Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the challenges of implementing responsible AI practices in the UK public sector, particularly at the intersection of national policy and local authority execution, using Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) as a case study. Through thematic analysis of 17 semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders, the authors identify five critical barriers, including data privacy risks and workforce readiness, that hinder effective AI integration. The findings underscore the necessity for both national policy reforms and local governance adjustments to ensure accountability and fairness in AI applications affecting vulnerable populations.
Local authorities face five interconnected challenges in implementing responsible AI, revealing critical gaps that could jeopardize vulnerable children's welfare.
The UK government has adopted a pro-AI stance to help transform public service delivery in the face of severe financial pressures, but the path to translate this vision into responsible AI practice remains ill-defined. While UK policy is often set at the national level, local authorities are responsible for most public service delivery, and the rapid advance of AI-first narratives in the public sector is exposing fault lines in knowledge and practice at this national-local interface. This paper examines how responsible AI is interpreted and implemented at the interface between the UK's central government and local authorities, taking the high-stakes area of Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) as a case study. We present a thematic analysis of 17 semi-structured interviews with policymakers, practitioners, and third-sector professionals to identify barriers and enabling conditions for responsible AI where national policy meets local practice. We identify five interconnected challenges facing local authorities: shadow usage of AI and data privacy risks, market-government asymmetry in AI provision, insufficient workforce readiness, a lack of standardised definitions and measurements, and gaps in human accountability. For each, participants proposed actionable steps, from strengthening data protection frameworks and rebalancing the market-government relationship to enhancing workforce capacity. Our examination of SEND brings these challenges into sharper focus, showing how high-stakes decisions affecting vulnerable children and families intensify tensions around accountability, fairness, and human oversight, exposing the limits of a principle-based regulatory approach. We argue that responsible public sector AI requires both national policy adjustments and structural reforms to institutional capacity, values, and governance mechanisms at the local level.