Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Automated multi-level governance compliance che...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Automated multi-level governance compliance checking

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Automated multi-level governance compliance checking. / King, Thomas Christopher; De Vos, Marina; Dignum, Virginia et al.
In: Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Vol. 31, No. 6, 11.2017, p. 1283-1343.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

King, TC, De Vos, M, Dignum, V, Jonker, CM, Li, T, Padget, J & van Riemsdijk, MB 2017, 'Automated multi-level governance compliance checking', Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 1283-1343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-017-9363-y

APA

King, T. C., De Vos, M., Dignum, V., Jonker, C. M., Li, T., Padget, J., & van Riemsdijk, M. B. (2017). Automated multi-level governance compliance checking. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 31(6), 1283-1343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10458-017-9363-y

Vancouver

King TC, De Vos M, Dignum V, Jonker CM, Li T, Padget J et al. Automated multi-level governance compliance checking. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. 2017 Nov;31(6):1283-1343. Epub 2017 Apr 6. doi: 10.1007/s10458-017-9363-y

Author

King, Thomas Christopher ; De Vos, Marina ; Dignum, Virginia et al. / Automated multi-level governance compliance checking. In: Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. 2017 ; Vol. 31, No. 6. pp. 1283-1343.

Bibtex

@article{0aca9f86cce44f1d9bbf6ba838895dd8,
title = "Automated multi-level governance compliance checking",
abstract = "An institution typically comprises constitutive rules, which give shape and meaning to social interactions and regulative rules, which prescribe agent behaviour in the society. Regulative rules guide social interaction, in particular when they are coupled with reward and punishment regulations that are enforced for (non-)compliance. Institution examples include legislation and contracts. Formal institutional reasoning frameworks automate ascribing social meaning to agent interaction and determining whether those actions have social meanings that comprise (non-)compliant behaviour. Yet, institutions do not just govern societies. Rather, in what is called multi-level governance, institutional designs at lower governance levels (e.g., national legislation at the national level) are governed by higher level institutions (e.g., directives, human rights charters and supranational agreements). When an institution design is found to be non-compliant, punishments can be issued by annulling the legislation or imposing fines on the responsible designers (i.e., government). In order to enforce multi-level governance, higher governance levels (e.g., courts applying human rights) must check lower level institution designs (e.g., national legislation) for compliance; in order to avoid punishment, lower governance levels (e.g., national governments) must check their institution designs are compliant with higher-level institutions before enactment. However, checking non-compliance of institution designs in multi-level governance is non-trivial. In particular, because institutions in multi-level governance operate at different levels of abstraction. Lower level institutions govern with concrete regulations whilst higher level institutions typically comprise increasingly vague and abstract regulations. To address this issue, in this paper we propose a formal framework with a novel semantics that defines compliance between concrete lower level institutions and abstract higher level institutions. The formal framework is complemented by a sound and complete computational framework that automates compliance checking, which we apply to a real-world case study.",
keywords = "Institutions, Normative reasoning , Multi-level governance ",
author = "King, {Thomas Christopher} and {De Vos}, Marina and Virginia Dignum and Jonker, {Catholijn M.} and Tingting Li and Julian Padget and {van Riemsdijk}, {M. Birna}",
year = "2017",
month = nov,
doi = "10.1007/s10458-017-9363-y",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "1283--1343",
journal = "Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Automated multi-level governance compliance checking

AU - King, Thomas Christopher

AU - De Vos, Marina

AU - Dignum, Virginia

AU - Jonker, Catholijn M.

AU - Li, Tingting

AU - Padget, Julian

AU - van Riemsdijk, M. Birna

PY - 2017/11

Y1 - 2017/11

N2 - An institution typically comprises constitutive rules, which give shape and meaning to social interactions and regulative rules, which prescribe agent behaviour in the society. Regulative rules guide social interaction, in particular when they are coupled with reward and punishment regulations that are enforced for (non-)compliance. Institution examples include legislation and contracts. Formal institutional reasoning frameworks automate ascribing social meaning to agent interaction and determining whether those actions have social meanings that comprise (non-)compliant behaviour. Yet, institutions do not just govern societies. Rather, in what is called multi-level governance, institutional designs at lower governance levels (e.g., national legislation at the national level) are governed by higher level institutions (e.g., directives, human rights charters and supranational agreements). When an institution design is found to be non-compliant, punishments can be issued by annulling the legislation or imposing fines on the responsible designers (i.e., government). In order to enforce multi-level governance, higher governance levels (e.g., courts applying human rights) must check lower level institution designs (e.g., national legislation) for compliance; in order to avoid punishment, lower governance levels (e.g., national governments) must check their institution designs are compliant with higher-level institutions before enactment. However, checking non-compliance of institution designs in multi-level governance is non-trivial. In particular, because institutions in multi-level governance operate at different levels of abstraction. Lower level institutions govern with concrete regulations whilst higher level institutions typically comprise increasingly vague and abstract regulations. To address this issue, in this paper we propose a formal framework with a novel semantics that defines compliance between concrete lower level institutions and abstract higher level institutions. The formal framework is complemented by a sound and complete computational framework that automates compliance checking, which we apply to a real-world case study.

AB - An institution typically comprises constitutive rules, which give shape and meaning to social interactions and regulative rules, which prescribe agent behaviour in the society. Regulative rules guide social interaction, in particular when they are coupled with reward and punishment regulations that are enforced for (non-)compliance. Institution examples include legislation and contracts. Formal institutional reasoning frameworks automate ascribing social meaning to agent interaction and determining whether those actions have social meanings that comprise (non-)compliant behaviour. Yet, institutions do not just govern societies. Rather, in what is called multi-level governance, institutional designs at lower governance levels (e.g., national legislation at the national level) are governed by higher level institutions (e.g., directives, human rights charters and supranational agreements). When an institution design is found to be non-compliant, punishments can be issued by annulling the legislation or imposing fines on the responsible designers (i.e., government). In order to enforce multi-level governance, higher governance levels (e.g., courts applying human rights) must check lower level institution designs (e.g., national legislation) for compliance; in order to avoid punishment, lower governance levels (e.g., national governments) must check their institution designs are compliant with higher-level institutions before enactment. However, checking non-compliance of institution designs in multi-level governance is non-trivial. In particular, because institutions in multi-level governance operate at different levels of abstraction. Lower level institutions govern with concrete regulations whilst higher level institutions typically comprise increasingly vague and abstract regulations. To address this issue, in this paper we propose a formal framework with a novel semantics that defines compliance between concrete lower level institutions and abstract higher level institutions. The formal framework is complemented by a sound and complete computational framework that automates compliance checking, which we apply to a real-world case study.

KW - Institutions

KW - Normative reasoning

KW - Multi-level governance

U2 - 10.1007/s10458-017-9363-y

DO - 10.1007/s10458-017-9363-y

M3 - Journal article

VL - 31

SP - 1283

EP - 1343

JO - Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems

JF - Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems

IS - 6

ER -