Whose Good, Whose Place? The Moral Geography of Agentic AI for Social Good
Agentic AI systems are increasingly proposed for social-good domains, often invoking the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a vocabulary of global benefit. Yet claims of social good do not establish accountability to the communities a system claims to serve. We present a structured survey of 112 papers on agentic AI for social good published between 2015 and 2026. We find a moral-geographic asymmetry: papers are least likely to specify geographic context in precisely the domains where local political, legal, and cultural context matters most. Across the corpus, 82 of 112 papers (73%) specify no geographic context. Papers aligned with health or physical/ecological SDGs specify geography 37-40% of the time, while papers aligned with institutional and social-policy SDGs do so only 13%. SDG 16, peace, justice, and strong institutions, is both the most-covered goal in the corpus and the one with the lowest geographic-specification rate. We interpret this as moral abstraction: agentic AI for social good often treats institutional good as universal in ways it does not treat health or ecological good. A second finding compounds this: only 28 of 112 papers (25%) report any real-world deployment or small-scale test. We identify five accountability gaps and propose a minimal reporting standard for more context-specific, participatory, and accountable agentic AI for social good.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Whose Side are Ethics Codes On? Power, Responsibility and the Social Good
The moral authority of ethics codes stems from an assumption that they serve a unified society, yet this ignores the political aspects of any shared resource. The sociologist Howard S. Becker challenged researchers to cl…
EthicsWhy Machines Can't Be Moral: Turing's Halting Problem and the Moral Limits of Artificial Intelligence
In this essay, I argue that explicit ethical machines, whose moral principles are inferred through a bottom-up approach, are unable to replicate human-like moral reasoning and cannot be considered moral agents. By utiliz…
EthicsInformed Consent for AI Consciousness Research: A Talmudic Framework for Graduated Protections
Artificial intelligence research faces a critical ethical paradox: determining whether AI systems are conscious requires experiments that may harm entities whose moral status remains uncertain. Recent work proposes avoid…
Legal ReasoningArtificial Intelligence in Team Dynamics: Who Gets Replaced and Why?
This study investigates the effects of artificial intelligence (AI) adoption in organizations. We ask: (1) How should a principal optimally deploy limited AI resources to replace workers in a team? (2) In a sequential wo…
ClarifyDelphi: Reinforced Clarification Questions with Defeasibility Rewards for Social and Moral Situations
Context is everything, even in commonsense moral reasoning. Changing contexts can flip the moral judgment of an action; "Lying to a friend" is wrong in general, but may be morally acceptable if it is intended to protect …
Question GenerationQuestion-Generation