Artificial Intelligence as a Factor in State and Society Transformation: Finding Balance between Administrative Efficiency and Human-Centricity

The article presents a socio-philosophical analysis of artificial intelligence (AI) integration into public administration systems. The research focuses on identifying an optimal balance between enhancing administrative efficiency and preserving humanistic values. The author examines diverse perspectives on AI’s role in contemporary society, ranging from techno-optimistic concepts that view AI as a tool for qualitative improvement of human life, to critical theories warning of dehumanization risks and increased social control. The paper conducts a comparative analysis of national AI development strategies among leading global powers, identifying their common features and significant differences shaped by cultural, political, and economic factors. Potential risks and threats associated with the implementation of AI systems in public administration are explored, including issues of personal data protection, information security, and the ethical dimensions of algorithmic decision-making. The concept of a human-centered approach to AI is examined as a potential guiding principle for the development and deployment of these technologies. Various levels of control over AI systems are characterized, encompassing legal regulation, professional and public evaluation. Particular attention is given to the prospects of artificial general intelligence (AGI) development and its potential impact on the transformation of state institutions and social relations. The study argues that AGI architecture, enabling genuine system agency, must incorporate a level responsible for actualization functions (strategic goal-setting, ethics, knowledge, and self-identification). Special emphasis is placed on the system’s awareness of its finite existence as a necessary condition for developing meaningful operational strategies and ethical principles. The article concludes that as AI technologies advance, the importance of ethical norms, value systems, and responsibility principles increases since these core societal factors cannot be fully replaced even by the most sophisticated regulation. The author highlights the growing significance of mutual trust between state and society in an environment where AI systems provide unprecedented opportunities for social control.

1. Amadei D. (2024) Machines of Loving Grace: How AI Could Transform the World for the Better. Retrieved from https://darioamodei.com/machines-of-loving-grace

2. Androutsopoulou A., Karacapilidis N., Loukis E., & Charalabidis Y. (2019) Transforming the Communication between Citizens and Government through AI-Guided Chatbots. Government Information Quarterly. Vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 358–367.

3. Avetisyan A.I. (2022) Cybersecurity in the Context of Artificial Intelligence. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences = Vestnik Rossiyskoy akademii nauk. Vol. 92, no. 12, pp. 1119–1123 (in Russian).

4. Bareis J. & Katzenbach C. (2022) Talking AI into Being: The Narratives and Imaginaries of National AI Strategies and Their Performative Politics. Science, Technology & Human Values. Vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 855–881.

5. Bender E.M., Gebru T., McMillan-Major A., & Shmitchell S. (2021) On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big? In: FAccT’21: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 610–623). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.

6. Bostrom N. (2014) Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

7. Dreyfus H.L. (1972) What Computers Can't Do: A Critique of Artificial Reason. New York: Harper & Row.

8. Dubrovsky D.I., Efimov A.R., Lepsky V.E., & Slavin B.B. (2022) The Fetish of Artificial Intelligence. Russian Journal of Philosophical Sciences = Filosofskie nauki. Vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 44–71.

9. Engstrom D., Ho D., Sharkey C., & Cuéllar M. (2020) Government by Algorithm: Artificial Intelligence in Federal Administrative Agencies. New York: NYU School of Law.

10. Fjelland R. (2020) Why General Artificial Intelligence Will Not Be Realized. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. Vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 1–9.

11. Floridi L. (2014) The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere is Reshaping Human Reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

12. Gao Y., Janssen M., & Zhang C. (2023) Understanding the Evolution of Open Government Data Research: Towards Open Data Sustainability and Smartness. International Review of Administrative Sciences. Vol. 89, no. 1, pp. 59–75.

13. Goertzel B. & Pennachin C. (Eds.) (2007) Artificial General Intelligence. Berlin: Springer.

14. Goertzel B. & Wang P. (Eds.) (2007) Advances in Artificial General Intelligence: Concepts, Architectures and Algorithms. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

15. Hine E. & Floridi L. (2024) Artificial Intelligence with American Values and Chinese Characteristics: A Comparative Analysis of American and Chinese Governmental AI Policies. AI & Society. Vol. 39, pp. 257–278.

16. Jonas H. (2004) The Imperative of Responsibility: In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age (I.I. Makhankov, Trans.). Moscow: Airis-press (Russian translation).

17. Kankanhalli A., Charalabidis Y., & Mellouli S. (2019) IoT and AI for Smart Government: A Research Agenda. Government Information Quarterly. Vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 304–309.

18. Korteling J., Boer-Visschedijk G., Blankendaal R., Boonekamp R., & Eikelboom A. (2021) Human- versus Artificial Intelligence. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. Vol. 4, article 622364.

19. Kurzweil R. (2005) The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. New York: Viking.

20. Kuusi O. & Heinonen S. (2022) Scenarios From Artificial Narrow Intelligence to Artificial General Intelligence – Reviewing the Results of the International Work / Technology 2050 Study. World Futures Review. Vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 65–79.

21. Margetts H. (2022) Rethinking AI for Good Governance. Daedalus. Vol. 151, no. 2, pp. 360–371.

22. Nazaretyan A.P. (2004) Anthropogenic Crises: The Hypothesis of Techno-Humanitarian Balance. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences = Vestnik Rossiyskoy akademii nauk. Vol. 74, no. 4, pp. 319–330 (in Russian).

23. Russell S. (2019) Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control. New York: Viking.

24. Sarpatwar K., Vaculin R., Min H., Su G., Heath T., Ganapavarapu G., & Dillenberger D. (2019) Towards Enabling Trusted Artificial Intelligence via Blockchain. In: Calo S., Bertino E., & Verma D. (Eds.) Policy-Based Autonomic Data Governance (pp. 137–153). Cham: Springer.

25. Shneiderman B. (2022) Human-Centered AI. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

26. Slavin B. (2023) An Architectural Approach to Modeling Artificial General Intelligence. Heliyon. Vol. 9, no. 3, article e14443.

27. Sun T. & Medaglia R. (2019) Mapping the Challenges of Artificial Intelligence in the Public Sector: Evidence from Public Healthcare. Government Information Quarterly. Vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 368–383.

28. Vogl T., Seidelin C., Ganesh B., & Bright J. (2020) Smart Technology and the Emergence of Algorithmic Bureaucracy: Artificial Intelligence in UK Local Authorities. Public Administration Review. Vol. 80, no. 6, pp. 946–961.

29. Wang P. (2019) On Defining Artificial Intelligence. Journal of Artificial General Intelligence. Vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 1–37.

30. Xu X., Kostka G., & Cao X. (2022) Information Control and Public Support for Social Credit Systems in China. The Journal of Politics. Vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 2230–2245.

31. Yigitcanlar T., Corchado J., Mehmood R., Li R., Mossberger K., & Desouza K. (2021) Responsible Urban Innovation with Local Government Artificial Intelligence (AI): A Conceptual Framework and Research Agenda. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. Vol. 7, no. 1, article 71.

32. Zuboff S. (2019) The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: Public Affairs.