.
Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Polity Press.
Halliday, T. C. (2017). Time and temporality in global governance. In P. Drahos (Ed.), Regulatory theory: Foundations and applications (pp. 303–322). ANU Press.
Hampel, J., & Renn, O. (Eds.). (2000). Gentechnik in der Öffentlichkeit: Wahrnehmung und Bewertung einer umstrittenen Technologie (2nd ed.). Campus.
Hammond, J. S., Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1999). Smart choices: A practical guide to making better decisions. Harvard Business School Press.
Hance, B. J., Chess, C., & Sandman, P. M. (1988). Improving dialogue with communities: A risk communication manual for government. Environmental Communication Research Programme, Rutgers University.
Harding, R., & Fisher, E. (Eds.). (1999). Perspectives on the precautionary principle. Federation Press.
Hiskes, R. (1998). Democracy, risk, and community: Technological hazards and the evolution of liberalism. Oxford University Press.
Hope, J. (2007). Biobazaar: The open source revolution and biotechnology. Harvard University Press.
Horowitz, R. (1989). The irony of regulatory reform. Oxford University Press.
Hutchens, A. (2009). Changing big business: The globalisation of the fair trade movement. Edward Elgar.
Inayatullah, S. (2004). Causal layered analysis: Theory, historical context, and case studies. In S. Inayatullah (Ed.), The causal layered analysis reader: Theory and case studies of an integrative and transformative methodology. Tamkang University Press.
Irwin, A. (2001). Sociology and the environment: A critical introduction to society, nature and knowledge. Polity Press.
Irwin, A., & Wynne, B. (Eds.). (1996). Misunderstanding science? The public reconstruction of science and technology. Cambridge University Press.
Jasanoff, S. (2005b). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press.
Joffe, H. (1999). Risk and the other. Cambridge University Press.
Jones, J., & Bronitt, S. (2006). The burden and standard of proof in environmental regulation: The precautionary principle in an Australian administrative context. In E. Fisher, J. Jones, & R. von Schomberg (Eds.), Implementing the precautionary principle: Perspectives and prospects (pp. 137–160). Edward Elgar.
Kassalow, J. S. (2001). Why health is important to U.S. foreign policy. Milbank Memorial Fund.
Kasperson, R. E., Golding, D., & Kasperson, J. X. (1999). Risk, trust and democratic theory. In G. Cvetkovich & R. Löfstedt (Eds.), Social trust and the management of risk (pp. 22–41). Earthscan.
Kelly, K. (2010). What technology wants. Viking Press.
Keeney, R. L. (1992). Value-focused thinking: A path to creative decision making. Harvard University Press.
Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2000). Introduction. In J. S. Nye & R. O. Keohane (Eds.), Governance in a globalizing world (pp. 1–42). Brookings Institution Press.
Lave, L. B. (1981). The strategy of social regulation: Decision frameworks for policy. Brookings Institution.
Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern. Harvard University Press.
Larson, E. V. (2019). Force planning scenarios, 1945–2016: Their origins and use in defense strategic planning. RAND.
Lash, S. (1994). Reflexivity and its doubles: Structure, aesthetics, community. In U. Beck, A. Giddens, & S. Lash (Eds.), Reflexive modernization (pp. 110–173). Polity Press.
Lash, S. (2000). Risk culture. In B. Adam, U. Beck, & J. van Loon (Eds.), The risk society and beyond (pp. 47–62). Sage.
Leiss, W. (1996). Three phases in risk communication practice. In H. Kunreuther & P. Slovic (Eds.), Challenges in risk assessment and risk management (pp. 85–94). The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Sage.
Luhmann, N. (1993). Risk: A sociological theory. Aldine de Gruyter.
Lundgren, R. E. (1994). Risk communication: A handbook for communicating environmental, safety, and health risks. Battelle Press.
Lupton, D. (1999). Risk. Routledge.
Löfstedt, R. E. (2005). Risk management in post-trust societies. Palgrave Macmillan.
Lyall, C., & Tait, J. (2004). Shifting policy debates and the implications for governance. In C. Lyall & J. Tait (Eds.), New modes of governance (pp. 3–17). Ashgate.
Majone, G. (1996). Regulating Europe. Routledge.
Marchant, G., & Mossman, K. (2004). Arbitrary and capricious: The precautionary principle in the European courts. AEI Press.
Mashaw, J. (1997). Greed, chaos and governance: Using public choice to improve public law. Yale University Press.
Miller, R. (2018). Transforming the Future: Anticipation in the 21st Century. Routledge–UNESCO.
Morgan, M. G., Fischhoff, B., Bostrom, A., & Atman, C. J. (2002). Risk communication: A mental models approach. Cambridge University Press.
Momen, M. N. (2019). Governance and regulations. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Global encyclopedia of public administration, public policy, and governance. Springer.
Niget, D., & Petitclerc, M. (Eds.). (2012). Pour une histoire du risque: Québec, France, Belgique. Presses de l'Université du Québec.
Nonet, P., & Selznick, P. (1978). Law and society in transition: Toward responsive law. Octagon Books.
Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Addison-Wesley.
Parker, C., & Braithwaite, J. (2003). Regulation. In P. Cane & M. Tushnet (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of legal studies (pp. 119–145). Oxford University Press.
Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvard University Press.
Perrow, C. (1984). Normal accidents: Living with high-risk technologies. Basic Books.
Pierre, J., & Peters, B. G. (2000). Governance, politics and the state. Macmillan.
Power, M. (1997). The audit society: Rituals of verification. Oxford University Press.
Ramírez, R., & Wilkinson, A. (2016). Strategic reframing: The Oxford scenario planning approach. Oxford University Press.
Rapoport, A. (1966). Strategy and conscience. Harper & Row.
Rayner, S., & Malone, E. L. (Eds.). (1998). Human choice and climate change – Volume Four. Battelle Press.
Renda, A. (2006). Impact assessment in the EU. Center for European Policy Studies.
Renn, O. (2004). The challenge of integrating deliberation and expertise: Participation and discourse in risk management. In T. L. MacDaniels & M. J. Small (Eds.), Risk analysis and society (pp. 289–366). Cambridge University Press.
Renn, O., & Rohrmann, B. (2000). Risk perception research – An introduction. In O. Renn & B. Rohrmann (Eds.), Cross-cultural risk perception (pp. 11–54). Kluwer.
Renn, O., & Walker, K. (2008). Lessons learned: A re-assessment of the IRGC framework on risk governance. In O. Renn & K. Walker (Eds.), Global risk governance (pp. 331–360). Springer.
Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Open University Press.
Renn, O. (2008). Risk governance: Coping with uncertainty in a complex world. Earthscan.
Rosa, E. A. (2003). The logical structure of the social amplification of risk framework (SARF). In N. Pidgeon, R. E. Kasperson, & P. Slovic (Eds.), The social amplification of risk (pp. 47–79). Cambridge University Press.
Rosenau, J. N. (1992). Governance, order, and change in world politics. In J. N. Rosenau & E.-O. Czempiel (Eds.), Governance without government (pp. 1–29). Cambridge University Press.
Russell, S. (2019). Human compatible: Artificial intelligence and the problem of control. Viking.
Rissler, J., & Mellon, M. (1996). International implications of commercialization (transgenic crops). In Rissler, J., & Mellon, M. The ecological risks of engineered crops. (pp.111-128) MIT Press.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Scott, A. (2000). Risk society or angst society? Two views of risk, consciousness and community. In B. Adam, U. Beck, & J. van Loon (Eds.), The risk society and beyond (pp. 33–46). Sage.
Sparrow, M. K. (2000). The regulatory craft: Controlling risks, solving problems, and managing compliance. Brookings Institution Press.
Sunstein, C. R. (2005). Laws of fear: Beyond the precautionary principle. Cambridge University Press.
Stein, A. (2005). Foundations of evidence law. Oxford University Press.
Steele, J. (2004). Risks and legal theory. Hart Publishing.
Stern, P. C., & Fineberg, H. V. (Eds.). (1996). Understanding risk: Informing decisions in a democratic society. National Academy Press.
Stilgoe, J. (2015). Experiment Earth: Responsible innovation in geoengineering. Routledge.
Stirling, A. (2004). Opening up or closing down. In M. Leach, I. Scoones, & B. Wynne (Eds.), Science, citizenship and globalisation (pp. 218–231). Zed Books.
Stirling, A., Renna, O., & van Zwanenburg, P. (2006). A framework for the precautionary governance of food safety. In E. Fisher, J. Jones, & R. von Schomberg (Eds.), Implementing the precautionary principle (pp. 284–315). Edward Elgar.
Tapper, C. (2004). Cross and Tapper on evidence (10th ed.). LexisNexis.
Teubner, G. (1987). Juridification concepts, aspects, limits, solutions. In G. Teubner (Ed.), Juridification of social spheres: A comparative analysis in the areas of labor, corporate, antitrust and social welfare law (pp. 3–48). De Gruyter.
Teubner, G. (1993). Law as an autopoietic system. Blackwell Publishing.
Tegmark, M. (2018). Life 3.0: Being human in the age of artificial intelligence. Vintage.
Urry, J. (2003). Global Complexity. Polity Press.
van Asselt, M. B. A. (2000). Perspectives on uncertainty and risk. Kluwer Academic.
van Asselt, M. B. A. (2007). Risk governance: Over omgaan met onzekerheid en mogelijke toekomsten [Risk governance: Dealing with uncertainty and possible futures]. Inaugural lecture, Universiteit Maastricht.
van Asselt, M. B. A., van ‘t Klooster, S. A., van Notten, P. W. F., & Smits, L. A. (2010). Foresight in action: Developing policy-oriented scenarios. Earthscan.
Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, Ł., & Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (Vol. 30, pp. 5998–6008).
Vile, M. J. C. (1998). Constitutionalism and the separation of powers (2nd ed.). Liberty Fund.
Viklund, M. (2002). Risk policy: Trust, risk perception, and attitudes. Stockholm School of Economics.
Von Winterfeldt, D. (1992). Expert knowledge and public values in risk management: The role of decision analysis. In S. Krimsky & D. Golding (Eds.), Social theories of risk (pp. 1–22). Praeger.
Voros, Joseph (2019). Big History and Anticipation. In Roberto Poli, Handbook of Anticipation: Theoretical and Applied Aspects of the Use of Future in Decision Making. Springer Verlag. pp. 425-464.
Webler, T. (1995). Right discourse in citizen participation: An evaluative yardstick. In O. Renn, T. Webler, & P. Wiedemann (Eds.), Fairness and competence in citizen participation: Evaluating new models for environmental discourse (pp. 35–86). Kluwer.
Wilkinson, A., & Eidinow, E. (2016). Risk-world scenarios case study. In R. Ramírez & A. Wilkinson (Eds.), Strategic reframing: The Oxford scenario planning approach (pp. 208–216). Oxford University Press.
Wildavsky, A. (1979). Speaking truth to power. Boston: Little, Brown. Routledge.
Wisdon, J., & Willis, R. (2004). See-through science: Why public engagement needs to move upstream. Demos.
Wolf, K. D. (2002). Contextualizing normative standards for legitimate governance beyond the state. In J. R. Grote & B. Gbikpi (Eds.), Participatory governance: Political and societal implications (pp. 35–50). Leske und Budrich.
Zinn, J. O., & Taylor-Gooby, P. (2006). Risk as an interdisciplinary research area. In P. Taylor-Gooby & J. Zinn (Eds.), Risk in social science (pp. 20–53). Oxford University Press.
外文期刊：
Ackerman, B. (2000). The new separation of powers. Harvard Law Review, 113(3), 633–696.
Aghion, P., Bergeaud, A., & Van Reenen, J. (2023). The impact of regulation on innovation. American Economic Review, 113(11), 2894–2936.
Amendola, A. (2001). Recent paradigms for risk informed decision making. Safety Science, 40(1–4), 17–30.
Amy, D. J. (1983). Environmental mediation: An alternative approach to policy stalemates. Policy Sciences, 15, 345–365.
Ansell, N. (2008). Third world gap year projects: Youth transitions and the mediation of risk. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 26(2), 218–240.
Baldwin, R., & Black, J. (2016). Driving priorities in risk-based regulation: What’s the problem? Journal of Law and Society, 43(4), 565–595.
Banerjee, S., Agarwal, A., & Singla, S. (2024). LLMs will always hallucinate, and we need to live with this. arXiv.
Baram, M. (1984). The right to know and the duty to disclose hazard information. American Journal of Public Health, 74(4), 385–390.
Barn, B. S. (2020). Mapping the public debate on ethical concerns: Algorithms in mainstream media. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 18(1), 38–53.
Beck, U. (2000b). The cosmopolitan perspective: Sociology of the second age of modernity. The British Journal of Sociology, 51(1), 79–105.
Beghelli, S., Guastella, G. & Pareglio, S. (2020). Governance fragmentation and urban spatial expansion: Evidence from Europe and the United States. Rev Reg Res 40, 13–32.
Bostrom, N. (2002). Existential risks: Analyzing human extinction scenarios and related hazards. Journal of Evolution and Technology, 9.
Bower, J. L., & Christensen, C. M. (1995). Disruptive technologies: Catching the wave. Harvard Business Review, Jan.-Feb., 43–53.
Braithwaite, J. (1982). Enforced self-regulation: A new strategy for corporate control. Michigan Law Review, 80, 1466–1507.
Braithwaite, J. (2020). Meta governance of path dependencies: Regulation, welfare, and markets. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 691(1), 30–49.
Bradford, A. (2024). The false choice between digital regulation and innovation. Northwestern University Law Review, 118(2).
Burns, W. J., Slovic, P., Kasperson, R. E., Kasperson, J. X., Renn, O., & Emani, S. (1993). Incorporating structural models into research on the social amplification of risk: Implications for theory construction and decision making. Risk Analysis, 13(6), 611–623.
Carter, D. (2020). Regulation and ethics in artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies: Where are we now? Who is responsible? Can the information professional play a role? Business Information Review, 37(2), 60–68.
Cath, C. (2018). Governing artificial intelligence: Ethical, legal and technical opportunities and challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 376, 2133.
Chander, A. (2015). How law made Silicon Valley. Emory Law Journal, 64, 677–738.
Charnley, G., & Elliott, E. D. (2002). Risk versus precaution: Environmental law and public health protection. Environmental Law Reporter, 32(2), 10363–10366.
Chayes, A. (1976). The role of the judge in public law litigation. Harvard Law Review, 89, 1281–1316.
Cihon, P., Schuett, J., & Baum, S. D. (2021). Corporate governance of artificial intelligence in the public interest. Information, 12(7), 275.
Cook, V. (2012). Conceptualising ‘risk’. Teaching Geography, 37(2), 54–56.
Cornfield, J. (1977). Carcinogenic risk assessment. Science, 194, 693–699.
Cortez, N. (2014). Regulating disruptive innovation. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 29, 175–228.
Crafts, N. (2006). Regulation and productivity performance. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22, 186–202.
de Almeida, P. G. R., dos Santos, C. D., & Farias, J. S. (2021). Artificial intelligence regulation: A framework for governance. Ethics and Information Technology, 23(3), 505–525.
de Vries, G., Verhoeven, I., & Boeckhout, M. (2011). Taming uncertainty: The WRR approach to risk governance. Journal of Risk Research, 14(4), 485–499.
DeSantis, M. (2024). Is AI a general purpose technology? (Doctoral thesis, Carnegie Mellon University).
Domanski, R. J. (2019). The A.I. pandorica: Linking ethically-challenged technical outputs to prospective policy approaches. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (pp. 409–416).
Dorf, M. C., & Sabel, C. F. (1998). A constitution of democratic experimentalism. Columbia Law Review, 98, 267–473.
Drahos, P. (2004). Intellectual property and pharmaceutical markets: A nodal governance approach. Temple Law Review, 77, 401–424.
Elliott, D. (2001). Risk governance: Is consensus a con? Science as Culture, 10(2), 265–271.
Farina, C. (1997). The consent of the governed: Against simple rules for a complex world. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 72, 987–1035.
Fisher, E. (2001). Is the precautionary principle justiciable? Journal of Environmental Law, 13, 317–339.
Fisher, E. (2002). Precaution, precaution everywhere: Developing a “common understanding” of the precautionary principle in the European Community. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 9, 7–28.
Fisher, E. (2004). The European Union in the age of accountability. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 24, 495–515.
Fisher, E. (2013). Framing risk regulation: A critical reflection. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 4(2), 125–132.
Fischhoff, B. (1995). Risk perception and communication unplugged: Twenty years of process. Risk Analysis, 15(2), 137–145.
Franklin, D. L. (2010). Legislative rules, nonlegislative rules, and the perils of the short cut. Yale Law Journal, 120, 276–324.
Freeman, J., & Rossi, J. (2012). Agency coordination in shared regulatory space. Harvard Law Review, 125(5), 1131–1211.
Freudenburg, W. R. (1993). Risk and recreancy: Weber, the division of labor, and the rationality of risk perceptions. Social Forces, 71(4), 909–932.
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993). Science for the post-normal age. Futures, 25(7), 739–755.
Gasser, U., & Almeida, V. A. F. (2017). A layered model for AI governance. IEEE Internet Computing, 21(6), 58–62.
Gersen, J. E. (2007). Overlapping and underlapping jurisdiction in administrative law. Supreme Court Review, 2006, 201–231.
Gersen, J. E., & O’Connell, A. J. (2008). Deadlines in administrative law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 156, 923–990.
Gersen, J. E., & Posner, E. A. (2007). Timing rules and legal institutions. Harvard Law Review, 121, 544–590.
Gervais, D. (2010). The regulation of inchoate technologies. Houston Law Review, 47, 665–691.
Giddens, A. (1999). Risk and responsibility. The Modern Law Review, 62(1), 1–10.
Good, I. J. (1966). Speculations concerning the first ultraintelligent machine. Advances in computers 6 , 31–88
Graham, J. D., & Hsia, S. (2002). Europe’s precautionary principle: Promise and pitfalls. Journal of Risk Research, 5(4), 371–390.
Hagemann, R., Huddleston, J., & Thierer, A. D. (2018). Soft law for hard problems: The governance of emerging technologies in an uncertain future. Colorado Technology Law Journal, 17, 37-129.
Hagendijk, R., & Irwin, A. (2006). Public deliberation and governance: Engaging with science and technology in contemporary Europe. Minerva, 44(2), 167–184.
Hahn, R. W., & Muething, M. (2003). The grand experiment in regulatory reporting. Administrative Law Review, 55(3), 607–642.
Harlow, C. (1994). Changing the mindset: The place of theory in English administrative law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 14, 419–439.
Harden, J. (2000). There's no place like home: The public/private distinction in students' theorising of risk and safety. Childhood, 7(1), 43–59.
Harrington, W., Morgenstern, R., & Nelson, P. (2000). On the accuracy of regulatory cost estimates. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 19(2), 297–332.
Haußermann, J. J., & Lütge, C. (2022). Community-in-the-loop: Towards pluralistic value creation in AI, or—why AI needs business ethics. AI and Ethics, 2(2), 341–362.
Hériard-Dubreuil, G., Bengtsson, G., Bourrelier, P. H., Foster, R., Gadbois, S., Kelly, K. N., Lebessis, N., Lochard, J., & Pape, R. (2002). A report of TRUSTNET on risk governance: Lessons learned. Journal of Risk Research, 5(1), 83–95.
Horlick-Jones, T. (1995). Modern disasters as outrage and betrayal. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 13(3), 305–315.
Horlick-Jones, T. (1998). Meaning and contextualization in risk assessment. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 59, 79–89.
Huang, L., Yu, W., Ma, W., Zhong, W., Feng, Z., Wang, H., Chen, Q., Peng, W., Feng, X., Qin, B., & Liu, T. (2023). A survey on hallucination in large language models: Principles, taxonomy, challenges, and open questions. arXiv.
Hulme, P. E. (2025). Trouble on the horizon: Anticipating biological invasions through futures thinking. Biological Reviews, 100(1), 461–480.
Jasanoff, S. (1999). The songlines of risk. Environmental Values, 8(2), 135–152.
Jasanoff, S. (2005a). Law’s knowledge: Science for justice in legal settings. American Journal of Public Health, 95(S1), S49–S58.
Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2009). Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva, 47(2), 119–146.
Joerges, C., & Neyer, J. (1997). From intergovernmental bargaining to deliberative political processes: The constitutionalisation of comitology. European Law Journal, 3(3), 273–299.
Kasperson, R. E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H. S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J. X., & Ratick, S. (1988). The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. Risk Analysis, 8(2), 177–187.
Kasirzadeh, A. (2024). Two types of AI existential risk: Decisive and accumulative. arXiv.
Keeney, R. L. (1982). Decision analysis: An overview. Operations Research, 30(5), 803–838.
Keeney, R. L., & McDaniels, T. (2001). A framework to guide thinking and analysis regarding climate change policies. Risk Analysis, 21(6), 989–1000.
Keeney, R. L. (2004). Making better decision makers. Decision Analysis, 1(4), 193–204.
Kennedy, D. (1973). Legal formality. Journal of Legal Studies, 2, 351–386.
Kingsbury, B., Krisch, N., Stewart, R. B., & Wight, J. (2005). The emergence of global administrative law. Law and Contemporary Problems, 68(3), 15–62.
Kleinsteuber, H. J. (2004). Self-regulation, co-regulation, state regulation: The Internet between regulation and governance. In OSCE Conference, Amsterdam: Guaranteeing Media Freedom on the Internet.
Klinke, A., & Renn, O. (2002). A new approach to risk evaluation and management: Risk-based, precaution-based and discourse-based management. Risk Analysis, 22(6), 1071–1094.
Kinney, A. G., & Leschine, T. M. (2002). A procedural evaluation of an analytic-deliberative process: The Columbia River Comprehensive Impact Assessment. Risk Analysis, 22(1), 83–100.
Kunreuther, H. (1997). Rethinking society’s management of catastrophic risks. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance, 83, 156–176.
Kolt, N. (2025). Governing AI agents. Notre Dame Law Review, 101 (Forthcoming). SSRN.
Koulu, R. (2020). Human control over automation: EU policy and AI ethics. European Journal of Legal Studies, 12(1), 9–46.
Kroll, J. A. (2018). The fallacy of inscrutability. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 376.
Kroll, J. A. (2021). Outlining traceability: A principle for operationalizing accountability in computing systems. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 758–771).
Lancieri, F., Edelson, L., & Bechtold, S. (2024). AI regulation: Competition, arbitrage & regulatory capture (Georgetown University Law Center Research Paper No. 2025/05). SSRN.
Larsson, S. (2020). On the governance of artificial intelligence through ethics guidelines. Asian Journal of Law and Society, 7(3), 437–451.
Larsson, S., & Heintz, F. (2020). Transparency in artificial intelligence. Internet Policy Review, 9(2).
Lave, L. (1987). Health and safety risk analyses: Information for better decisions. Science, 236(4800), 291–295.
Leiter, B. (1999). Positivism, formalism, realism. Columbia Law Review, 99, 1138–1152.
Levi-Faur, D. (2013). The odyssey of the regulatory state: From a “thin” monomorphic concept to a “thick” and polymorphic concept. Law & Policy, 35(1–2), 29–50.
Levi-Faur, D. (2014). The welfare state: A regulatory perspective. Public Administration, 92(3), 599–614.
Lewis, D., Hogan, L., Filip, D., & Wall, P. J. (2020). Global challenges in the standardization of ethics for trustworthy AI. Journal of ICT Standardization, 8(2), 123–150.
Lobel, O. (2004). The renew deal: The fall of regulation and the rise of governance in contemporary legal thought. Minnesota Law Review, 89, 342–437.
Löfstedt, R. E. (2003). Risk communication: Pitfalls and promises. European Review, 11(3), 417–435.
Löfstedt, R. E. (2011). Risk versus hazard: How to regulate in the 21st century. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 2(2), 149–168.
Loughlin, M. (2005). The functionalist style in public law. The University of Toronto Law Journal, 55(3), 361–403.
Lütge, C., Poszler, F., Acosta, A. J., Danks, D., Gottehrer, G., Mihet-Popa, L., & Naseer, A. (2021). AI4People: Ethical guidelines for the automotive sector – Fundamental requirements and practical recommendations. International Journal of Technoethics, 12(1), 101–125.
Luhmann, N. (1989). Law as a social system. Northwestern University Law Review, 83, 136–150.
Lysaght, T., Lim, H. Y., Xafis, V., & Ngiam, K. Y. (2019). AI-assisted decision-making in healthcare. Asian Bioethics Review, 11(3), 299–314.
Majone, G. (1997). From the positive to the regulatory state: Causes and consequences of changes in the mode of governance. Journal of Public Policy, 17(2), 139–167.
Majone, G. (2002). What price safety? The precautionary principle and its policy implications. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40, 89–109.
Majone, G. (2010). Foundations of risk regulation: Science, decision-making, policy learning and institutional reform. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 1(1), 5–19.
Marisam, J. (2011). Duplicative delegations. Administrative Law Review, 63(2), 181–244.
Mashaw, J. (2002). Deconstructing debate, reconstructing law. Cornell Law Review, 87, 682–700.
Mashaw, J. (2003). Law and engineering: In search of the law-science problem. Law and Contemporary Problems, 66, 135–153.
McCarthy, J., Minsky, M. L., Rochester, N., & Shannon, C. E. (1956). A proposal for the Dartmouth Summer Research Project on Artificial Intelligence. Unpublished manuscript.
Mendelson, N. A. (2007). Regulatory beneficiaries and informal agency policymaking. Cornell Law Review, 92, 397–446.
Mohun, A. P. (2016). Constructing the history of risk: Foundations, tools, and reasons why. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 41(1), 30–47.
Mokander, J., & Floridi, L. (2021). Ethics-based auditing to develop trustworthy AI. Minds and Machines, 31(2), 323–327.
Moran, M. (2002). Understanding the regulatory state. British Journal of Political Science, 32(2), 391–413.
Mosca, M. (2018). Cybersecurity in an era with quantum computers: Will we be ready? IEEE Security & Privacy, 16(5), 38–41.
Nelken, D. (1995). Disclosing/invoking legal culture. Social and Legal Studies, 4, 437–452.
North, D. W. (1968). A tutorial introduction to decision theory. IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cybernetics, SSC-4(3), 200–210.
Orbach, B. (2012). What is regulation? Yale Journal on Regulation Online, 30(1), 1–10.
Orr, W., & Davis, J. L. (2020). Attributions of ethical responsibility by artificial intelligence practitioners. Information, Communication & Society, 23(5), 719–735.
Pascual, P. (2005). Wresting environmental decisions from an uncertain world. Environmental Law Reporter, 35, 10539.
Petts, J. (1997). The public–expert interface in local waste management decisions: Expertise, credibility, and process. Public Understanding of Science, 6(4), 359–381.
Pidgeon, N. F. (1998). Risk assessment, risk values and the social science programme: Why we do need risk perception research. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 59(1), 5–15.
Pidgeon, N. F., Poortinga, W., Rowe, G., Jones, T.-H., Walls, J., & O’Riordan, T. (2005). Using surveys in public participation processes for risk decision making: The case of the 2003 British GM Nation? public debate. Risk Analysis, 25(2), 467–479.
Plough, A., & Krimsky, S. (1987). The emergence of risk communication studies: Social and political context. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 12(3/4), 78–85.
Pritikin, M. H., & Ross, E. (2011). The collection gap: Underenforcement of corporate and white-collar fines and penalties. Yale Law & Policy Review, 29, 453–498.
Raab, C. D. (2020). Information privacy, impact assessment, and the place of ethics. Computer Law and Security Review, 37, 105404.
Rahwan, I. (2018). Society-in-the-loop: Programming the algorithmic social contract. Ethics and Information Technology, 20(1), 5–14.
Ramírez, R., & Wilkinson, A. (2014). Rethinking the 2×2 scenario method: Grid or frames? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 86, 254–264.
Rasmussen, J. (1997). Risk management in a dynamic society: A modelling problem. Safety Science, 27(2–3), 183–213.
Raso, C. N. (2010). Strategic or sincere? Analyzing agency use of guidance documents. Yale Law Journal, 119, 782–829.
Reddy, S., Allan, S., Coghlan, S., & Cooper, P. (2020). A governance model for the application of AI in health care. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 27(3), 491–497.
Reilly-King, F., Duggan, C. & Wilner, A. (2024). Foresight and futures thinking for international development co-operation: Promises and pitfalls. Development Policy Review, 42(S1), e12790.
Reich, C. A. (1990a). Beyond the new property: An ecological view of due process. Brooklyn Law Review, 56, 731–758.
Reich, C. A. (1990b). The liberty impact of the new property. William & Mary Law Review, 31(2), 295–319.
Renn, O. (2011). The social amplification/attenuation of risk framework: Application to climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 2(2), 154–169.
Renn, O., & Klinke, A. (2004). Systemic risks: A new challenge for risk management. EMBO Reports, 5(S1), 41–46.
Renn, O., & Roco, M. C. (2006). Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 8(2), 153–191.
Renn, O., & Schweizer, P. (2009). Inclusive risk governance: Concepts and application to environmental policy making. Environmental Policy and Governance, 19(3), 174–185.
Rayner, S., & Cantor, R. (1987). How fair is safe enough? The cultural approach to societal technology choice. Risk Analysis, 7(1), 3–9.
Roca, E., Gamboa, G., & Tàbara, J. D. (2008). Assessing the multidimensionality of coastal erosion risks. Risk Analysis, 28(2), 399–412.
Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology & Human Values, 25(1), 3–29.
Scott, C. (2000). Accountability in the regulatory state. Journal of Law and Society, 27(1), 38–60.
Scott, C. (2001). Analysing regulatory space: Fragmented resources and institutional design. Public Law, 329–353.
Scott, S., Jackson, S., & Backett-Milburn, K. (1998). Swings and roundabouts: Risk anxiety and the everyday worlds of students. Sociology, 32(4), 689–705.
Schiff, D., Biddle, J., Borenstein, J., & Laas, K. (2020). What’s next for AI ethics, policy, and governance? A global overview. In Proceedings of the 2020 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (pp. 153–158).
Seger, E., Dreksler, N., Moulange, R., Dardaman, E., Schuett, J., Wei, K., Winter, C., Arnold, M., Ó hÉigeartaigh, S., Korinek, A., Anderljung, M., Bucknall, B., Chan, A., Stafford, E., Koessler, L., Ovadya, A., Garfinkel, B., Bluemke, E., Aird, M., Levermore, P., Hazell, J., & Gupta, A. (2023). Open-sourcing highly capable foundation models: An evaluation of risks, benefits, and alternative methods for pursuing open-source objectives (LawAI Working Paper No. 2–2023). SSRN.
Seiguer, E., & Smith, J. J. (2005). Perception and process at the Food and Drug Administration. Food and Drug Law Journal, 60, 17–39.
Slovic, P. (1986). Informing and educating the public about risk. Risk Analysis, 6(4), 403–415.
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280–286.
Smuha, N. A. (2021a). From a ‘race to AI’ to a ‘race to AI regulation’. Law, Innovation and Technology, 13(1), 57–84.
Smuha, N. A. (2021b). Beyond a human rights-based approach to AI governance. Philosophy and Technology, 34, 91–104.
Sunstein, C. R. (1996). The cost-benefit state (John M. Olin Law & Economics Working Paper No. 39). University of Chicago Law School.
Sunstein, C. R. (2004). Valuing life: A plea for disaggregation. Duke Law Journal, 54(2), 385–445.
Super, D. A. (2011). Against flexibility. Cornell Law Review, 96, 1375–1427.
Searle, J. R. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 417–424.
Shneiderman, B. (2020). Bridging the gap between ethics and practice. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, 10(4), 31.
Shome, N., Cornell, C. A., Bazzurro, P., & Carballo, J. E. (1998). Earthquakes, records and nonlinear responses. Earthquake Spectra, 14(3), 469–500.
Sjöberg, L. (1999). Risk perception in Western Europe. Ambio, 28(6), 543–549.
Steinzor, R. (2011). The truth about regulation in America. Harvard Law & Policy Review, 5, 323–328.
Stern, R. E. (2000, April 6–7). New approaches to urban governance in Latin America [Paper presentation]. Seminar on IDRC and Management of Sustainable Urban Development in Latin America: Lessons Learnt and Demands for Knowledge, Montevideo, Uruguay.
Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568–1580.
Stirling, A. (1999). On science and precaution in the management of technological risk. University of Sussex.
Stirling, A. (2008). "Opening up" and "closing down". Science, Technology, & Human Values, 33(2), 262–294.
Stirling, A. (2010). Keep it complex. Nature, 468, 1029–1031.
Stewart, R. B. (1981). Regulation, innovation, and administrative law. California Law Review, 69(5), 1256–1377.
Stewart, R. B. (1985). The discontents of legalism. Wisconsin Law Review, 1985, 655–705.
Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & McCallum, A. (2019). Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in NLP. arXiv.
Stix, C. (2021). Actionable principles for artificial intelligence policy. Science and Engineering Ethics, 27(1).1-17
Soneryd, L. (2007). Deliberations on the unknown, the unsensed, and the unsayable? Science, Technology & Human Values, 32(3), 287–314.
Teubner, G., & Willke, H. (1984). Kontext und Autonomie: Gesellschaftliche Selbststeuerung durch reflexives Recht. Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie, 5, 4–14.
Thierer, A. D. (2016). Permissionless innovation and public policy: A 10-point blueprint. SSRN.
Truby, J. (2020). Governing artificial intelligence to benefit the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainable Development, 28(4), 946–959.
Tsamados, A., Aggarwal, N., Cowls, J., Morley, J., Roberts, H., Taddeo, M., & Floridi, L. (2022). The ethics of algorithms: Key problems and solutions. AI & Society, 37(1), 215–230.
Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 59(236), 433–460.
Vallis, R., & Inayatullah, S. (2016). Policy metaphors: From the tuberculosis crusade to the obesity apocalypse. Futures, 84, 133–144.
van Asselt, M. B. A., & Renn, O. (2011). Risk governance. Journal of Risk Research, 14(4), 431–449.
van Asselt, M. B. A., & Vos, E. (2006). The precautionary principle and the uncertainty paradox. Journal of Risk Research, 9(4), 313–336.
van Asselt, M. B. A., & Vos, E. (2008). Wrestling with uncertain risks: EU regulation of GMOs and the uncertainty paradox. Journal of Risk Research, 11(1–2), 281–300.
van Dijk, H. F. G., van Rongen, E., Eggermont, G., Lebret, E., Bijker, W. E., & Timmermans, D. R. M. (2011). The role of scientific advisory bodies in precaution‐based risk governance. Journal of Risk Research, 14(4), 451–466.
Vincent-Jones, P. (2007). The new public contracting: Public versus private ordering? Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 14(2), 259–278.
Viscusi, W. K., & Aldy, J. E. (2003). The value of a statistical life: A critical review of market estimates throughout the world. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 27, 5–76.
Walls, J., O’Riordan, T., Horlick-Jones, T., & Niewöhner, J. (2005). The meta-governance of risk and new technologies: GM crops and mobile phones. Journal of Risk Research, 8(7–8), 635–661.
Weimer, M. (2017). The origins of “risk” as an idea and the future of risk regulation. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 8(1), 10–17.
Weinberg, A. M. (1972). Science and trans-science. Minerva, 10(2), 209–222.
Weiser, P. J. (2008). The next frontier for network neutrality. Administrative Law Review, 60, 273–310.
Wiener, J. B. (1998). Managing the iatrogenic risks of risk management. Risk: Health, Safety & Environment, 9, 39–82.
Wiener, N. (1960). Some moral and technical consequences of automation. Science, 131(3410), 1355–1358.
Wieringa, M. (2020). What to account for when accounting for algorithms. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 1–18).
Wiedemann, P. M., & Femers, S. (1993). Public participation in waste management decision-making: Analysis and management of conflict. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 33(3), 355–368.
Winfield, A. F. T., & Jirotka, M. (2018). Ethical governance is essential to building trust in robotics and artificial intelligence systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 376(2133).
Wu, T. (2011). Agency threats. Duke Law Journal, 60, 1841–1878.
Wu, W., Huang, T., & Gong, K. (2020). Ethical principles and governance technology development of AI in China. Engineering, 6(3), 302–309.
Wynne, B. (2002). Risk and environment as legitimatory discourses of technology: Reflexivity inside out? Current Sociology, 50(3), 459–477.
Zarsky, T. (2015). The privacy-innovation conundrum. Lewis & Clark Law Review, 19, 115–162.
Zumbansen, P. (2008). Law after the welfare state: Formalism, functionalism and the ironic turn of reflexive law. American Journal of Comparative Law, 56(3), 769–805.
國際組織及各國政策報告：
Better Regulation Commission. (2006). Risk, responsibility and regulation: Whose risk is it anyway?
Better Regulation Commission. (2008). Public risk: The next frontier for better regulation.
Black, J. (2010). Risk-based regulation: Choices, practices and lessons learnt. In Risk and regulatory policy: Improving the governance of risk (pp. 185–224). OECD.
Melina, G., Panton, A. J., Pizzinelli, C., Rockall, E. J., & Tavares, M. M. (2024). Gen-AI: Artificial intelligence and the future of work (IMF Staff Discussion Note No. 2024/001). International Monetary Fund.
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. (2024). Charting the Geopolitics and European Governance of Artificial Intelligence.
Commission of the European Communities. (2000). Communication from the Commission on the precautionary principle (COM(2000)1).
Dreyer, M., Renn, O., Ely, A., Stirling, A., Vos, E., Wendler, F. (2008). A General Framework for the Precautionary and Inclusive Governance of Food Safety in Europe, Final Reportof subproject 5 of the EU Integrated Project SAFE FOODS (30 June 2008), Stuttgart, DIALOGIK.
Draghi, M. (2024, September 9). The future of European competitiveness–A competitiveness strategy for Europe. European Commission.
European Commission. (2001). White paper on European governance (COM(2001) 428 final).
Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. (2011). The financial crisis inquiry report: Final report of the National Commission on the Causes of the Financial and Economic Crisis in the United States. U.S. Government Printing Office.
Financial Services Authority (FSA). (2002). Building the new regulator: Progress report 2.
Health and Safety Executive (HSE). (2001a). The Ladbroke Grove rail inquiry (Part 2 Report). HSE Books.
Health and Safety Executive (HSE). (2001b). Reducing risk–Protecting people. HSE Books.
HM Treasury. (2005). Reducing administrative burdens: Effective inspection and enforcement (Hampton Report).
House of Commons Science and Technology Committee. (2006). Scientific advice, risk and evidence based policy making (Vol. 1). The Stationery Office.
International Risk Governance Council (IRGC). (2005). Risk governance: Towards an integrative approach (White Paper No. 1, O. Renn, with an annex by P. Graham).
Institute for AI Policy and Strategy (IAPS) (2025). AI Agent Governance：A Field Guide.
McKinsey & Company. (2023). The economic potential of generative AI: The next productivity frontier.
McKinsey & Company. (2024). Beyond the hype: Capturing the potential of AI and gen AI in tech, media and telecom.
National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling. (2011). Deepwater: The Gulf oil disaster and the future of offshore drilling. Report to the President. U.S. Government Printing Office.
National Research Council. (1983). Risk assessment in the federal government: Managing the process. National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (1994). Science and judgment in risk assessment. National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (1996). Understanding risk: Informing decisions in a democratic society. National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2008). Public participation in environmental assessment and decision making. National Academies Press.
OECD. (1998). 21st century technologies: Promises and perils of a dynamic future.
OECD. (2000). Uncertainty and precaution: Implications for trade and environment.
OECD. (2001a). Environmental outlook.
OECD. (2001b). OECD economic surveys: Turkey.
OECD. (2002). Guidance document on risk communication for chemical risk management.
OECD. (2003). Emerging systemic risks: Final report to the OECD Futures Project.
OECD. (2006). Risk and regulation: Issues for discussion (GOV/PGC/REG(2006)1).
OECD. (2007). Progress report on the stock take of country responses and the development of case studies (GOV/PGC/REG(2007)12).
OECD. (2008). Environmental outlook to 2030.
OECD. (2009). Regulatory impact analysis.
OECD. (2011). Regulatory policy and governance: Supporting economic growth and serving the public interest.
OECD. (2012). Environmental outlook to 2050.
OECD. (2021). Technology and Innovation Outlook 2021: Times of crisis and opportunity.
OECD. (2022). OECD framework for the classification of AI systems.
OECD. (2024a). Using foresight to anticipate emerging critical risks.
OECD. (2024b). Explanatory memorandum on the updated OECD definition of an AI system (OECD Artificial Intelligence Papers, No. 8).
OECD (2024c), Framework for Anticipatory Governance of Emerging Technologies, OECD Science,
Technology and Industry Policy Papers.
OECD. (2025a). Recommendation of the Council on the Safety Testing and Assessment of Manufactured Nanomaterials (OECD/LEGAL/0400).
OECD. (2025b). A quantum technologies policy primer (OECD Digital Economy Papers No. 371).
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), & Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). (2003). Regulatory analysis (OMB Circular No. A-4).
Pollard, S. J. T., Duarte-Davidson, R., Yearsley, R., Twigger-Ross, C., Fisher, J., Willows, R., & Irwin, J. (2000). A strategic approach to the consideration of ‘environmental harm’.（Report No.36）The Environment Agency.
Royal Society. (1992). Risk: Analysis, perception and management.
Stanford University. (2025). The Stanford emerging technology review 2025.
UNESCO. (2024). Consultation paper on AI regulation: Emerging approaches across the world.
WBGU. (2000). World in transition: Strategies for managing global environmental risks. Springer.
World Bank. (2015). Worldwide governance indicators.
World Health Organization. (2022). Global report on infection prevention and control.
World Health Organization. (2024). Global report on infection prevention and control.
網頁資料
Anthropic. (2023, September 19). Anthropic's responsible scaling policy. https://www.anthropic.com/index/responsible-scaling-policy (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Anthony, A., Sharma, L., & Noor, E. (2024, April 30). Advancing a more global agenda for trustworthy artificial intelligence. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/04/advancing-a-more-global-agenda-for-trustworthy-artificial-intelligence?lang=en (Accessed: May 26, 2025)
Aszódi, N. (2025, February). As of February 2025: Harmful AI applications prohibited in the EU. AlgorithmWatch. https://algorithmwatch.org (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Bertuzzi, L. (2023, March 11). Are EU regulators ready for concentration in the AI market? EURACTIV. https://www.euractiv.com (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Butler, S. (1863, June 13). Darwin among the machines. The Press. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1725970397i/28103397.jpg
(Accessed: May 20, 2025)
Chakravorti, B., Bhalla, A., & Chaturvedi, R. S. (2023, December 12). Charting the emerging geography of AI. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2023/12/charting-the-emerging-geography-of-ai (Accessed: May 20, 2025)
Center for AI Safety (2023, May 23). Statement on AI Risk：AI experts and public figures express their concern about AI risk. https://safe.ai/work/statement-on-ai-risk#press (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Durmus, M. (2024, September 14). Why it is so hard to categorize AI. https://murat-durmus.medium.com/why-its-so-hard-to-categorize-ai-5fbb89c07b08 (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Durmus, M. (2025, February 16). The difference between AI safety, AI ethics, and responsible AI. https://murat-durmus.medium.com (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Economist. (2020, February 22). The EU wants to set the rules for the world of technology. The Economist. https://www.economist.com (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Fergnani, A. (2023, October 17). 4 archetypes, Shell, 2x2: Three scenario planning methods explained and compared. Predict. https://medium.com/predict/4-archetypes-shell-2x2-three-scenario-planning-methods-explained-and-compared-d2e41c474a37 (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Future of Life Institute.(2023,March 22). Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter. FLI. https://futureoflife.org/open-letter/pause-giant-ai-experiments/(Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Gubrud, M. A. (1997, November 5). Nanotechnology and international security. Fifth Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology. https://legacy.foresight.org/Conferences/MNT05/Papers/Gubrud/index.html (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Jacobs, J. (2024, January 24). Risks around AI and algorithmic convergence are causing ‘regulatory gaps’. OMFIF. https://www.omfif.org (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Joy, B. (2000, April). Why the future doesn’t need us. Wired, 8(4). https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2 (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Kunda, S. (2024, March). Global AI governance: Convergence or fragmentation? FutureMatters. https://gftn.co/insights/global-ai-governance-convergence-or-fragmentation (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Lagercrantz, O. (2025, January 31). Europe’s AI Act stumbles out of the gate. Center for European Policy Analysis. https://cepa.org (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Landler, M & Lowrey, A (2012. January. 13). Obama Bid to Cut the Government Tests Congress. N.Y. TIMES. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/14/us/politics/obama-to-ask-congress-for-power-to-merge-agencies.html (Accessed: May 19, 2025)
Lewis, J. A. (2022, November 28). Tech regulation can harm national security. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). https://www.csis.org/analysis/tech-regulation-can-harm-national-security (Accessed: May 19, 2025)
Maynard, A. D. (2006, July 19). Nanotechnology: A research strategy for addressing risk. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. https://www.pew.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2006/07/19/nanotechnology-a-research-strategy-for-addressing-risk (Accessed: May 19, 2025)
MIT Initiative on the Digital Economy. (2021, September 8). Shaking up Europe: Andrew McAfee argues for less regulation. MIT IDE. https://ide.mit.edu (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Minevich, M. (2021, December 3). Can Europe dominate in innovation despite US Big Tech lead? Forbes. https://www.forbes.com (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Obernolte, J. (2023, June). The role of Congress in regulating artificial intelligence. Ripon Forum, 57(3). https://riponsociety.org (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Ovide, S. (2022, June 16). The hands-off tech era is over. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/15/technology/government-intervention-tech.html (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Oxford Insights. (2024, December 20). Government AI readiness index 2024. https://www.oxfordinsights.com/government-ai-readiness-index (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Pinto Bazurco, J. F. (2020, October 23). The precautionary principle. In Still Only One Earth: Lessons from 50 years of UN sustainable development policy briefs. IISD/SDG Knowledge Hub. https://www.iisd.org/articles/precautionary-principle (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
The White House. (2011, January 25) Remarks by the President in State of Union Address. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/01/25/remarks-president-state-union-address (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Thierer, A. (2018, August 16). The pacing problem, the Collingridge dilemma & technological determinism. Technology Liberation Front. https://techliberation.com (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Thierer, A. (2024, August 15). The policy origins of the digital revolution & the continuing case for the freedom to innovate. R Street. https://www.rstreet.org (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Voss, A. (2024, December 18). Getting serious about AI rules: Lack of enforcement capacity puts EU at risk. Euractiv. https://www.euractiv.com (Accessed: March 27, 2025)
Withrow, J. (2022, October 9). Don’t stifle U.S. tech innovation with Europe’s rules. R Street. https://www.rstreet.org (Accessed: March 27, 2025) |
| Description: | 博士
國立政治大學
風險管理與保險學系
105358501 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105358501 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [風險管理與保險學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 850101.pdf | | 4828Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
