12.1 Ethics, Sustainability, and Use of Information Systems

Utilitarianism

The concept of utilitarianism describes a normative ethical theory holding that the morally correct course of action is the one that maximizes utility and happiness for the greatest number of people. The roots of utilitarianism are generally traced to the English philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and the name of this theory derives from the utility of the actions taken. What are the consequences, and how are those consequences valued? For example, if you take your friend’s apple without permission, you have gained an apple but likely lost your friend’s trust. Is it more useful to have your friend’s trust or their apple?

The simplest conceptual understanding of this theory is that people should be guided in their ethics, their choice of action, by the following principle: Create the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Over time, utilitarianism has become connected with capitalism and Adam Smith (1723–1790), often referred to as the founder of modern capitalism. This makes sense since the goal of capitalism—maximizing economic production and benefits—can be regarded as a utilitarian goal. With utilitarianism focused on maximizing the greatest good, one can understand why this is the dominant ethical theory applied in business today. Consequentialism, the broader name given to this ethical approach under the utilitarianism theory, is a person’s determination of whether the actions they take are ethical or not based on the consequences of those actions.

While utilitarianism is popular among business professionals, in practice, their actions do not always reflect its proper application. For example, imagine that you work for a company that manufactures a smart coffee maker, and the market share percentage of your company’s top competitor is twice as much as your company’s market share. Your supervisor asks you to reverse engineer the competitor’s smart coffee maker and use the information gained to improve your company’s product. A year later, your company’s market share doubles, while your competitor loses market share. Although this action may have maximized the greatest good for your company, it hurt your competitor.

In the world of business, including areas focused on information systems and technology, it can be challenging to apply utilitarianism appropriately. First, imagine the difficulty in truly determining what the proper course of action would be in trying to figure out whether certain actions would create the greatest good for the greatest number of people. What is good? How do we know if the actions maximize the quantity of that good for the greatest number of human beings on the planet? What is the context within which we measure this good? Is it in the people in an organization, those in a community, the individuals in a particular society, or all human beings that inhabit the entire planet?

These are the key difficulties involved in properly applying the principles of utilitarianism. Also, one can be sympathetic to the plight of people operating within the business context when they transform the difficult-to-measure variables of “good” and “people” into the much more measurable (and generally desirable) variables of “money” and “stakeholders.” There are many conflicts of interest that a business can face when trying to operate for the good and make a profit at the same time. As a result, in application, this can lead to unethical outcomes as measured by the original intent of this theory.

Another difficulty in properly applying utilitarianism is the misunderstanding that the greatest good is associated with majority rule. For instance, suppose in a class of 100 students, the class took a vote, and ninety-nine students decided to make one student responsible for taking all the notes, translating them electronically, organizing them, and distributing them to the other ninety-nine students. As a result of this decision, the remaining ninety-nine students would do nothing but wait for the notes to arrive prior to the exam. The majority ruled in this instance, and this led to 99 percent of the class doing no work in preparation for an exam that was supposed to serve as a measure of everyone’s learning of the course material. Using the concept of majority rule, one could make the argument that this is an appropriate application of utilitarianism.

But, in this case, is majority rule an ethical approach to utilitarianism? Did this decision result in the greatest good for the greatest number of people? Of course not. Is goodness simply measured as the least amount of overall class effort needed to obtain the highest average grade in a class? Is it good that 99 percent of the students did not engage with the course material throughout the semester, or that they were not able to take in the teachings from the course and put them into practical use? Is this good for each individual student? Is this good for the university from which the student graduates whose students enter society unable to effectively perform the abilities that class was supposed to teach? Is this good for the well-being of the society within which those individuals operate? Questions such as these reach toward the ideal nature of goodness at the heart of utilitarianism.

Deontology

The concept of deontology describes a normative ethical theory that focuses on the inherent rightness or wrongness of actions themselves, as opposed to the consequences of those actions, following the premise of treating others the way you would like to be treated. The school of deontology is usually attributed to philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804). Its name comes from the Greek word for “duty,” and it is often referred to as the duty-based approach. Kant’s maxim is stated as such: Act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time wish that it becomes universal law.¹ The simplest interpretation of this is to only take an action if everyone else should also be able to do it. You may recognize this idea as the Golden Rule: Treat others the way you would like to be treated, or act toward others the way you would want others to act toward you. Expressed this way, deontology becomes clear: the action one takes is the focal point for whether the decision being made is ethical. For a deontologist, the consequences of your actions are irrelevant because it is impossible for you to truly know what all the consequences of your actions would be. However, you could know if your action was in alignment with a universal maxim that reflects a natural law.

Practical application of this theory often devolves into a discussion about what specific duties need to be followed (lying is wrong, physically injuring others is wrong) and the fact that exceptions lie on the fringes of the theory. To explore this, assume that you maintain the computer systems and personnel files for your company’s human resources division. You receive a request for information about a former employee who was terminated. The employee is being considered for a new position but will not get the position if you reveal that the employee was terminated. Since you have access to the employee’s personnel file, you know the details of the termination, and you are confident that the employee was terminated unfairly. Should you lie and say that the employee willingly left their position? Or should you tell the truth knowing that this will harm the employee because they will not get the job? The duty you intend to follow is not about particular types of actions; rather, it is about following the more general principle that applies to all actions. Namely, you should take only those actions that benefit yourself and your fellow human beings. The key is not to rationalize the type of rules to be followed but rather focus on the feeling it engenders when you take actions that are meant for the betterment of others as well as yourself.

Virtue Ethics

The approach of virtue ethics is based on the premise that there are virtues and ideals toward which each human being should strive to allow the full expression of their humanity to flourish. This approach can be traced back nearly 2,500 years to the people of ancient Greece, specifically to the philosopher Plato (427?–347 BCE), his teacher Socrates (469?–399 BCE), and his student Aristotle (384–322 BCE). As such, virtue ethics is the original normative ethical theory and the primary influence on humanity until the later development of deontology and utilitarianism. For over a century, virtue ethics was relegated to the background in favor of deontology and utilitarianism. However, there has been a resurgence of interest in this approach thanks in part to G. E. M. Anscombe’s 1958 article, “Modern Moral Philosophy,” in which she has been noted as having:

increasing dissatisfaction with the forms of deontology and utilitarianism then prevailing. Neither of them, at that time, paid attention to a number of topics that had always figured in the virtue ethics tradition—virtues and vices, motives and moral character, moral education, moral wisdom or discernment, friendship and family relationships, a deep concept of happiness, the role of the emotions in our moral life and the fundamentally important questions of what sorts of persons we should be and how we should live.²

The earliest, most direct, and accessible source of virtue ethics is Plato. Plato taught that there were four virtues that one needed to embody to live an ideal life: Courage, wisdom, moderation, and justice. Courage can be understood as the ability to maintain the intent to do good in whatever actions you take. Wisdom is knowing the proper relationship among all things, so that one has developed the understanding to naturally take the action that generates the most good for self and others. Moderation, or temperance, is the control of one’s instinctual fears and desires, their pains and pleasures, to operate in a more rational manner of thoughtful consideration. Justice is the alignment of your action with the ideal; the closer you are to the ideal, the more just your actions become.

Synthesis

Consider a scenario in which your company has been profitable but needs to cut costs to maintain long-term sustainability. The executive team proposes paying out large bonuses to themselves, citing that it’s part of their compensation plan. However, the company also needs to lay off a substantial portion of its staff due to budget constraints. The executive team’s actions can be reviewed through the concept of virtual ethics. For example, do their actions demonstrate the virtues of fairness and empathy? Were they compassionate for the employees they laid off in making their decision? Are the leaders acting with integrity, balancing their personal interests with the well-being of the larger community, including those who depend on the company for their livelihoods? A virtue ethics–based decision would involve the executives reflecting on the kind of people they want to be and how their actions align with virtues like honesty, integrity, and justice. They might decide, for instance, to forgo or reduce their bonuses, showing empathy for those losing their jobs and prioritizing the welfare of the broader community over their individual interests.

So how are these concepts—utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics—applied in an information systems setting? To explore this, assume you work for a company that provides the technology to support Mobility as a Service (MaaS) for public transit systems. With MaaS, passengers access one interface and pay portal to plan and pay for a trip that includes multiple modes of transportation, such as bicycling, riding a bus, and riding a subway to reach their destination. You are part of a team brainstorming ways to market your company’s MaaS technology to cities across the United States. The needs and resources of these cities vary greatly, providing disparate opportunities for your company to earn a profit. As you and your team explore options, you likely will be influenced by utilitarianism as well as deontology and virtue ethics.

From a utilitarianism perspective, your marketing plan should aim to increase access to MaaS in cities that will benefit the most, considering both immediate customer needs (such as more affordable transportation options) and long-term impacts (like reduced congestion and lower emissions). From a deontological perspective, how can you ensure that cities have an equal opportunity to purchase and take advantage of your company’s MaaS technology? Your marketing plan would aim to provide equitable access for all customer groups because it is the right way to do business. How will virtue ethics guide your personal contributions to the discussion to help promote equality and the greatest good in your company’s marketing plan, while also recognizing that your company wants to achieve a certain profit margin in sales of its MaaS technology? Balancing utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics with goals such as profit maximization can be challenging. When people and organizations achieve that balance, they can attain positive results that help promote a fairer and more just society.

Systems Thinking and the DIKW Pyramid

A tool that aids in the development of balanced ethical decision-making processes is systems thinking, an approach that emphasizes the interconnectedness of components within a whole, suggesting that the overall behavior of a system results from these interactions. It promotes a holistic (synthetic) view rather than a fragmented (analytical) one, advocating that understanding the entire structure and its patterns is crucial. Systems thinking is based on general systems theory, which argues that all systems have components that are interrelated to create an organized whole. Systems thinking enhances ethical reasoning by emphasizing holistic analysis of the interconnected components and relationships within complex situations. This allows for a broader understanding of direct and indirect impacts.

In contrast, the DIKW pyramid, which is a hierarchy often used in information management and knowledge creation, represents an approach that focuses on the distinction between disparate elements (refer to Figure 12.2). Data, information, knowledge, and wisdom (DIKW) form the pyramid. Data at the pyramid’s base signify raw, unprocessed facts and figures without context. Moving up the pyramid, data transform into information, where data are given context and meaning. Further refinement and understanding lead to knowledge, which is the application of information. At the apex, wisdom represents a deep, intuitive understanding or insight derived from a comprehensive synthesis of knowledge.

Figure 12.2 As the DIKW pyramid shows, data transform into information, which becomes knowledge, and ultimately wisdom. (attribution: Copyright Rice University, OpenStax, under CC BY 4.0 license)

Application of the DIKW pyramid to systems thinking can provide guidance for decision-making. Data, in isolation, can be likened to individual components of a system. Without context or connection, these components (or data points) may seem unrelated or arbitrary. However, progressing up the DIKW pyramid, these isolated pieces start to form patterns (information), which when understood within a broader framework offer insights (knowledge). Finally, when these insights are synthesized in consideration of the whole system, holistic strategies (wisdom) emerge. Through systems thinking, the DIKW pyramid is not merely a linear progression from data to wisdom but a dynamic, interconnected web where each level informs and is informed by the others.

Ethical considerations are more present as you progress up the pyramid toward the wisdom level. At these higher levels, application of knowledge in business situations becomes more important, and ethics is required to make good decisions. In other words, as you move from the data level to the wisdom level, there are more opportunities for unethical decision-making.

In essence, systems thinking enhances the DIKW pyramid by emphasizing the importance of viewing each level as part of a larger, interconnected whole. It reminds us that wisdom is not just the culmination of accumulated knowledge but also the recognition of patterns, relationships, and feedback loops within the system. By understanding systems thinking, we can harness a deeper, more holistic understanding of complex issues and challenges, fostering more informed and effective ethical decision-making.

Green, Lean, and Sustainable Information Systems

Information systems have become foundational to almost all business operations, and they have environmental and societal implications. To address these concerns, future information system professionals must become familiar with and understand three information system models: Green, Lean, and Sustainable. These models can be implemented with consideration of utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics.

Representing a commitment to environmental stewardship, Green IS encompasses the strategies and practices designed to minimize the environmental footprint of digital operations. In this model, ethical choices are being made at all phases of the life cycle of information systems products. The practical implementation of the Green IS model’s ideals means that the design, usage, disposal, and even recycling of information systems are environmentally friendly. The purpose of such practices is to reduce energy consumption during system operations, minimize greenhouse gas emissions, and carry out recycling and ethical disposal of electronic components. Given the growing demand for data centers and information technology infrastructure, the critical need for such practices will only increase in the future. Adopting environmentally conscious practices can offset these facilities’ massive energy consumption and emissions.

Lean IS originates from embodying ideals in the manufacturing field; Lean IS is a set of practices that is about doing more with less, focusing on eliminating waste, in terms of time, resources, or processes, and thus ensuring that every aspect of an information system delivers value. Given the holistic nature of Lean IS, it involves efficient practices across a wide range of the information system life cycle. For example, within the context of process optimization, workflows would be streamlined to eliminate waste in the form of redundancies, and in resource management, both hardware and software would be utilized in a more efficient manner.

Continuous improvement can be accomplished by regularly assessing and refining system components for efficiency. One important task of Lean IS is to learn how a system works by analyzing its component parts and determining their relationships to one another. If done properly, such efforts will help managers better understand the underlying principles that lead to a better functioning system because they are better synthesized within the larger system. To accomplish this, leaders must understand the relationship between the information system and the organization. Then, they must expand that understanding to the local community where the organization is located. Beyond that lies the larger society within which that community is located and that society (be it at the state, federal, or international level) operates within the context of the planet Earth. All these systems are interrelated and impact each other in various ways. So, whatever information system you are working on, realizing the significance of your efforts does not end with performing your work-related task utilizing an information system. In keeping with Lean IS practices, the by-products of improving the efficiency of an information system include faster decision-making, reduced operational costs, and increased customer satisfaction.

While Green IS and Lean IS address environmental concerns and efficiency, respectively, Sustainable IS provides a more holistic approach that considers the long-term impacts and viability of information systems, focusing on their environmental, economic, and social implications. In fact, these can be understood as the three pillars of sustainability. From an environmental perspective, this approach mirrors the goals of Green IS, emphasizing reduced resource consumption and an environmentally conscious approach. The economic perspective focuses on the system’s economic viability, ensuring that it delivers value. From the social perspective, the system should address social needs, foster inclusivity, and seek to reduce existing inequalities.

Sustainable IS can help organizations align the goals of a business with the larger systems that the business is a part of, thus creating opportunities for greater societal and environmental well-being. By-products of this alignment include enhanced corporate reputations, improved stakeholder relations, and long-term business resilience. Increasingly, corporate stakeholders are pressuring companies to have more sustainable practices. As society grapples with rapid technological advancements, the integration of sustainability principles into information systems becomes paramount. Green, Lean, and Sustainable IS frameworks ensure that as technology progresses it is done responsibly. By embracing these principles, organizations can drive innovation as well as enhance the well-being of our planet and its inhabitants.

Sustainable Consumption and Production

With information systems increasingly dominating both business and personal contexts, the ripple effects of our digital choices are becoming increasingly evident. The ethical dimension of these choices is highlighted when we consider the sustainable consumption and production (SCP) of information system resources, which focuses on using and producing goods and services in a way that minimizes environmental impacts while ensuring that resources are used efficiently. When information system resources meet SCP standards, they can meet the basic needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

The SCP approach not only addresses environmental and resource-related concerns but also delves into the moral responsibilities tied to technology creation and usage. The design, manufacture, use, and disposal of digital tools can either promote sustainability or exacerbate existing ecological and societal problems. Three areas where ethical issues emerge in this context are consumption, production, and policy regulation (Figure 12.3).

Figure 12.3 Sustainability requires organizations to make sure their information systems meet consumption, production, and policy standards that benefit ecological and societal goals. (attribution: Copyright Rice University, OpenStax, under CC BY 4.0 license)

When considering the ethical consumption of information system resources, one key stakeholder is the consumer. It is essential to recognize that every digital device purchased or piece of software installed comes with an environmental and social cost. One’s ethical consumption means being aware of this impact and making choices that prioritize longevity, repairability, and efficiency. With rapid technological advancements, devices become obsolete quickly, leading to substantial e-waste. Ethical consumption involves choosing devices designed for longer life spans and ensuring proper recycling or disposal of obsolete technology.

The production of information system products is also embedded with ethical considerations. Ethical production in information systems begins at the design phase. Embracing principles like modularity can make devices more repairable and upgradable, thereby extending their useful life and benefiting the larger system that comprises the information system and the planet as a whole. To benefit all stakeholders, the processes employed in producing digital tools should be energy efficient and minimize waste.

Governmental and international bodies create the legal framework for any particular information system, so policy and regulation play a role. Information systems are contained within the organizations that house and utilize them. These systems are utilized to interact with customers and other stakeholders that reside on our planet. Governmental and international bodies have a role in establishing standards that guide the ethical and sustainable production and consumption of information system resources. Beyond establishing laws, governments at the local, state, and federal level can encourage sustainable practices. Examples include tax incentives for using greener materials, grants for businesses that are more energy efficient, and credits to companies that reduce carbon emissions. Alternatively, these same entities can issue penalties and sanctions if laws are violated, thereby deterring environmentally harmful operations.

The nexus between ethics, sustainability, and information systems is evident in the realm of SCP, where all digital stakeholders—whether as consumers, developers, or policymakers—hold a collective responsibility. Adopting SCP principles within information systems ensures progress toward a digital future that is in harmony with the planet and its diverse inhabitants.

Sustainable Supply Chain Management

Supply chains are more than just logistic networks—they also represent a company’s ethical principles, reflecting how its employees act within its organizational structure as well as the organization’s natural obligation to practice societal and environmental responsibility in its actions. A sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) approach seeks to infuse sustainability principles into the supply chain process. The production of digital devices often involves complex global supply chains. Ensuring that materials are sourced responsibly and workers are treated fairly is vital. Ethical production prioritizes conflict-free minerals, promotes fair labor practices, and avoids environmental degradation. This is demonstrated, for example, in IKEA’s commitment to using only recycled and renewable materials in their products.³

SSCM goes beyond optimizing traditional supply chain objectives, emphasizing instead the three Ps: people (social), planet (environmental), and profit (economic). This holistic approach ensures that businesses thrive for future generations. With their analytical and integrative capabilities, information systems are poised to play a pivotal role as the backbone of modern supply chains, providing real-time data, analytics, and communication tools. When utilized pursuant to SSCM principles, they can promote transparency, efficiency, and sustainability.

Sustainable sourcing is one component of the sustainable supply chain system that can be improved. A supplier evaluation platform is an information systems tool that can help accomplish this goal. This platform can automate the process of assessing suppliers based on their environmental and social practices and ensure that businesses partner with like-minded entities. Another practice related to sustainable sourcing is material traceability systems. These systems provide data about the origins of materials, allowing for responsible sourcing and avoiding the utilization of resources linked to environmental harm or unethical practices.

Another goal of SSCM is efficient and green logistics. One example of how information systems contribute to this practice can be seen through route optimization software. This software minimizes transportation costs and emissions by identifying the most efficient routes for the movement of goods. Similarly, inventory management systems can be utilized to optimize stock levels and reduce waste. The proper use of these systems ensures that resources are utilized judiciously, aligning with the tenets of SSCM.

One way an organization can demonstrate transparency is by using blockchain as part of its supply chain. Blockchain technology, with its decentralized and tamperproof nature, can trace products throughout their life cycles (refer to Chapter 10 Emerging Technologies and Frontiers of Information Systems). This fosters transparency and assures stakeholders of product authenticity and ethical sourcing. Another practice to enhance transparency is to incorporate effective stakeholder communication. Information system–enabled platforms facilitate open dialogues with stakeholders, updating them on supply chain practices and receiving feedback to continuously refine SSCM strategies.

The future for SSCM is continuous improvement and innovation. This will allow businesses to update their strategies and stay ahead of regulatory and market changes. Another SSCM development is collaborative ecosystems. Companies, suppliers, and tech providers, along with other pertinent stakeholders, should collaboratively explore innovative information system solutions that push the boundaries of current SSCM thinking to improve the supply chain process. Supported by robust information systems, SSCM offers businesses a pathway to reconcile operational efficiency with sustainability imperatives.

Corporate Social Responsibility

As businesses leverage technology at a rapid pace, the way they approach, integrate, and manage information systems can have lasting effects on societal welfare, environmental sustainability, and corporate integrity. Because the digital realm intersects with every facet of modern life, information systems plays an integral role in corporate social responsibility (CSR), is an inherent recognition of the ethical relationship between a corporation and the larger social and environmental system that it inhabits. Corporate social responsibility allows companies to take responsibility for the impact their activities have on the environment, society, and stakeholders impacted by the company’s actions. It goes beyond focusing on profitability to consider the ethical implications of business operations. Information systems—which include tools, networks, and infrastructures—serve as both an operational backbone and a strategic asset for companies. The way businesses choose to deploy and manage information systems can either enhance or hinder their CSR goals.

When considering how to deploy and manage their information systems and technology, organizations need to take into account the three Ps of CSR:

• People represent the practices that will be followed as part of information system and technology operations.
• Planet represents consideration of the impact these operations will have on the environment.
• Profit is the economic goal that has to be sustained by the business.

Using the three Ps as a guide, organizations can minimize any negative effects of their information system and technology practices on the environment and society as a whole while still making a profit.

Corporate social responsibility can also fit into the context of the ethical theories you’ve learned about. From a utilitarian perspective, CSR consider the consequences of a company's actions and prioritizes the actions that generate the most good for the most number of people on the planet. An organization focused on deontology would seek out the principles that inform a more ideal version of society and seek to act in accordance with those principles. From a virtue ethicist perspective, an organization would attempt to embody the virtues that would best lead to the experience of a beautiful, true, good, and flourishing life, then interact with society from that state of being.

As with environmental practices, there are many opportunities for integrating CSR principles in information system development. From whatever philosophical perspective a company approaches it, integrating CSR into information systems means ensuring that the organization’s software and hardware development processes are in alignment with ethical guidelines. This includes ethical choices that will impact society, such as open-source software adoption, transparent data management, and safeguarding of user privacy. Design phase choice involves sustainable hardware. The selection of energy-efficient hardware, minimization of resource use, and the promotion of recyclable components further align the ideal aspects of CSR and information systems in tangible ways.

Information systems can also be utilized to facilitate CSR initiatives. Information systems can provide powerful tools that companies use to track, monitor, and report their CSR activities. Advanced analytics can aid in assessing environmental impact, employee welfare, and community engagement, allowing for more informed decision-making. The critical part, obviously, is that these tools be used with the intention that corporations seek to create a more ideal form of responsibility to society.

Another area in which information systems can benefit CSR efforts is stakeholder communication. Modern information systems enable transparent and continuous dialogue with stakeholders. Through digital platforms, companies can communicate their CSR initiatives, gather feedback, and foster a culture of accountability and inclusivity.

The futures of CSR and information systems are continuously evolving. Businesses must be proactive, anticipating shifts and aligning information systems and business strategies accordingly. This will require collaborative approaches that form partnerships between businesses, governments, and society so the positive impacts of CSR-focused information system initiatives can be more ideally implemented. As systems thinking informs us, all things are interconnected. Given this, to practice and foster ethical conduct, you should consider how the singular information system that is the focus of your work fits into and impacts the overall system. By centering CSR in information system decisions and operations, companies can advance their business objectives and champion a more sustainable, equitable, and ethical digital future.

Sustainable Development Goals

In 2015, the United Nations established Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a set of seventeen interconnected objectives aimed at addressing global challenges and ensuring a more sustainable future for humanity (Figure 12.4). The SDGs provide a comprehensive framework, touching on areas like poverty, health, education, and climate change, with the aim of fostering prosperity while protecting the planet. As we strive to achieve these ambitious targets, the role of information systems becomes paramount because through digitization, automation, and analytics, information systems have the potential to accelerate our journey toward achieving these global ideals.

Figure 12.4 Information systems play an integral part in the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals by connecting communities and resources. (credit: modification of work “The 17 Sustainable Development Goals of the UN” by United Nations: The Global Goals/Wikimedia Commons, CC0 1.0)

The ethical use of information systems for the common good empowers the achievement of SDGs. Consider these examples of how information systems can contribute to specific UN goals:

• Goal 3: Good Health and Well-Being: Advanced health information systems, telemedicine platforms, and health analytics tools can revolutionize health-care delivery, especially in remote and underserved regions of our planet.
• Goal 4: Quality Education: E-learning platforms, virtual classrooms, and digital educational resources offer new ways to bridge educational gaps and reach learners worldwide.
• Goal 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure: Information systems support industrial innovation by optimizing supply chains, enhancing manufacturing processes, and fostering global collaboration through digital platforms.
• Goal 13: Climate Action: Environmental monitoring systems, climate modeling software, and data analytics can provide insights into climate change patterns and inform mitigation strategies.

Achieving the SDGs requires public-private partnership and collaboration. Governments, private sectors, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) can create synergistic outcomes, far beyond what each of them can do individually. Information systems are the technology that can connect these organizations to drive impactful initiatives. Local knowledge and global expertise can be harnessed to cocreate information system solutions that are tailored to specific SDG challenges. Integrating technology with purpose, leveraging its capabilities, and navigating its challenges with foresight ensures that information systems can serve as a powerful tool in achieving the global promise of the SDGs.

Human-Computer Interaction

Human-computer interaction examines the interface between human beings and computing technology. As information systems become more sophisticated, with abilities like natural language processing, computer vision, and predictive analytics, new ethical considerations emerge regarding how these technologies are designed and deployed.

The key ethical issues in HCI involve transparency, privacy, and accountability. Systems should be transparent regarding their capabilities and limitations. Privacy must be safeguarded, and user data must be utilized ethically. Engineers must be accountable for potential harm resulting from flawed system design. Guidelines such as value-sensitive design promote these ideals by integrating ethical considerations into the design process. Overall, responsible HCI requires aligning systems with human values like trust, dignity, and justice.

User Experience

The user experience (UX) refers to how end users interact with information systems and their perceptions regarding accessibility, usability, and satisfaction. User experience design has ethical implications in terms of promoting inclusion and minimizing harm.

Inclusive UX design, such as video captioning, provides accessibility to groups with different abilities in hearing, vision, language or digital literacy. User experience should also seek to avoid dark patterns, deceptive interfaces that bait and switch to nudge users toward harmful actions, such as buying overpriced products. Misinformation, addictive behaviors, and compulsive spending can result from such exploitative designs. Responsible UX upholds ideals of autonomy and well-being by empowering users with controls, protections, and transparency.

Technology Adoption and Resistance

The adoption or rejection of new technologies has wide-ranging ethical and societal impacts. Some key societal considerations include the displacement of workers whose skills become obsolete, worsening inequality between technology adopters and nonadopters, and the environmental sustainability of proliferating hardware and infrastructure. Responsible innovation requires foresight and mitigation of these consequences. For example, change management processes can provide support and training to workers transitioning to new roles. Inclusive policies work to close digital divides by making technology affordable and accessible. Sustainable design and manufacturing should be pursued to lower the environmental harms of constantly evolving technologies.

Technology Addiction

Problematic overuse of technology and information systems can result in behaviors that negatively impact mental health and relationships (Figure 12.5). Psychologists point to dopamine-driven feedback loops that make devices habit forming.⁸ For example, many apps have infinite scrolling that makes it hard for users to stop. Tech companies face ethical questions around deliberately engineering addictiveness into apps and platforms. Mitigating technology addiction requires design practices that promote healthy engagement aligned with user well-being. Examples include digital detox features, usage dashboards, and nudges toward positive habits. Families and schools also play a role in promoting tech-life balance and modeling healthy technology integration. Ongoing research and open dialogue around technology's addictive potential are warranted.

Figure 12.5 As we become more reliant on technology, this can lead to technology addiction, which occurs when we overuse technology and become so addicted to our cell phones and other technology that it negatively impacts our lives, including relationships with others. (credit: “Focused Female Professional at the Office” by Aspen/nappy, Public Domain)

Robotic and Artificial Intelligence Replacement of Humans

Advances in robotics and AI raise concerns about human jobs being lost to automation. This has significant ethical and social implications in terms of employment and economic security. However, robots and AI also create new roles, such as AI research scientists who study and create new AI technologies. Responsible AI specialists ensure that AI technology is managed ethically and legally for the company and society at large. Also, since robots and AI do not have some human skills such as creativity and empathy, humans are still needed to oversee tasks completed by robots and AI.

A balanced approach recognizes the benefits of emerging technologies while proactively addressing their disruptive effects. Policies like educational and training programs can help workforce transitions. Continual investment in human capabilities less prone to automation is needed, along with designing complementary roles between humans and AI. With foresight and intentionality, job displacement can ideally yield new potential.

Societal Implications of Technology

Some key societal implications stemming from the proliferation of information systems and technology include the following:

• Digital divide: The uneven distribution of access to information systems and information technology has created a digital divide between those who have access to technology and those who do not, reinforcing broader social and economic disparities. This has profound implications for education, employment, and social mobility. Individuals without technology access face constraints in pursuing educational opportunities, applying for jobs, using government services, and connecting with social groups. This entrenches preexisting socioeconomic disadvantages. Policy steps like providing low-cost internet access, public technology centers, and digital literacy programs help bridge these divides. Inclusive design practices also ensure technologies accommodate users across age, ability, language, and socioeconomic status. Educational programs focused on digital literacy are also essential to ensure inclusivity. Pursuing digital inclusion promotes equity and social justice.
• Job displacement: The increased automation and use of information systems and information technology have led to job displacement in many industries, particularly in manual and routine-based roles. This has implications for the workforce, income inequality, and social welfare. Workers displaced by technology require retraining programs to transition into new roles. Policymakers must develop robust social safety nets to support workers struggling with job losses due to automation. Fostering a culture of lifelong learning and flexibility will be imperative as job disruption becomes more commonplace in our increasingly digital future.
• Cybercrime: The proliferation of information systems and information technology has also led to a rise in cybercrime, including identity theft, hacking, and online fraud. This has important implications for personal privacy, data protection, and security. Strict data privacy regulations and cybersecurity standards are required to safeguard users. Media literacy programs should educate the public on cyber risks. Cyber warfare also poses new national security threats that governments must address.
• Social media: The rise of social media platforms has significant implications for social interaction, communication, and identity. It has enabled new forms of social and political activism, both positive and negative. The platforms have been used to spread misinformation, exacerbate political polarization, and allow election interference. Features like social validation can be addictive and harmful. This is especially true for youth whose minds are more easily influenced given their stage of development. On the other hand, social media allows marginalized groups to build community and amplify their voices. Ongoing oversight, moderation, and user protections are needed to ensure social media minimizes detrimental impacts and instead works to benefit society.
• Health care: The use of information systems and information technology in health care has led to improved patient care, diagnosis, and treatment. However, it has also created new ethical and privacy concerns surrounding patient data and medical records. Strict data governance models, such as those found in HIPAA, must safeguard health-care data integrity and confidentiality. Careful oversight is required for emerging technologies, like AI diagnostics, to avoid harmful errors. Attention must also be paid to equitable access to health-care technologies.
• Environmental sustainability: The use of information systems and information technology can impact the environment in both helpful and harmful ways. Proliferating hardware and infrastructure contribute to resource consumption and e-waste. However, systems can also enable remote collaboration, thereby reducing transportation and associated emissions. Green design, renewable energy, and proper e-waste disposal are imperative for environmentally sound systems.
• Social and cultural impacts: Information systems and technology have influenced social norms, behaviors, and values both positively and negatively. For example, information systems and technology have been a positive force by helping people communicate over long distances to maintain close relationships, enabling people to learn about cultures worldwide without traveling. However, information systems and technology also provide resources to enable cyberbullying, allowing bullies to widen the circle of people they can harass. These examples indicate that ongoing research into how technology shapes social patterns is needed, along with thoughtful application of this knowledge to guide ethical and prosocial innovation.
• Privacy and data protection: Information systems’ collection, use, and dissemination of personal data raises critical privacy issues. Data breaches, surveillance, and inadequate consent processes can violate user privacy. Strict data governance frameworks must safeguard personal data. Encryption, access controls, and principles like data minimization help protect privacy. Education on managing digital footprints is also essential.
• Cybersecurity and information security: Connected systems enable new forms of criminal activity, including hacking, malware, and phishing. This can result in fraud, identity theft or disrupted critical infrastructure. To control cybercrime, implementing robust cybersecurity defenses via tools like firewalls and access controls is imperative. Workforce education on security best practices and law enforcement training to address cyber threats are needed. Information security must constantly evolve to stay ahead of criminal misuse of technology.
• Intellectual property rights: Emerging technologies like AI and social media raise new issues surrounding copyright, fair use, trademarks, and patents. Clearer legal guidelines are required. Ethical considerations around equitable access to knowledge must also guide intellectual property policies. Education on issues like plagiarism and piracy helps foster respect for IP rights.
• Ethical use of technology: The responsible use of information systems entails thoughtful practices regarding transparency, accuracy, bias mitigation, and fostering positive social outcomes. Corporate ethics policies guide issues like hacker ethics and responsible disclosure. Promoting public discourse on ethical technology, its management, and its use is key. The IEEE TechEthics is an extensive resource that addresses the ethical use of technology in business and society.⁹
• Ethical AI and automation: AI and automated systems raise concerns like privacy, embedded biases, and accountability. Ensuring human oversight and rigorously testing systems for fairness and safety are essential. Transparent and ethical AI practices consider potential harm early in the design phases. Regulations may be required to align automated technology with human values and welfare.

Responsible innovation considers the multifaceted societal impacts of information systems and technology. By upholding ethical principles and humanistic values, information systems can be shaped and governed to maximize society as a whole. Technology and society evolve together. Aligning the rapid pace of innovation with the public interest necessitates sustained dialogue between policymakers, technologists, and communities.