AI fairness and Bias are becoming essential across ethical, social, commercial, and legal spheres. Fairness in AI encompasses a range of contexts, including avoiding discrimination based on protected characteristics like race and gender, adhering to fair processes, and ensuring equitable or consistent outcomes depending on the situation. It also involves preventing the exploitation of personal data and maintaining fairness in business practices and marketplaces.

Researchers have suggested several methods to evaluate and address bias in AI systems, but these methods are often improvised and lack a systematic structure for assessing fairness throughout the AI lifecycle. There is no universal process for assessing AI fairness across different fields and organizations. AI fairness is context-dependent, with different machine learning techniques and algorithms requiring distinct approaches based on the specific problem and requirements of each AI system. Biases and their impacts also vary depending on the application and scenario.

The ICO emphasizes the need for a “by design” approach to incorporate fairness into AI development from the start. The aim of Esdha is to provide guidance for organisations to create fair, safe and trustworthy AI systems using “by design” approach through:

• Pre-Processing Fairness: Interventions before training (e.g., rebalancing datasets, removing sensitive attributes).
• In-Processing Fairness: Adjustments during model training (e.g., fairness constraints, adversarial debiasing).
• Post-Processing Fairness: Modifying outputs to achieve fairness (e.g., recalibration of predictions).

Moreover, current AI fairness approaches often focus on products, leaving gaps for practitioners involved in services or consulting. Addressing fairness issues in datasets we need to provide effective support for fairness across different organizational and operational contexts including:

Perceived Severity of Fairness-Related Harms

Quantifying harms might favour majority groups, overshadowing severe impacts on smaller, marginalized communities.

Ease of Data Collection and Mitigation

This approach can perpetuate disparities by neglecting groups facing significant systemic marginalization.

Perceived PR or Brand Impacts

Performance disparities with potential for viral attention or reputational harm can be prioritised. Examples included high-profile failures like biased resume screening systems. Focusing on PR and brand risks may sideline actual stakeholder harms, prioritizing optics over substance.

Customer or Market Needs

Business imperatives often dictated prioritization, with organizations favouring high-value customers. Market-driven approaches favoured privileged groups, especially in tiered geographic deployments. This reinforces existing social and structural inequities by prioritizing powerful and already privileged groups.

Design considerations for embedding Fairness in Requirements, Context, and Purpose

Previous research has highlighted the various dimensions of bias in AI, such as technical, legal, social, and ethical aspects. It also points out the need for fairness regulations in AI across different domains, including for people with disabilities, and establishes the importance of ethical principles in AI fairness. Therefore here are some design considerations for you to get started

Defining Requirements

• Stakeholder Identification: Engage domain experts, ethicists, and affected communities to identify fairness priorities.
• Contextual Sensitivity: Recognize the sociocultural and organizational contexts to understand fairness implications.
• Use Case Alignment: Specify how fairness dimensions align with the broader purpose of the AI system.

Contextual Understanding

• Sensitive Attributes: Identify attributes relevant to fairness, such as age, gender, or socioeconomic status.
• Potential Disparities: Map out potential biases or disparities that could arise in the system.
• Regulatory Compliance: Ensure alignment with legal frameworks (e.g., GDPR, Equal Employment Opportunity laws).

Purpose Articulation

• Fairness Goals: Clearly define fairness objectives (e.g., reducing bias, ensuring equitable outcomes).
• Success Metrics: Establish measurable fairness metrics and thresholds.
• Transparency Commitment: Incorporate mechanisms for explaining fairness decisions to stakeholders.

Best practices for addressing fairness

Fairness is inherently interdisciplinary, and achieving it requires collaboration across diverse teams. Consider the following steps:

Building Interdisciplinary Teams

Include professionals with expertise in:

• Social Sciences: To understand societal impacts and ethical implications.
• Legal Experts: To ensure compliance with fairness-related laws and standards.
• Ethicists: To evaluate moral considerations and align with ethical principles.
• Technical Experts: To design and implement fairness-aware AI algorithms.

Co-Creation with Stakeholders

Engage end-users, affected communities, and organizational leaders in the development process. Their input can provide valuable insights into fairness concerns and desired outcomes.

 Ongoing Collaboration

Fairness is not a one-time task. Establish processes for continuous engagement and feedback from stakeholders throughout the AI lifecycle.

Free Resources for AI Fairness Design Considerations

Stakeholder Identification for Machine Learning 

The Solutionism Trap in Machine Learning

 

 

AI Fairness Mitigation Package – £999

The ultimate resource for organisations ready to tackle bias at scale starting from problem definition through to model monitoring to drive responsible AI practices.

Mitigate and resolve 15 Types of Fairness specific to your project with detailed guidance from problem definition to model monitoring.

Packed with practical methods, research-based strategies, and critical questions to guide your team.

Comprehensive checklists for every phase in the AI/ ML pipeline

Get Fairness Mitigation Package– (Delivery within 2-3 days)

 

Customised AI Fairness Mitigation Package – £2499

We’ll customise the design cards and checklists to meet your specific use case and compliance requirements—ensuring the toolkit aligns perfectly with your goals and industry standards.

Mitigate and resolve 15 Types of Fairness specific to your project with detailed guidance from problem definition to model monitoring.

Packed with practical methods, research-based strategies, and critical questions specific to your use case.

Customised checklists for every phase in the AI/ ML pipeline

Get Customised AI Fairness Mitigation Package– (Delivery within 7 days)