research-article

How Could Equality and Data Protection Law Shape AI Fairness for People with Disabilities?

Authors:

Reuben KirkhamAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS), Volume 14, Issue 3

Article No.: 17, Pages 1 - 32

https://doi.org/10.1145/3473673

Published: 30 August 2021 Publication History

Abstract

This article examines the concept of ‘AI fairness’ for people with disabilities from the perspective of data protection and equality law. This examination demonstrates that there is a need for a distinctive approach to AI fairness that is fundamentally different to that used for other protected characteristics, due to the different ways in which discrimination and data protection law applies in respect of Disability. We articulate this new agenda for AI fairness for people with disabilities, explaining how combining data protection and equality law creates new opportunities for disabled people's organisations and assistive technology researchers alike to shape the use of AI, as well as to challenge potential harmful uses.

References

[1]

Meryl Alper. 2017. Giving Voice: Mobile Communication, Disability, and Inequality. MIT Pre

[2]

Solon Barocas et al. 2017. The problem with bias: Allocative versus representational harms in machine learning. 9th Annual Conference of the Special Interest Group for Computing, Information and Society.

[3]

Solon Barocas and Andrew D. Selbst. 2016. Big data's disparate impact. Calif. L. Rev. 104 (2016): 671.

[4]

Ruha Benjamin. 2019. Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the new jim code. Social Forces (2019).

[5]

Cynthia L. Bennett and Os Keyes. 2020. What is the point of fairness? Disability, AI and the complexity of justice. ACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing 125 (2020), 1–1.

Digital Library

[6]

Tobias Berg et al. 2020. On the rise of fintechs: Credit scoring using digital footprints. The Review of Financial Studies 33, 7 (2020), 2845–2897.

[7]

Reuben Binns. 2018. Fairness in machine learning: Lessons from political philosophy. Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency. PMLR, 2018.

[8]

Peter Blanck. 2014. E-Equality. Cambridge University Press.

[9]

Judy Brewer. 2017. Standards Bodies, Access to Information Technology, and Human Rights. Disability, human rights, and information technology. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2017. 11–23.

[10]

James I. Charlton. 1998. Nothing About us Without us. University of California Press.

[11]

Sarah Hannett. 2020. Information rights: A practitioner's guide to data protection, freedom of information, and other information rights: edited by Philip Coppel QC, Hart Publishing, 2020, Vol 1 cxxxvii, 1301 pp; Vol 2 iv, 1198 pp, £ 200 (hbk), ISBN 9781509922246. (2020): 353–355.

[12]

Centre for Democracy & Technology. 2020. Algorithm-driven Hiring Tools: Innovative Recruitment or Expedited Disability Discrimination? CDT (2020).

[13]

Equality and Human Rights Commission, Scottish Human Rights Commission, and Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission. “Progress on disability rights in the United Kingdom.” (2018).

[14]

Kirsten Ellis et al. 2020. Bespoke Reflections: Creating a one-handed braille keyboard. The 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 2020.

[15]

Raphael Gellert and Serge Gutwirth. 2013. The legal construction of privacy and data protection. Computer Law & Security Review 29, 5 (2013), 522–530.

[16]

Alexandra Reeve Givens and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2020. Centering disability perspectives in algorithmic fairness, accountability, & transparency. Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 2020.

Digital Library

[17]

Daniel Greene, Anna Lauren Hoffmann, and Luke Stark. 2019. Better, nicer, clearer, fairer: A critical assessment of the movement for ethical artificial intelligence and machine learning. Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii international conference on system sciences. 2019.

[18]

James Grimmelmann and Daniel Westreich. 2016. Incomprehensible discrimination. Calif. L. Rev. Circuit 7 (2016), 164.

[19]

Anhong Guo et al. 2020. Toward fairness in AI for people with disabilities SBG@ a research roadmap. ACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing 125 (2020), 1–1.

[20]

Rupert Harwood. 2016. What has limited the impact of UK disability equality law on social justice? Laws 5, 4 (2016), 42.

[21]

Deborah Hellman. 2020. Measuring algorithmic fairness. Va. L. Rev. 106 (2020), 811.

[22]

Bob Hepple. 2010. The new single equality act in Britain. The Equal Rights Review 5 (2010), 11–24.

[23]

Anna Lauren Hoffmann. 2019. Where fairness fails: data, algorithms, and the limits of antidiscrimination discourse. Information, Communication & Society 22, 7 (2019), 900–915.

[24]

John Horan. 2011. What does In the matter of Horan tell us about judges and barristers. Equal Opportunities Review 213 (2011), 27–28.

[25]

John Horan. 2015. Access to justice - a personal viewpoint. Employment Law Brief 1033 (2015), 16–17.

[26]

David L. Hosking. 2008. Critical disability theory. A paper presented at the 4th biennial disability studies conference at Lancaster University, UK, Sept. 2-4, 2008. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 72, 3 (2008), 467–478.

[27]

Ben Hutchinson et al. 2020. Social biases in NLP models as barriers for persons with disabilities. arXiv preprint arXiv:2005.00813 (2020).

[28]

Amy Hurst and Jasmine Tobias. 2011. Empowering individuals with do-it-yourself assistive technology. The proceedings of the 13th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility. 2011.

Digital Library

[29]

Hisayo Katsui and Shuaib Chalklen, eds. Disability, globalization and human rights. Routledge, 2020.

[30]

Pauline T. Kim. 2016. Data-driven discrimination at work. Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 58 (2016), 857.

[31]

Reuben Kirkham. 2015. Can disability discrimination law expand the availability of wearable computers? Computer 48, 6 (2015), 25–33.

Digital Library

[32]

R. Kirkham and C. Greenhalgh. (2015). Social access vs. privacy in wearable computing. IEEE Pervasive Computing 14, 1 (2015), 26–33.

Digital Library

[33]

Reuben Kirkham et al. 2015. Build me a Ubicomp: bespoke ubiquitous accessibility in live television production environments. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 19, 5 (2015), 853–880.

[34]

Reuben Kirkham. 2018. How long is a piece of string? The appropriateness of search time as a measure of ‘burden'in Access to Information regimes. Government Information Quarterly 35, 4 (2018), 657–668.

[35]

Reuben Kirkham. 2020. Using european human rights jurisprudence for incorporating values into design. Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 2020.

Digital Library

[36]

Toel Koyithara. 2018. Law and disability: How the UK is still reinforcing the medical view of disability. Oxford Human Rights Hub. Available at [https://ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk/law-and-disability-how-the-uk-is-still-reinforcing-the-medical-view-of-disability/ (archived at: https://perma.cc/P3XD-574M)] (2018).

[37]

John D. Kraemer and Connor S. Benton. 2015. Disparities in road crash mortality among pedestrians using wheelchairs in the USA: results of a capture–recapture analysis. BMJ open 5, 11 (2015), e008396.

[38]

Jonathan Lazar et al. 2010. Up in the air: Are airlines following the new DOT rules on equal pricing for people with disabilities when websites are inaccessible? Government Information Quarterly 27, 4 (2010), 329–336.

[39]

Jonathan Lazar et al. 2016. Human–computer interaction and international public policymaking: a framework for understanding and taking future actions. Foundations and Trends® Human–Computer Interaction 9, 2 1126 (2016), 69–149. http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/1100000062.

[40]

Jonathan Lazar, Brian Wentz, and Marco Winckler. 2017. Information privacy and security as a human right for people with disabilities. Disability, Human Rights, and Information Technology. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2017. 199–211.

[41]

Jonathan Lazar. 2019. The potential role of US consumer protection laws in improving digital accessibility for people with disabilities. U. Pa. JL & Soc. Change 22 (2019), 185.

[42]

Zachary C. Lipton, Alexandra Chouldechova, and Julian McAuley. 2018. Does mitigating ML's impact disparity require treatment disparity? Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. 2018.

Digital Library

[43]

Aileen McColgan QC. 2014. Discrimination, equality and the law. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014.

[44]

Peter Mittler. 2015. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: Implementing a Paradigm Shift. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities 12, 2 (2015), 79–89.

[45]

Meredith Ringel Morris. 2020. AI and Accessibility. Communications of the ACM 63, 6 (2020), 35–37.

Digital Library

[46]

Karen Nakamura. 2019. My algorithms have determined you're not human: AI-ML, reverse turing-tests, and the disability experience. The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 2019.

Digital Library

[47]

Dino Pedreshi, Salvatore Ruggieri, and Franco Turini. 2008. Discrimination-aware data mining. Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. 2008.

Digital Library

[48]

Javier Sánchez-Monedero, Lina Dencik, and Lilian Edwards. 2020. What does it mean to'solve'the problem of discrimination in hiring? Social, technical and legal perspectives from the UK on automated hiring systems. Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 2020.

Digital Library

[49]

Richard K. Scotch. 2009. “Nothing about us without us”: Disability rights in America. OAH Magazine of History 23, 3 (2009): 17–22.

[50]

Jacobus TenBroek. 1966. The right to live in the world: The disabled in the law of torts. Calif. L. Rev. 54 (1966), 841.

[51]

Shari Trewin. 2018. AI fairness for people with disabilities: Point of view. arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.10670 (2018).

[52]

Shari Trewin et al. 2019. Considerations for AI fairness for people with disabilities. AI Matters 5, 3 (2019), 40–63.

Digital Library

[53]

Manish Raghavan et al. 2020. Mitigating bias in algorithmic hiring: Evaluating claims and practices. Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 2020.

[54]

Frances Ryan. 2020. Crippled: Austerity and the demonization of disabled people. Verso.

[55]

Nitin Madnani et al. 2017. Building better open-source tools to support fairness in automated scoring. Proceedings of the First ACL Workshop on Ethics in Natural Language Processing 2017.

[56]

Thomas Nachbar. 2020. Algorithmic fairness, algorithmic discrimination. Florida State University Law Review, Forthcoming, Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper 2020–11 (2020).

[57]

Sandra Wachter, and Brent Mittelstadt. 2019. A right to reasonable inferences: re-thinking data protection law in the age of big data and AI. Colum. Bus. L. Rev. (2019), 494.

[58]

Meredith Whittaker et al. 2019. Disability, bias, and AI. AI Now Institute.

[59]

Colin Watson, Reuben Kirkham, and Ahmed Kharrufa. 2020. PIP Kit: An exploratory investigation into using lifelogging to support disability benefit claimants. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2020.

Digital Library

[60]

Alice Xiang, and Inioluwa Deborah Raji. 2019. On the legal compatibility of fairness definitions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.00761 (2019).

[61]

Muhammad Bilal Zafar et al. 2017. Fairness constraints: Mechanisms for fair classification. Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. PMLR, 2017.

Cited By

El Morr CKundi BMobeen FTaleghani SEl-Lahib YGorman R(2024)AI and disability: A systematic scoping reviewHealth Informatics Journal10.1177/1460458224128574330:3Online publication date: 17-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/14604582241285743
Kollnig KDatta SSerban Von Davier TVan Kleek MBinns RLyngs UShadbolt N(2023)‘We are adults and deserve control of our phones’: Examining the risks and opportunities of a right to repair for mobile appsProceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3593013.3593973(22-34)Online publication date: 12-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3593013.3593973
Birzhandi PCho Y(2023)Application of fairness to healthcare, organizational justice, and financeExpert Systems with Applications: An International Journal10.1016/j.eswa.2022.119465216:COnline publication date: 15-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.119465

Index Terms

How Could Equality and Data Protection Law Shape AI Fairness for People with Disabilities?
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Accessibility

Recommendations

Reframing Disability as Competency: Unpacking Everyday Technology Practices of People with Visual Impairments
CHI '20: Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

More than a billion people in the world live with some form of visual impairment, and a wide variety of technologies are now routinely used by them in the course of 'getting on' in everyday life. However, little is known about the ways in which assistive ...
What difference does tech make? Conceptualizations of Disability and Assistive Technology among Kenyan Youth: Conceptualizations of Disability and AT
ASSETS '21: Proceedings of the 23rd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility

Most research which investigates stigma towards with people with disabilities and the use of Assistive Technology (AT) are based in the Global North and focus on the experiences of people with disabilities and the consequences that stigma has on choices ...
Network-based accessibility services for people with disabilities
Accessible Design'05: Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on Accessible Design in the Digital World

Most assistive technologies (AT) are based on hardware and/or software installed and used by individuals. For example, a screen reader is installed on a computer so that a user can hear spoken output of the information on the display. However, a network-...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing

ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing Volume 14, Issue 3

September 2021

199 pages

ISSN:1936-7228

EISSN:1936-7236

DOI:10.1145/3477232

Editors:
Tiago Guerreiro
Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal
,
Stephanie Ludi
University of North Texas, USA

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2021 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 30 August 2021

Accepted: 01 July 2021

Revised: 01 April 2021

Received: 01 August 2020

Published in TACCESS Volume 14, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
714
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)268
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)23

Reflects downloads up to 12 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

El Morr CKundi BMobeen FTaleghani SEl-Lahib YGorman R(2024)AI and disability: A systematic scoping reviewHealth Informatics Journal10.1177/1460458224128574330:3Online publication date: 17-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/14604582241285743
Kollnig KDatta SSerban Von Davier TVan Kleek MBinns RLyngs UShadbolt N(2023)‘We are adults and deserve control of our phones’: Examining the risks and opportunities of a right to repair for mobile appsProceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency10.1145/3593013.3593973(22-34)Online publication date: 12-Jun-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3593013.3593973
Birzhandi PCho Y(2023)Application of fairness to healthcare, organizational justice, and financeExpert Systems with Applications: An International Journal10.1016/j.eswa.2022.119465216:COnline publication date: 15-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.eswa.2022.119465
Agarwal AAgarwal H(2023)A seven-layer model with checklists for standardising fairness assessment throughout the AI lifecycleAI and Ethics10.1007/s43681-023-00266-94:2(299-314)Online publication date: 21-Feb-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-023-00266-9
Kulkarni PKirkham RMcNaney R(2022)Opportunities for Smartphone Sensing in E-Health Research: A Narrative ReviewSensors10.3390/s2210389322:10(3893)Online publication date: 20-May-2022
https://doi.org/10.3390/s22103893

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents