PriMera Scientific Engineering (ISSN: 2834-2550)

Review Article

Volume 2 Issue 3

Ratings of The Driving Factors for Adoption and Implementation of Artificial Intelligence in The Public Sector

Samuel Narh Dorhetso* and Bismark Dzahene Quarshie

March 06, 2023

View PDF

Abstract

The study constructed an estimation of the significance of driving factors that influence artificial intelligence (AI) adoption and implementation in the public sector, and accentuated a critical research area that is currently understudied. A theoretical framework, underpinned by the diffusion of innovation (DOI) theory, was developed from a mingle of the technology, organization, and environment (TOE) framework and the human, organisation, and technology (HOT) fit model. The best-worst method was used to scrutinize and rank the identified driving factors according to their weighted averages. The findings of the study pointed to privacy and security; reliability, serviceability and functionality; regulation; interpretability and ease of use; IT infrastructure and data; and ethical issues as the highest ranked driving factors for AI adoption and implementation in government institutions. The study has significant implications for policy makers and practitioners, as it would augment their perspectives on how to adopt and implement AI innovations.

Keywords: privacy and security; innovation; artificial intelligence; government; technology; best-worst method

References

  1. Abouelmehdi K, Beni-Hessane A and Khaloufi H. “Big healthcare data: Preserving security and privacy”. Journal of Big Data 5.1 (2018): 1-18.
  2. Alexopoulos C., et al. “How machine learning is changing e-government”. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance—ICEGOV2019, Part F1481 (2019): 354-363.
  3. Bonczek RH, Holsapple CW and Whinston AB. “Foundations of Decision Support Systems”. Academic Press, New York (2014).
  4. Broring A., et al. “Enabling IoT ecosystems through platform interoperability”. IEEE Software 1.34 (2017): 54-61.
  5. Cresswell AM and Sayogo DS. Developing Public Value Metrics for Returns to Government ICT Investments (2012).
  6. Davenport T., et al. “How artificial intelligence will change the future of marketing”. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 48.1 (2020): 24-42.
  7. De Vries H, Bekkers V and Tummers L. “Innovation in the public sector: A systematic review and future research agenda”. Public Administration 94.1 (2016): 146-166.
  8. Edler J., et al. Innovation and Public Procurement. Review of Issues at Stake. In Study for the European Commission (No ENTR/03/24); (2006). Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (2006).
  9. Edquist C, Hommen L and Tsipouri L. Public Technology Procurement and Innovation:16. Springer US (2000).
  10. Fu JR, Farn CK and Chao WP. “Acceptance of Electronic Tax Filing: A Study of Taxpayer Intentions”. Information &Management 43 (2006): 109-126.
  11. Holzinger A, Tjoa AM and Kieseberg P. “Digital transformation for sustainable development goals (SDGs) - a security, safety and privacy perspective on AI”. in: International Federation for Information Processing (2021): 1-20.
  12. Karunasena K and Deng H. “Critical factors for evaluating the public value of e-government in Sri Lanka”. Government Inf. Quart 1.29 (2012): 76-84.
  13. Lauterbach A. Artificial Intelligence and policy: QuoVadis? Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance 21.3 (2019): 238-263
  14. Lee YJ and Park JY. “Identification of future signal based on the quantitative and qualitative text mining: A case study on ethical issues in Artificial Intelligence”. Quality and Quantity 52.2 (2018): 653-667.
  15. Medhora PR. “Data Governance in the Digital Age”. Centre for International Governance Innovation Special Report (2018).
  16. Morse RS. “Integrative public leadership: Catalysing collaboration to create public value”. Leadership Quart 2.21 (2010): 231-245.
  17. Nilashi M., et al. “Determining the Importance of Hospital Information System Adoption Factors Using Fuzzy Analytic Network Process (ANP).” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 111 (2016): 244-264.
  18. Orji IJ and Wei S. “A Detailed Calculation Model for Costing of Green Manufacturing”. Industrial Management & Data Systems 116.1 (2016): 65-86.
  19. Pandey SK., et al. “Transformational leadership and the use of normative public values: Can employee be inspired to serve larger public purpose?”. Public Admin 1.94 (2016): 204-222.
  20. Rezaei J. “Best-worst multi-criteria decision-making method”. Omega 53 (2015): 49-57.
  21. Rezaei J. “Best- Worst Multi- Criteria Decision Making Method: Some Properties and a Linear Model”. Omega 64 (2016): 126-130.
  22. Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations, Fourth edition, New York: Free Press (1995).
  23. Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations, Fifth edition, New York: Free Press (2003).
  24. Schedler K, Guenduez AA and Frischknecht R. “How smart can government be? Exploring barriers to the adoption of smart government”. Information Polity 24.1 (2019): 3-20.
  25. Schrader DE and Ghosh D. “Proactively protecting against the singularity: Ethical decision making in AI”. IEEE Security and Privacy 16.3 (2018): 56-63.
  26. Stock T and Seliger G. “Opportunities of sustainable manufacturing in industry 4.0”. Procedia CIRP 40 (2016): 536-541.
  27. Sun TQ and Medaglia R. “Mapping the challenges of Artificial Intelligence in the public sector: evidence from public healthcare”. Govern. Inf. Q 36.2 (2019): 368-383.
  28. Thesmar D., et al. “Combining the power of Artificial Intelligence with the richness of healthcare claims data: Opportunities and challenges”. Rmaco Economics 37.6 (2019): 745-752.
  29. Tornatzky L and Fleischer M. “The process of technology innovation”. Lexington, MA, Lexington Books (1990).
  30. van Noordt C and Misuraca G. “Exploratory Insights on Artificial Intelligence for Government in Europe”. Social Science Computer Review (2020).
  31. van Noordt C and Misuraca G. Towards a Systematic Understanding on the Challenges of Procuring Artificial Intelligence in the Public Sector (2021).
  32. Vellido A. Societal issues concerning the application of Artificial Intelligence in medicine. Kidney Diseases 5.1 (2019): 11-17.
  33. Wang ZG., et al. “Energy Performance Contracting, Risk Factors, and Policy Implications: Identification and Analysis of Risks Based on the Best- Worst Network Method”. Energy 170 (2019): 1-13.
  34. Yang Y., et al. “Efficacy of China’s Strategic Environmental Management in its Institutional Environment”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 39.1 (2018): 138-163.
  35. Yusof NM, Paul RJ and Stergioulas LK. "Towards a Framework for Health Information Systems Evaluation”. The 39th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (2006).