The impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on society is undeniable. From new life-enhancing medical advancements and increased workforce productivity to huge job losses and stark lack of legal regulation, it holds immense influence, for better or worse. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that AI is having a particularly strong influence on the gender gap, especially in the workplace.
AI is trained using data sourced by its creators and that data can define the system’s biases - while AI itself does not have a sense of morality or a code of ethics, it can inherit biases found in the data. This means, for example, that generative AI systems often exhibit biases in their associations: “doctor” might be associated with “man” and “nurse” with “woman”, due to gender biases found in the data used to train it and the way in which words are encoded to reflect their historical associations with other words. Steps can be taken to minimise this effect, but we are certainly not starting from a blank canvas.
While this obviously has a negative impact – with algorithmic biases perpetuating those already present in society, leading to a particularly potent feedback loop - the problem extends further still. Organisations that use AI to determine employee pay may find that, due to historical gender pay gaps in the workplace, without intervention, the AI creates a gender pay gap to mimic the data with which it has been trained. Similarly, organisations that are integrating AI into their HR and hiring departments, such as in CV screening, may find that it exhibits gender biases based on previous hiring trends, leaving the potential for a biased hiring process. Until legal safeguards catch up, AI and algorithmic biases can have a very real influence on the gender pay gap and workforce demographics.
Part of the problem may stem from the fact that AI is still mostly being developed by men. According to the Global Gender Gap Report of 2023, only 30% of people working in AI were women - just four percentage points higher than in 2016 despite a sixfold increase in talent availability. Similarly, a UNESCO report from earlier this year pointed out that only 18% of authors at leading AI conferences are women, while more than 80% of AI professors are men.
On a wider scale, a report by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) has determined that women are 40% more likely to have their work replaced by AI in the near future, with traditionally female-dominated roles such as personal assistant and admin assistant expected to be disproportionately affected compared to traditionally male roles. However, given the increasing presence of AI in the workplace, female business leaders, who have consistently demonstrated better positive communication and higher levels of empathy towards their employees, may find themselves at an advantage as they possess skills that cannot be replaced by AI.
Ensuring diversity in the creation process of AI is key to its beneficial integration into society, but there need to be targeted measures in place to protect female-dominated jobs, regulate how AI is used in the hiring process and ultimately prevent AI from widening the gender gap in the workplace.
Elouisa Crichton is a Partner at Dentons
Agenda is a column for outside contributors. Contact: agenda@theherald.co.uk
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here