Implementing Digitalization in an Administrative Justice Context

Oxford Handbook of Administrative Justice (2021 Forthcoming)

22 Pages Posted: 7 Apr 2021

See all articles by Jennifer Raso

Jennifer Raso

McGill University, Faculty of Law

Date Written: April 6, 2021


Administrative agencies have long been sites of technological innovation. Today, government officials worldwide are intensifying digitalization efforts to cut costs and to make bureaucratic operations more efficient. This article examines how digitalization initiatives are implemented in administrative settings, using examples from the United Kingdom (Universal Credit), Canada (Ontario’s Social Assistance Management System), and Australia (Online Compliance Initiative, a.k.a. ‘Robodebt’). It draws on qualitative research, government reports, and administrative justice literature to illustrate the dilemmas common to digital government projects. For example, digitalization both hardens and virtualizes the interface between officials and the public, while obscuring the vast amounts of human labour needed to maintain digital government initiatives. To function well, digital systems require deep integration between government databases and software. Yet, the process of digitalization is often piecemeal, continuous, and reproduces dilemmas that arise whenever new technologies are used to solve institutional problems. Consequently, the promised benefits of ‘digital by default’ initiatives are rarely realized. Digitalization accelerates a shift in relations between people and the state that administrative justice scholars must take seriously. First, scholars must reconsider the internal perspective from which administrative justice theories assess an outcome’s acceptability. Digitalization compels the development of new justice models centred on the values of system users within and outside of administrative institutions. Second, scholars must reassess administrative justice theory’s procedural focus. In digitalized settings, ‘administratively just’ decision-making processes may generate substantively unjust outcomes. These challenges must be addressed if administrative justice theories are to remain relevant in an age of algorithmically-driven decision-making.

Keywords: administrative justice, digital government, algorithmic decision-making, social protection, welfare, fair process, substantive justice

JEL Classification: O33, H55, H53, H41, I38, Z18, K49, K23, K19

Suggested Citation

Raso, Jennifer, Implementing Digitalization in an Administrative Justice Context (April 6, 2021). Oxford Handbook of Administrative Justice (2021 Forthcoming), Available at SSRN:

Jennifer Raso (Contact Author)

McGill University, Faculty of Law ( email )

3644 Peel Street
Room 506
Montreal, Quebec H3A 1W9

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics