Better together? Human oversight as means to achieve fairness in the European AI Act governance

Abstract In this article, we investigate the relationship between human oversight and fairness within the evolving framework of EU AI regulatory governance. We address two core research questions: (1) How are human oversight and fairness related? and (2) To what extent does the AI Act establish a framework for human oversight that effectively supports the implementation of the various dimensions of fairness? Based on a review of interdisciplinary literature, the article identifies three normative claims linking human oversight to fairness: first, that human oversight can help mitigate bias and error in AI systems; second, that it can function as a mechanism of accountability by assigning oversight to natural persons where AI systems lack legal liability; and third, that it can introduce human empathy and contextual sensitivity into decision-making processes, enabling a substantive notion of fairness that takes into account individual circumstances. A critical analysis of the AI Act reveals that while these normative aspirations are acknowledged, the Act only partially operationalises them, leaving several aspects of fairness insufficiently supported.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cambridge Forum on AI Law and Governance
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/cfl.2025.10010
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.37

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Better together? Human oversight as means to achieve fairness in the European AI Act governance

Ana Correa, Abdullah Elbi, Sara Garsia
1 citations
Cambridge Forum on AI Law and Governance
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.37
article

Better together? Human oversight as means to achieve fairness in the European AI Act governance

Ana Correa, Abdullah Elbi, Sara Garsia
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract In this article, we investigate the relationship between human oversight and fairness within the evolving framework of EU AI regulatory governance. We address two core research questions: (1) How are human oversight and fairness related? and (2) To what extent does the AI Act establish a framework for human oversight that effectively supports the implementation of the various dimensions of fairness? Based on a review of interdisciplinary literature, the article identifies three normative claims linking human oversight to fairness: first, that human oversight can help mitigate bias and error in AI systems; second, that it can function as a mechanism of accountability by assigning oversight to natural persons where AI systems lack legal liability; and third, that it can introduce human empathy and contextual sensitivity into decision-making processes, enabling a substantive notion of fairness that takes into account individual circumstances. A critical analysis of the AI Act reveals that while these normative aspirations are acknowledged, the Act only partially operationalises them, leaving several aspects of fairness insufficiently supported.

Cambridge Forum on AI Law and GovernanceVol. 1
KU Leuven (BE)
European Commission
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
2.37
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Better together? Human oversight as means to achieve fairness in the European AI Act governance — Ana Correa, Abdullah Elbi, et al. · Cambridge Forum on AI Law and Governance (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS