A Practicable Operationalisation of Meaningful Human Control
Meaningful Human Control (MHC) has been a consistent key term in legal debates concerning autonomous weapon systems (AWS), but its usefulness as a policy or lawmaking tool is limited due to a lack of clarity on what the concept encompasses. This study engaged in a thorough literature study of offici...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-05-01
|
| Series: | Laws |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/11/3/43 |
| _version_ | 1797485248270827520 |
|---|---|
| author | Jonathan Kwik |
| author_facet | Jonathan Kwik |
| author_sort | Jonathan Kwik |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Meaningful Human Control (MHC) has been a consistent key term in legal debates concerning autonomous weapon systems (AWS), but its usefulness as a policy or lawmaking tool is limited due to a lack of clarity on what the concept encompasses. This study engaged in a thorough literature study of official statements, policy papers and academic papers published between 2013–2021 to determine features common to these proposals and synthesise a workable framework of MHC. The framework identifies five core elements—awareness, weaponeering, context control, prediction and accountability—and many interlocking mechanisms which link these elements together in a causal and chronological manner corresponding to the military targeting process. Subsequently, a detailed commentary and discussion is provided on the individual differences between sources, how specific elements can be implemented in practice by military commanders, and particularly controversial points are highlighted which require specific consideration by commentators and policymakers. The framework identifies concrete and practicable ways commanders can exercise control over AWS and serves as a solid foundation for further legal analysis of commanders’ duties when employing AWS, for future policy discussions, and as a problem-solving tool to resolve important legal questions such as the ubiquitous ‘accountability gap’ conundrum. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T23:17:02Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-db94f9af7b674650839d1999f4306a38 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2075-471X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T23:17:02Z |
| publishDate | 2022-05-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Laws |
| spelling | doaj.art-db94f9af7b674650839d1999f4306a382023-11-23T17:35:00ZengMDPI AGLaws2075-471X2022-05-011134310.3390/laws11030043A Practicable Operationalisation of Meaningful Human ControlJonathan Kwik0Faculty of Law, University of Amsterdam, 1012 WX Amsterdam, The NetherlandsMeaningful Human Control (MHC) has been a consistent key term in legal debates concerning autonomous weapon systems (AWS), but its usefulness as a policy or lawmaking tool is limited due to a lack of clarity on what the concept encompasses. This study engaged in a thorough literature study of official statements, policy papers and academic papers published between 2013–2021 to determine features common to these proposals and synthesise a workable framework of MHC. The framework identifies five core elements—awareness, weaponeering, context control, prediction and accountability—and many interlocking mechanisms which link these elements together in a causal and chronological manner corresponding to the military targeting process. Subsequently, a detailed commentary and discussion is provided on the individual differences between sources, how specific elements can be implemented in practice by military commanders, and particularly controversial points are highlighted which require specific consideration by commentators and policymakers. The framework identifies concrete and practicable ways commanders can exercise control over AWS and serves as a solid foundation for further legal analysis of commanders’ duties when employing AWS, for future policy discussions, and as a problem-solving tool to resolve important legal questions such as the ubiquitous ‘accountability gap’ conundrum.https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/11/3/43autonomous weapon systemmeaningful human controlinternational humanitarian lawtargetingartificial intelligencehuman-machine interaction |
| spellingShingle | Jonathan Kwik A Practicable Operationalisation of Meaningful Human Control Laws autonomous weapon system meaningful human control international humanitarian law targeting artificial intelligence human-machine interaction |
| title | A Practicable Operationalisation of Meaningful Human Control |
| title_full | A Practicable Operationalisation of Meaningful Human Control |
| title_fullStr | A Practicable Operationalisation of Meaningful Human Control |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Practicable Operationalisation of Meaningful Human Control |
| title_short | A Practicable Operationalisation of Meaningful Human Control |
| title_sort | practicable operationalisation of meaningful human control |
| topic | autonomous weapon system meaningful human control international humanitarian law targeting artificial intelligence human-machine interaction |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/11/3/43 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jonathankwik apracticableoperationalisationofmeaningfulhumancontrol AT jonathankwik practicableoperationalisationofmeaningfulhumancontrol |