Administrative Justice in Public-Sector Automated Decision-Making Governance: A Systematic Review
Main Article Content
Abstract
Public authorities are increasingly embracing automated decision making (ADM). The literature on legal mandates, organizational practice, and citizen results is mixed. This systematic review assesses the conceptualization of accountability, transparency, supervision by humans, and administrative justice in public sector ADM by scholarship and how protections are operationalized. The search in Scopus (PRISMA method) resulted in 122 entries and 56 qualifying full-text papers. The archive is dominated by doctrinal and socio-legal research (28/56) and European contexts (31/56). Conceptual and case studies are many but empirical qualitative [7] and quantitative [5] are limited. The gap between ideals and implementation is stark: literature describes more than safeguards for review, correction, and repair ADM governance ideals. Three conflicts are clearly emerging: formal accountability versus diffused responsibility, formal transparency versus useable cures, and formal oversight by humans versus intervention capacity. A four-layer diagnostic methodology is proposed: system traceability, administrative capability, institutional responsibility, and citizen-facing remedies. Cross-layer dependency matters: safeguards cannot work without complementary records, authority, review capability, or accessible remedies.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Article Details
How to Cite
SETIAWAN, Setiawan; HERNIMAWATI, Hernimawati; SAPUTRA, Trio.
Administrative Justice in Public-Sector Automated Decision-Making Governance: A Systematic Review.
Policy & Governance Review, [S.l.], v. 10, n. 3, p. 306-325, nov. 2026.
ISSN 2580-4820.
Available at: <https://journal.iapa.or.id/pgr/article/view/1400>. Date accessed: 03 nov. 2026.
doi: https://doi.org/10.30589/pgr.v10i3.1400.
Section
Articles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Adelmant, V., & Raso, J. (2025). Data entry and decision chains: Distributed responsibility and bureaucratic disempowerment in the UK’s Universal Credit programme. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 45(2), 415–446. https://doi. org/10.1093/ojls/gqaf006
Agbabiaka, O., Ojo, A., & Connolly, N. (2025). Requirements for trustworthy AI-enabled automated decision-making in the public sector: A systematic review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2025.124076
AllahRakha, N. (2025). AI and corruption: Legal liability in algorithmic decision-making. Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 8(3), 303–326. https:// doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-8.3-a000120
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/ mum032
Appelman, N., Ó Fathaigh, R., & van Hoboken, J. (2021). Social welfare, risk profiling and fundamental rights: The case of SyRI in the Netherlands. Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law, 12(4), 257–271.
Arnesen, S., Broderstad, T. S., Fishkin, J. S., Johannesson, M. P., & Siu, A. (2025). Knowledge and support for AI in the public sector: A deliberative poll experiment. AI & Society, 40, 3573–3589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146- 024-02104-w
Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2020). Administration by algorithm: A risk management framework. Information Polity, 25, 471–490. https://doi. org/10.3233/IP-200249
Bodó, B., & Janssen, H. (2022). Maintaining trust in a technologized public sector. Policy and Society, 41(3), 414–429. https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/ puac019
Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x
Brand, D. J. (2022). Responsible artificial intelligence in government: Development of a legal framework for South Africa. eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government, 14(1), 130–150. https://doi. org/10.29379/jedem.v14i1.678
Busuioc, M. (2021). Accountable artificial intelligence: Holding algorithms to account. Public Administration Review, 81(5), 825–836. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13293
Butler, O. (2025). Algorithmic decision-making, delegation and the modern machinery of government. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 45(3), 727–752. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/ gqaf018
Carlsson, V. (2025). Legal certainty in automated decision-making in welfare services. Public Policy and Administration, 40(2), 302–321. https://doi. org/10.1177/09520767231202334
Casado, E. G. (2023). Automated decision-making systems in Spanish administrative law. CERIDAP, 2023(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.13130/2723- 9195/2023-1-119
Cetina Presuel, R., & Martinez Sierra, J. M. (2024). The adoption of artificial intelligence in bureaucratic decision-making: A Weberian perspective. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 5(1). https:// doi.org/10.1145/3609861
Chenou, J.-M., & Valenzuela, L. E. R. (2021). Habeas data, habemus algorithms: Algorithmic intervention in public interest decision- making in Colombia. The Law, State and Telecommunications Review, 13(2), 56–77. https://doi.org/10.26512/lstr.v13i2.34113
Cobbe, J., & Singh, J. (2020). Reviewable automated decision-making. Computer Law & Security Review, 39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. clsr.2020.105475
Csatlós, E. (2025). Automation in action: Experience with quick and cost-efficient administrative decisions in Hungary. Balkan Social Science Review, 25, 181–203. https://doi.org/10.46763/ BSSR252525181c
Denk, T., Hedström, K., & Karlsson, F. (2022). Citizens’ attitudes towards automated decision- making. Information Polity, 27, 391–408. https:// doi.org/10.3233/IP-211516
Engstrom, D. F., & Ho, D. E. (2020). Algorithmic accountability in the administrative state. Yale Journal on Regulation, 37, 800–854.
Fischer-Abaigar, U., Kern, C., Barda, N., & Kreuter, F. (2024). Bridging the gap: Towards an expanded toolkit for AI-driven decision-making in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2024.101976
Geburczyk, F. (2021). Automated administrative decision-making under the influence of the GDPR: Early reflections and upcoming challenges. Computer Law & Security Review, 41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2021.105538
Gontarz, I. (2023). Judicial review of automated administrative decision-making: The role of administrative courts in the evaluation of unlawful regimes. ELTE Law Journal, 2023(1), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.54148/ELTELJ.2023.1.151
Haitsma, L., & Brink, B. (2025). From human intervention to human involvement: A critical examination of the role of humans in (semi-) automated administrative decision-making. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.1145/3716173
Hamuľáková, Z., & Horvat, M. (2026). Artificial intelligence and administrative punishment [Umelá inteligencia a správne trestanie]. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica, 2026(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2026.5
Hickok, M. (2024). Public procurement of artificial intelligence systems: New risks and future proofing. AI & Society, 39(3), 1213–1227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01572-2
Hirvonen, H. (2024). Just accountability structures: A way to promote the safe use of automated decision-making in the public sector. AI & Society, 39, 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00146-023-01731-z
Hubková, P. (2024). EU administrative decision- making delegated to machines: Legal challenges and issues. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica, 2024(2), 101–119. https://doi. org/10.14712/23366478.2024.25
Jančát, L. (2025). Automation of processes in public administration in selected member states of the European Union [Automatizácia procesov vo verejnej správe vo vybraných členských štátoch Európskej únie]. Studia Iuridica Cassoviensia, 13(Special Issue), 66–90. https:// doi.org/10.33542/SIC2025-S-05
Jobberns, H., & Guihot, M. (2024). Digital governance and neoliberalism: The evolution of machine learning in Australian public policy. Law, Technology and Humans, 6(2), 29–52. https://doi.org/10.5204/lthj.3408
Kaun, A., Larsson, A. O., & Masso, A. (2025). Automation scenarios: Citizen attitudes towards automated decision-making in the public sector. Information, Communication & Society, 28(7), 1177–1194. https://doi.org/10.1080/136911 8X.2024.2375261
König, P. D., Felfeli, J., Achtziger, A., & Wenzelburger, G. (2024). The importance of effectiveness versus transparency and stakeholder involvement in citizens’ perception of public sector algorithms. Public Management Review, 26(4), 1061–1082. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.21449 38
König, P. D., & Wenzelburger, G. (2021). The legitimacy gap of algorithmic decision-making in the public sector: Why it arises and how to address it. Technology in Society, 67. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101688
Kuziemski, M., & Misuraca, G. (2020). AI governance in the public sector: Three tales from the frontiers of automated decision-making in democratic settings. Telecommunications Policy, 44. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101976
Langer, C. (2024). Decision-making power and responsibility in an automated administration. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 4. https://doi. org/10.1007/s44163-024-00152-1
Lengyel, A. (2025). Automated decision-making in administrative penal matters [Automatizované rozhodovanie vo veciach správneho trestania]. Studia Iuridica Cassoviensia, 13(Special Issue), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.33542/ SIC2025-S-07
Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services (30th Anniversary Expanded Edition). Russell Sage Foundation. https://www.russellsage.org/ publications/book/street-level-bureaucracy
Long, Y., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2023). Understanding the extent of automation and process transparency appropriate for public services: The AI cases in Chinese local governments. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 19(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEGR.322550
Mashaw, J. L. (1983). Bureaucratic Justice: Managing Social Security Disability Claims. Yale University Press. https://yalebooks.yale.edu/ book/9780300034035/bureaucratic-justice/
Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government. Harvard University Press. https://books.google.com/books/about/ Creating_Public_Value.html?id=aSa4AAAAIAAJ
Moynihan, D. P., Herd, P., & Harvey, H. (2015). Administrative Burden: Learning, Psychological, and Compliance Costs in Citizen-State Interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 43–69. https://doi. org/10.1093/jopart/muu009
Nalbandian, L. (2022). Increasing the accountability of automated decision-making systems: An assessment of the automated decision-making system introduced in Canada’s temporary resident visa immigration stream. Journal of Responsible Technology, 10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jrt.2021.100023
Novotná, M., Adamová, Z., & Maslen, M. (2026). Public administration responsibility for the deployment of artificial intelligence [Zodpovednosť verejnej správy za nasadenie umelej inteligencie]. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica, 2026(1), 111–132. https://doi. org/10.14712/23366478.2026.8
Olsen, H. P., Hildebrandt, T. T., Wiesener, C., Larsen, M. S., & Ammitzbøll Flügge, A. W. (2024). The right to transparency in public governance: Freedom of information and the use of artificial intelligence by public agencies. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 5(1). https:// doi.org/10.1145/3632753
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pesch, P. J. (2025). Potentials and challenges of large language models (LLMs) in the context of administrative decision-making. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 16(1), 76–95. https:// doi.org/10.1017/err.2024.99
Pilving, I. (2023). Guidance-based algorithms for automated decision-making in public administration: The Estonian perspective. CERIDAP, 2023(1), 51–74. https://doi. org/10.13130/2723-9195/2023-1-105
Putri, A. N., & Syahrina, A. (2026). Automated Decision-Making and the Transformation of Bureaucratic Discretion:A Cross-Sector Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence. Policy & Governance Review, 10(2). https://doi. org/10.30589/pgr.v10i2.1391
Rachovitsa, A., & Johann, N. (2022). The human rights implications of the use of AI in the digital welfare state: Lessons learned from the Dutch SyRI case. Human Rights Law Review, 22, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngac010
Reichel, J. (2023). Regulating automation of Swedish public administration. CERIDAP, 2023(1), 75– 94. https://doi.org/10.13130/2723-9195/2023- 1-112
Rizk, A., & Lindgren, I. (2025). Automated decision- making in public administration: Changing the decision space between public officials and citizens. Government Information Quarterly, 42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102061
Roehl, U. B. U. (2023). Automated decision-making and good administration: Views from inside the government machinery. Government Information Quarterly, 40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2023.101864
Rudolf, G., & Kovač, P. (2024). The role of automated decision-making in modern administrative law: Challenges and data protection implications. Central European Public Administration Review, 22(2), 83–108. https://doi.org/10.17573/ cepar.2024.2.04
Sanchez-Graells, A. (2024). Resh(AI)ping good administration: Addressing the mass effects of public sector digitalisation. Laws, 13. https://doi. org/10.3390/laws13010009
Schmidt, R., & Scott, C. (2021). Regulatory discretion: Structuring power in the era of regulatory capitalism. Legal Studies, 41, 454–473. https:// doi.org/10.1017/lst.2021.13
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities (4th Edition). SAGE Publications. https://ndlsearch.ndl.go.jp/ en/books/R100000002-I024635595
Sharaf Addin, E. H. M. (2025). Reconciling adminis- trative efficiency with procedural safeguards in the ADM system. Bratislava Law Review, 9(2), 155– 172. https://doi.org/10.46282/blr.2025.9.2.1116
Shen, P. (2026). Toward a proportionate explainability framework in administrative automated decision- making: A lesson from China. Computer Law & Security Review, 61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. clsr.2026.106307
Suksi, M. (2021). Administrative due process when using automated decision-making in public administration: Some notes from a Finnish perspective. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 29, 87–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-020- 09269-x
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471- 2288-8-45
Tomlinson, J. (2020). Justice in automated adminis- tration. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 40(4), 708–736. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqaa025
Weerheijm, B., Galdames, M., & Giest, S. (2026). Bureaucratic accountability: Enabler or barrier for algorithm use? Policy Design and Practice, 9(1), 16–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292. 2025.2578064
Weerheijm, B., Giest, S., & Klievink, B. (2025). Complexity, understandability, and compatibility: A comparative study of AI advisory systems for national security. Government Information Quarterly, 42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025. 102088
Wieringa, M. (2023). “Hey SyRI, tell me about algorithmic accountability”: Lessons from a landmark case. Data & Policy, 5. https://doi. org/10.1017/dap.2022.39
Zheng, G., Lee, H., Li, W., Liu, Y., & Tang, T. (2026). Navigating the algorithmic state: Public values and citizens’ preferences of AI-driven public service delivery. Public Administration, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.70066
Agbabiaka, O., Ojo, A., & Connolly, N. (2025). Requirements for trustworthy AI-enabled automated decision-making in the public sector: A systematic review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. techfore.2025.124076
AllahRakha, N. (2025). AI and corruption: Legal liability in algorithmic decision-making. Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 8(3), 303–326. https:// doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-8.3-a000120
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/ mum032
Appelman, N., Ó Fathaigh, R., & van Hoboken, J. (2021). Social welfare, risk profiling and fundamental rights: The case of SyRI in the Netherlands. Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law, 12(4), 257–271.
Arnesen, S., Broderstad, T. S., Fishkin, J. S., Johannesson, M. P., & Siu, A. (2025). Knowledge and support for AI in the public sector: A deliberative poll experiment. AI & Society, 40, 3573–3589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146- 024-02104-w
Bannister, F., & Connolly, R. (2020). Administration by algorithm: A risk management framework. Information Polity, 25, 471–490. https://doi. org/10.3233/IP-200249
Bodó, B., & Janssen, H. (2022). Maintaining trust in a technologized public sector. Policy and Society, 41(3), 414–429. https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/ puac019
Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and Assessing Accountability: A Conceptual Framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x
Brand, D. J. (2022). Responsible artificial intelligence in government: Development of a legal framework for South Africa. eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government, 14(1), 130–150. https://doi. org/10.29379/jedem.v14i1.678
Busuioc, M. (2021). Accountable artificial intelligence: Holding algorithms to account. Public Administration Review, 81(5), 825–836. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13293
Butler, O. (2025). Algorithmic decision-making, delegation and the modern machinery of government. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 45(3), 727–752. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/ gqaf018
Carlsson, V. (2025). Legal certainty in automated decision-making in welfare services. Public Policy and Administration, 40(2), 302–321. https://doi. org/10.1177/09520767231202334
Casado, E. G. (2023). Automated decision-making systems in Spanish administrative law. CERIDAP, 2023(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.13130/2723- 9195/2023-1-119
Cetina Presuel, R., & Martinez Sierra, J. M. (2024). The adoption of artificial intelligence in bureaucratic decision-making: A Weberian perspective. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 5(1). https:// doi.org/10.1145/3609861
Chenou, J.-M., & Valenzuela, L. E. R. (2021). Habeas data, habemus algorithms: Algorithmic intervention in public interest decision- making in Colombia. The Law, State and Telecommunications Review, 13(2), 56–77. https://doi.org/10.26512/lstr.v13i2.34113
Cobbe, J., & Singh, J. (2020). Reviewable automated decision-making. Computer Law & Security Review, 39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. clsr.2020.105475
Csatlós, E. (2025). Automation in action: Experience with quick and cost-efficient administrative decisions in Hungary. Balkan Social Science Review, 25, 181–203. https://doi.org/10.46763/ BSSR252525181c
Denk, T., Hedström, K., & Karlsson, F. (2022). Citizens’ attitudes towards automated decision- making. Information Polity, 27, 391–408. https:// doi.org/10.3233/IP-211516
Engstrom, D. F., & Ho, D. E. (2020). Algorithmic accountability in the administrative state. Yale Journal on Regulation, 37, 800–854.
Fischer-Abaigar, U., Kern, C., Barda, N., & Kreuter, F. (2024). Bridging the gap: Towards an expanded toolkit for AI-driven decision-making in the public sector. Government Information Quarterly, 41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2024.101976
Geburczyk, F. (2021). Automated administrative decision-making under the influence of the GDPR: Early reflections and upcoming challenges. Computer Law & Security Review, 41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2021.105538
Gontarz, I. (2023). Judicial review of automated administrative decision-making: The role of administrative courts in the evaluation of unlawful regimes. ELTE Law Journal, 2023(1), 151–162. https://doi.org/10.54148/ELTELJ.2023.1.151
Haitsma, L., & Brink, B. (2025). From human intervention to human involvement: A critical examination of the role of humans in (semi-) automated administrative decision-making. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 6(3). https://doi.org/10.1145/3716173
Hamuľáková, Z., & Horvat, M. (2026). Artificial intelligence and administrative punishment [Umelá inteligencia a správne trestanie]. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica, 2026(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2026.5
Hickok, M. (2024). Public procurement of artificial intelligence systems: New risks and future proofing. AI & Society, 39(3), 1213–1227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-022-01572-2
Hirvonen, H. (2024). Just accountability structures: A way to promote the safe use of automated decision-making in the public sector. AI & Society, 39, 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00146-023-01731-z
Hubková, P. (2024). EU administrative decision- making delegated to machines: Legal challenges and issues. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica, 2024(2), 101–119. https://doi. org/10.14712/23366478.2024.25
Jančát, L. (2025). Automation of processes in public administration in selected member states of the European Union [Automatizácia procesov vo verejnej správe vo vybraných členských štátoch Európskej únie]. Studia Iuridica Cassoviensia, 13(Special Issue), 66–90. https:// doi.org/10.33542/SIC2025-S-05
Jobberns, H., & Guihot, M. (2024). Digital governance and neoliberalism: The evolution of machine learning in Australian public policy. Law, Technology and Humans, 6(2), 29–52. https://doi.org/10.5204/lthj.3408
Kaun, A., Larsson, A. O., & Masso, A. (2025). Automation scenarios: Citizen attitudes towards automated decision-making in the public sector. Information, Communication & Society, 28(7), 1177–1194. https://doi.org/10.1080/136911 8X.2024.2375261
König, P. D., Felfeli, J., Achtziger, A., & Wenzelburger, G. (2024). The importance of effectiveness versus transparency and stakeholder involvement in citizens’ perception of public sector algorithms. Public Management Review, 26(4), 1061–1082. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2022.21449 38
König, P. D., & Wenzelburger, G. (2021). The legitimacy gap of algorithmic decision-making in the public sector: Why it arises and how to address it. Technology in Society, 67. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101688
Kuziemski, M., & Misuraca, G. (2020). AI governance in the public sector: Three tales from the frontiers of automated decision-making in democratic settings. Telecommunications Policy, 44. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2020.101976
Langer, C. (2024). Decision-making power and responsibility in an automated administration. Discover Artificial Intelligence, 4. https://doi. org/10.1007/s44163-024-00152-1
Lengyel, A. (2025). Automated decision-making in administrative penal matters [Automatizované rozhodovanie vo veciach správneho trestania]. Studia Iuridica Cassoviensia, 13(Special Issue), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.33542/ SIC2025-S-07
Lipsky, M. (2010). Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services (30th Anniversary Expanded Edition). Russell Sage Foundation. https://www.russellsage.org/ publications/book/street-level-bureaucracy
Long, Y., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2023). Understanding the extent of automation and process transparency appropriate for public services: The AI cases in Chinese local governments. International Journal of Electronic Government Research, 19(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEGR.322550
Mashaw, J. L. (1983). Bureaucratic Justice: Managing Social Security Disability Claims. Yale University Press. https://yalebooks.yale.edu/ book/9780300034035/bureaucratic-justice/
Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating Public Value: Strategic Management in Government. Harvard University Press. https://books.google.com/books/about/ Creating_Public_Value.html?id=aSa4AAAAIAAJ
Moynihan, D. P., Herd, P., & Harvey, H. (2015). Administrative Burden: Learning, Psychological, and Compliance Costs in Citizen-State Interactions. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(1), 43–69. https://doi. org/10.1093/jopart/muu009
Nalbandian, L. (2022). Increasing the accountability of automated decision-making systems: An assessment of the automated decision-making system introduced in Canada’s temporary resident visa immigration stream. Journal of Responsible Technology, 10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jrt.2021.100023
Novotná, M., Adamová, Z., & Maslen, M. (2026). Public administration responsibility for the deployment of artificial intelligence [Zodpovednosť verejnej správy za nasadenie umelej inteligencie]. Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica, 2026(1), 111–132. https://doi. org/10.14712/23366478.2026.8
Olsen, H. P., Hildebrandt, T. T., Wiesener, C., Larsen, M. S., & Ammitzbøll Flügge, A. W. (2024). The right to transparency in public governance: Freedom of information and the use of artificial intelligence by public agencies. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 5(1). https:// doi.org/10.1145/3632753
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pesch, P. J. (2025). Potentials and challenges of large language models (LLMs) in the context of administrative decision-making. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 16(1), 76–95. https:// doi.org/10.1017/err.2024.99
Pilving, I. (2023). Guidance-based algorithms for automated decision-making in public administration: The Estonian perspective. CERIDAP, 2023(1), 51–74. https://doi. org/10.13130/2723-9195/2023-1-105
Putri, A. N., & Syahrina, A. (2026). Automated Decision-Making and the Transformation of Bureaucratic Discretion:A Cross-Sector Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence. Policy & Governance Review, 10(2). https://doi. org/10.30589/pgr.v10i2.1391
Rachovitsa, A., & Johann, N. (2022). The human rights implications of the use of AI in the digital welfare state: Lessons learned from the Dutch SyRI case. Human Rights Law Review, 22, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngac010
Reichel, J. (2023). Regulating automation of Swedish public administration. CERIDAP, 2023(1), 75– 94. https://doi.org/10.13130/2723-9195/2023- 1-112
Rizk, A., & Lindgren, I. (2025). Automated decision- making in public administration: Changing the decision space between public officials and citizens. Government Information Quarterly, 42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102061
Roehl, U. B. U. (2023). Automated decision-making and good administration: Views from inside the government machinery. Government Information Quarterly, 40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2023.101864
Rudolf, G., & Kovač, P. (2024). The role of automated decision-making in modern administrative law: Challenges and data protection implications. Central European Public Administration Review, 22(2), 83–108. https://doi.org/10.17573/ cepar.2024.2.04
Sanchez-Graells, A. (2024). Resh(AI)ping good administration: Addressing the mass effects of public sector digitalisation. Laws, 13. https://doi. org/10.3390/laws13010009
Schmidt, R., & Scott, C. (2021). Regulatory discretion: Structuring power in the era of regulatory capitalism. Legal Studies, 41, 454–473. https:// doi.org/10.1017/lst.2021.13
Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and Organizations: Ideas, Interests, and Identities (4th Edition). SAGE Publications. https://ndlsearch.ndl.go.jp/ en/books/R100000002-I024635595
Sharaf Addin, E. H. M. (2025). Reconciling adminis- trative efficiency with procedural safeguards in the ADM system. Bratislava Law Review, 9(2), 155– 172. https://doi.org/10.46282/blr.2025.9.2.1116
Shen, P. (2026). Toward a proportionate explainability framework in administrative automated decision- making: A lesson from China. Computer Law & Security Review, 61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. clsr.2026.106307
Suksi, M. (2021). Administrative due process when using automated decision-making in public administration: Some notes from a Finnish perspective. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 29, 87–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-020- 09269-x
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471- 2288-8-45
Tomlinson, J. (2020). Justice in automated adminis- tration. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 40(4), 708–736. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqaa025
Weerheijm, B., Galdames, M., & Giest, S. (2026). Bureaucratic accountability: Enabler or barrier for algorithm use? Policy Design and Practice, 9(1), 16–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292. 2025.2578064
Weerheijm, B., Giest, S., & Klievink, B. (2025). Complexity, understandability, and compatibility: A comparative study of AI advisory systems for national security. Government Information Quarterly, 42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025. 102088
Wieringa, M. (2023). “Hey SyRI, tell me about algorithmic accountability”: Lessons from a landmark case. Data & Policy, 5. https://doi. org/10.1017/dap.2022.39
Zheng, G., Lee, H., Li, W., Liu, Y., & Tang, T. (2026). Navigating the algorithmic state: Public values and citizens’ preferences of AI-driven public service delivery. Public Administration, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.70066