Ethics and Governance in the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Lifecycle Engineering Perspective

ABSTRACT Trustworthy Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is often treated as a model property addressed through better training data, alignment, evaluation or guardrails. We argue instead that trustworthiness is a lifecycle governance capability that must be engineered, evidenced, monitored and adapted across data acquisition, training and alignment, safe inference, public deployment and post‐deployment use. We develop a lifecycle engineering framework integrating four governance layers – technical, organizational, human‐centred and regulatory – and translate ethical principles and major governance instruments into stage‐specific controls, responsibilities, evidence artefacts, metrics and review triggers. The framework is constructed through a structured conceptual synthesis of peer‐reviewed literature, NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, ISO/IEC 23894, ISO/IEC 42005, ALTAI, the EU AI Act and complementary security and agentic‐governance guidance. A source register, seven‐field extraction schema, explicit mapping rules, worked extraction example and weighting sensitivity analysis make the construction logic inspectable. A public‐facing retrieval‐augmented generation case and a contrastive agentic‐system stress test illustrate operationalization through measurable indicators, responsible actors, review triggers and capability boundaries without being presented as independent empirical validation. We further address hallucination, prompt injection, privacy leakage, overreliance, unsafe tool use, memory, planners and multi‐agent workflows. The perspective positions trustworthy GenAI as an evidence‐driven, adaptive socio‐technical capability rather than a one‐time model or compliance claim.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Expert Systems
Published
2026-10-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/exsy.70460
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Ethics and Governance in the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Lifecycle Engineering Perspective

Junxin Chen, Lorenzo Ricciardi Celsi
Expert Systems
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Ethics and Governance in the Age of Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Lifecycle Engineering Perspective

Junxin Chen, Lorenzo Ricciardi Celsi
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Trustworthy Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) is often treated as a model property addressed through better training data, alignment, evaluation or guardrails. We argue instead that trustworthiness is a lifecycle governance capability that must be engineered, evidenced, monitored and adapted across data acquisition, training and alignment, safe inference, public deployment and post‐deployment use. We develop a lifecycle engineering framework integrating four governance layers – technical, organizational, human‐centred and regulatory – and translate ethical principles and major governance instruments into stage‐specific controls, responsibilities, evidence artefacts, metrics and review triggers. The framework is constructed through a structured conceptual synthesis of peer‐reviewed literature, NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, ISO/IEC 23894, ISO/IEC 42005, ALTAI, the EU AI Act and complementary security and agentic‐governance guidance. A source register, seven‐field extraction schema, explicit mapping rules, worked extraction example and weighting sensitivity analysis make the construction logic inspectable. A public‐facing retrieval‐augmented generation case and a contrastive agentic‐system stress test illustrate operationalization through measurable indicators, responsible actors, review triggers and capability boundaries without being presented as independent empirical validation. We further address hallucination, prompt injection, privacy leakage, overreliance, unsafe tool use, memory, planners and multi‐agent workflows. The perspective positions trustworthy GenAI as an evidence‐driven, adaptive socio‐technical capability rather than a one‐time model or compliance claim.

Expert SystemsVol. 43(12)
Dalian University of Technology (CN), Mercatorum University (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.