I would like to discuss the connection between public and business administration. I argue that in order to investigate ethics, we need to consider the connection between the public and private sectors. I believe that a separate view between private agents on the one hand and public organizations on the other would fail to comprehensively capture the ethics involved in complex activities. This is a crucial aspect if we want to understand how such practices contribute to the common good.
Why this question? The most recent reason is due to the wide-ranging transformations that artificial intelligence (AI) represents for humanity. Another motivation comes from my experience in both the public and private sectors, which has allowed me to understand the commonalities and differences between them.
In the Brazilian context, however, there seems to be a friction between the areas, which can reduce the chances of this comprehensive approach happening. Part of this impasse lies in the assumption that the interests of public and private actors are distinct, but in practice this is not always the case. Sometimes we miss the ethos of the profession in the way agents act; sometimes professionals conform in the face of contextual pressures.
In any case, a separate view of public and private administration greatly reduces the ethical understanding of the means, ends and circumstances of actions. This is because the public and private sectors end up being interdependent. Lazzarini (2015) brings together evidence of this very well when he analyzes bond capitalism. Studies on Brazilian culture, clientelism and nepotism also highlight this characteristic.
Recognizing that research into AI ethics is growing, it’s important to reflect on the mutual implications between public administration and business, or economics, administration and the State.
Several studies on artificial intelligence suggest this connection, as in the books by Carissa Véliz (2020), Mark Coeckelbergh (2022) and Chris Miller (2022). Véliz (2020) warns, for example, that the data economy and surveillance are convenient for governments and companies; both help each other to structure AI systems. This translates into risks for freedom and democracy (Coeckelbergh, 2022).
Finally, when I asked chatGPT “what would happen if we adopted an ethical perspective that doesn’t assume the connection between the state and the private sector when dealing with artificial intelligence?”, I got the following answer:
“If we were to adopt an ethical perspective that does not acknowledge the connection between the state and the private sector in addressing artificial intelligence (AI), we would risk creating a fragmented and inadequate framework to tackle the complex and interconnected challenges of this field. This approach would overlook the collaborative and interdependent nature of technological innovation, leading to various negative consequences for both the development and regulation of AI.”
In conclusion, what I have tried to reinforce with the case of AI ethics is that we should more emphatically recognize the relationship between public and private administration. In everyday life, we see how both are connected by their relationships, agents and interests. If we want to understand the real ethical dilemmas of agents and the circumstances for their growth in virtue, we must consider the connection between the public and private sectors.
REFERENCES
Coeckelbergh, M. (2022). The political philosophy of AI: an introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Lazzarini, S. (2011). Capitalismo de laços: os donos do Brasil e suas conexões. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier.
Miller, C. (2022). Chip war: the fight for the world’s most critical technology. New york: Scribner.
Véliz, C. (2020). Privacy is power: why and how you should take back control of your data. London: Penguin Random House.
