Algorithmic governance at work: a legal-sociological and policy analysis of AI regulation, institutional power and labor rights

The role of management sociology in improving the efficiency of a law firm in the context of digitalization

The role of management sociology in balancing automation and the preservation of the human dimension of legal practice is examined, enabling law firms to adapt to digitalisation while preserving the unique values of the legal profession.

Artificial intelligence, work, and structural inequality: Why human-centric AI requires institutional architecture, not just ethics.

The article demonstrates how labour markets and migration governance function as "stress-test" domains in which continuous classification, automated risk assessment, worker scoring, and fragmented data environments can amplify existing structural inequalities.

Editorial: Legal-Technical Governance and Regulation of Artificial Intelligence in Africa

This editorial introduces the special issue on the legal-technical governance and regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) in Africa, the product of a project launched by the Data Science Law Lab in collaboration with the Data Science for Social Impact research group at the University of Pretoria. It situates the five peer-reviewed contributions within a legal-technical approach to AI governance: a transdisciplinary approach in which the legal and the technical are fused to add nuance to regulatory forms and practices and to close the legal-technical gap in AI governance and regulation. The contributions move from conceptual foundations, where legal-technical governance is advanced as an analytical framework, through continental norm-making on the transition from African Union soft law to an AI treaty and national policy design on intellectual property in African AI strategies, to the operation of AI systems in practice, addressing the algorithmic sovereignty gap in AI-enabled surveillance in South Africa and Nigeria and the legal status of predictive policing in the fight against cybercrime in Nigeria.

Human-centric AI governance in the European Union. Accountability, fundamental rights, and institutional resilience in public administration

Artificial intelligence is increasingly used in public administration to classify individuals, assess risks, prioritize cases, support eligibility determinations and guide the allocation of public resources. In the European Union, these uses are governed by the Artificial Intelligence Act, the GDPR and the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Formal compliance, however, does not by itself ensure lawful and accountable administration. AI relocates discretion from the visible act of decision-making to less visible choices concerning data, model design, procurement, thresholds and interface architecture. This Policy and Practice Review therefore treats human-centric AI governance not as a general ethical aspiration, but as an administrative and constitutional framework for governing public power. Drawing on EU law, public administration scholarship and a comparative institutional analysis of selected Member State practices, it develops six interdependent dimensions: legal anchoring, accountable discretion, fundamental rights by design, meaningful human oversight, contestability and justification, and institutional resilience. The analysis shows that common EU rules may produce unequal levels of protection where public authorities differ in technical expertise, audit capacity, procurement independence and access to effective remedies. It also argues that accountability must follow the chain of influence through which algorithmic systems shape administrative outcomes, rather than only the formal chain of decision-making. The article translates this framework into actor-specific recommendations concerning fundamental rights impact assessments, procurement, auditability, human oversight, transparency, contestability and post-deployment monitoring. It concludes that AI-enabled administration remains legitimate only where public authorities retain the capacity to understand, justify, correct, suspend and democratically control the systems they use.

A normatively grounded hybrid model of AI governance: insights from the teaching of Leo XIV

The study develops a Leo XIV-informed, normatively grounded hybrid model of AI governance that extends beyond the exercise of agency over technology to fostering a more just and inclusive social order in which technology enables human flourishing.

IN THE AGE OF ARTIFICIAL