Roles for Computing in Social Change (1912.04883v4)

Abstract: A recent normative turn in computer science has brought concerns about fairness, bias, and accountability to the core of the field. Yet recent scholarship has warned that much of this technical work treats problematic features of the status quo as fixed, and fails to address deeper patterns of injustice and inequality. While acknowledging these critiques, we posit that computational research has valuable roles to play in addressing social problems -- roles whose value can be recognized even from a perspective that aspires toward fundamental social change. In this paper, we articulate four such roles, through an analysis that considers the opportunities as well as the significant risks inherent in such work. Computing research can serve as a diagnostic, helping us to understand and measure social problems with precision and clarity. As a formalizer, computing shapes how social problems are explicitly defined --- changing how those problems, and possible responses to them, are understood. Computing serves as rebuttal when it illuminates the boundaries of what is possible through technical means. And computing acts as synecdoche when it makes long-standing social problems newly salient in the public eye. We offer these paths forward as modalities that leverage the particular strengths of computational work in the service of social change, without overclaiming computing's capacity to solve social problems on its own.

• The paper identifies four distinct roles for computing—diagnostic, formalizing, rebuttal, and synecdoche—that frame its potential to address social inequalities.
• It demonstrates how computational methods can diagnose biases, such as racial bias in ad delivery and gender bias in facial recognition.
• The study argues that formalizing social problems spurs democratic debate and guides policy reform by clarifying technical constraints.

Roles for Computing in Social Change

The paper "Roles for Computing in Social Change," presented at the FAT* '20 Conference, embarks on an exploration of how computing research can contribute to addressing social problems, especially in the context of concerns related to fairness, accountability, and transparency. The authors, Rediet Abebe et al., articulate four distinct roles that computing can play in this landscape, acknowledging both the potential benefits and risks associated with each.

The paper emphasizes the importance of recognizing the diagnostic potential of computing research. By employing computational methods, researchers can measure and precisely characterize social problems that manifest in technical systems. For instance, studies illustrating racial bias in ad delivery or gender bias in facial recognition technologies exemplify how computing can enhance understanding of discriminatory patterns. These diagnostic efforts, while not solutions in themselves, can drive improvements and policy changes by rigorously documenting issues in technical systems.

The paper further discusses how computing serves as a formalizer, requiring explicit specification of inputs, objectives, and constraints. This role forces practitioners to confront and define social problems in precise terms, offering opportunities for democratic deliberation concerning the values encoded in algorithmic systems. The formalization process can thus illuminate the stakes involved in decision-making and clarify policy debates.

A critical role outlined in the paper is computing as a rebuttal. Computing experts have the ability to clarify the limits of technical interventions, dispelling misconceptions around their neutrality and reliability. The paper cites examples illustrating how researchers have effectively challenged inappropriate applications of computational tools, drawing upon formalizations to establish inherent limits on algorithmic fairness and thereby exposing the constraints of these approaches.

Lastly, the authors explore computing as synecdoche, wherein it brings longstanding social issues to the fore by leveraging the public and scholarly attention that technology often commands. By framing broader social concerns as technology issues, computing can serve as an entry point for renewed discourse on these topics, spotlighting systemic problems and mobilizing resources for broader reform.

The implications of these roles are multidimensional. They highlight how computing research can align with broader social changes, engaging with longstanding socio-political systems without overclaiming the power of computational solutions. Future research avenues could further delve into ethical frameworks to guide the alignment of computing with societal goals, broadening the intersection of technological and social sciences to effectively leverage computing's capacities in service of going beyond incremental to systemic change.