# "RecommendationsA/IS creators should work to better understand and apply well-being metrics in the algorithmic age. Specifically:- A/IS creators should work directly with experts, researchers, and practitioners in wellbeing concepts and metrics to identify existing metrics and combinations of indicators that would bring support a “triple bottom line”, i.e., accounting for economic, social, and environmental impacts, approach to wellbeing. However, well-being metrics should only be used with consent, respect for privacy, and with strict standards for collection and use of these data.- For A/IS to promote human well-being, the well-being metrics should be chosen in collaboration with the populations most affected by those systems—the A/IS stakeholders—including both the intended end-users or beneficiaries and those groups whose lives might be unintentionally transformed by them. This selection process should be iterative and through a learningand continually improving process. In addition, “metrics of well-being” should be treated as vehicles for learning and potential mid- course corrections. The effects of A/IS on human well-being should be monitored continuously throughout their life cycles, byA/IS creators and stakeholders, and both A/IS creators and stakeholders should be prepared to significantly modify, or even roll back, technology that is shown to reduce well-being, as defined by affected populations.- A/IS creators in the business or academic, engineering, or policy arenas are advised to review the additional resources on standards development models and frameworks at the end of this chapter to familiarize themselves with existing indicators relevant to their work.

## Further Resources- PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). Managing and Measuring Total Impact: A New Language for Business Decisions,

1. - World Economic Forum. The Inclusive Growth and Development Report 2017, Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum, January 16,
   
2. - OECD Guidelines on Measuring Subjective Well-being,
   
3. - National Research Council. Subjective WellBeing: Measuring Happiness, Suffering, and Other Dimensions of Experience. DC: The National Academies Press,
   
4. "p73-74"Create technical standards for representing goals, metrics, and evaluation guidelines for well-being metrics and their precursors and components within A/IS that include:

• Ontologies for representing technological requirements.

• A testing framework for validating adherence to well-being metrics and ethical principles such as [IEEE P7010™ Standards Project for Wellbeing Metric for Autonomous and Intelligent Systems](https://standards.ieee.org/project/
  

• html).above as well as others as a basis for a wellbeing metrics standard for A/IS creators. (See page 191, Additional Resources: Additional Resources: Standards Development Models and Frameworks)

• The development of a well-being metrics standard for A/IS that encompasses an understanding of well-being as holistic and interlinked to social, economic, and ecological systems."p.79-80
  
  ## "RecommendationAppoint a lead team or person, “leads”, to facilitate stakeholder engagement and to serve as a resource for A/IS creators who use stakeholderbased processes to establish well-being indicators. Specifically:

• Leads should solicit and collect lessons learned from specific applications of stakeholder engagement and deliberation in order to continually refine its guidance.

• When determining well-being indicators, the leads should enlist the help of experts in public participation and deliberation. With expert guidance, facilitators can provide guidance for how to: take steps to mitigate the effects of unequal power in deliberative processes; incorporate appropriately trained facilitators and coaching participants in deliberations; recognize and curb disproportionate influence by morepowerful groups; use techniques to maximize the voices of less-powerful groups.

• Leads should use their convening power to bring together A/IS creators and stakeholders, including critics of A/IS, for deliberations on well-being indicators, impacts, and other considerations for specific contexts and settings. Leads’ involvement would help bring actors to the table with a balance of power and encourage all actors to remain in conversation until robust, mutually agreeable definitionsare found.
  
  ## Further Resources

• D. E. Booher and J. E. Innes. Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. London:Routledge,
  

• J. A. Leydens and J. C. Lucena. Engineering Justice: Transforming Engineering Education and Practice_. _Wiley-IEEE Press,
  

• G. Ottinger. [Assessing Community Advisory ](https://www.sciencehistory.org/sites/default/files/studies-in-sustainability-ottinger
  

• pdf)[Panels: A Case Study from Louisiana’s Industrial Corridor.](https://www.sciencehistory.org/sites/default/files/studies-in-sustainability-ottinger
  

• pdf) Center for Contemporary History and Policy,
  

• Expert and Citizen Assessment of Science and Technology (ECAST) Network "p.82-83