SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sayıştay Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 36 Sayı: 139

Utilizing Artificial Intelligence as a Strategic Risk Management Tool for Public Sector Operations and Auditing Processes

Kamu Sektörü Faaliyetleri ve Denetim Süreçleri İçin Stratejik Risk Yönetim Aracı Olarak Yapay Zekanın Kullanılması

Oğuz Ümit Tamer(SAYIŞTAY BAŞKANLIĞI)0000-0002-1848-9743
Bruce Mcdonald(OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-8963-8606
Farouk Hemıcı(University of Paris 1-Panthéon Sorbonne)0000-0002-2728-9372
Georgia Kontogeorga(European Commission)0000-0002-9830-324X
Pages
659–680
Publication Date
2025-12-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

By considering AI as a dual-use technology that demands a proactive paradigm of accountability, the study demonstrates that AI has the potential to help build more resilient and responsible public sector systems.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Symbolizing a significant turning point in the historical landscape, AI is becoming an effective tool in today’s public administration, not only for increasing capacity, quality, and speed in services, but also for strategic risk management.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Discussing modern applications of AI, such as anomaly-based fraud detection, resource estimation, and continuous auditing, and their respective strengths and weaknesses, this study concludes that AI significantly enhances efficiency and oversight but also poses the risk of enshrining bias, opacity, and accountability gaps.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:By considering AI as a dual-use technology that demands a proactive paradigm of accountability, the study demonstrates that AI has the potential to help build more resilient and responsible public sector systems.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Yapay Zeka · Kamu Sektörü · Risk Yönetimi

Abstract

Symbolizing a significant turning point in the historical landscape, AI is becoming an effective tool in today’s public administration, not only for increasing capacity, quality, and speed in services, but also for strategic risk management. Regulators and algorithmic auditing play a central role in implementing fairness, transparency, and persistent controls against risks in AI systems. Discussing modern applications of AI, such as anomaly-based fraud detection, resource estimation, and continuous auditing, and their respective strengths and weaknesses, this study concludes that AI significantly enhances efficiency and oversight but also poses the risk of enshrining bias, opacity, and accountability gaps. By considering AI as a dual-use technology that demands a proactive paradigm of accountability, the study demonstrates that AI has the potential to help build more resilient and responsible public sector systems.

Özet

Tarihsel akışın önemli bir dönüm noktasını simgeleyen YZ, günümüz kamu yönetiminde sadece hizmetlerde bir kapasite, kalite ve hız artışının değil, aynı zamanda stratejik bir risk yönetiminin de etkili bir aracı haline gelmektedir. Düzenleyiciler ve algoritmik denetim, YZ sistemlerindeki risklere karşı adalet, şeffaflık ve kalıcı kontrollerin uygulanmasında merkezi bir rol oynamaktadır. Anomali tabanlı dolandırıcılık tespiti, kaynak tahmini ve sürekli denetim gibi yapay zekânın modern uygulamalarını ve bunların güçlü ve zayıf yönlerini tartışan bu çalışma, YZ’nin verimliliği ve denetimi büyük ölçüde artırdığı, ancak aynı zamanda önyargıyı yerleştirme, opaklık ve hesap verebilirlik boşlukları yaratma riskini de beraberinde getirdiği sonucuna varmaktadır. Yapay zekâyı proaktif bir hesap verebilirlik paradigması gerektiren çift kullanımlı bir teknoloji olarak ele alan çalışma, YZ’nin daha dayanıklı ve sorumlu kamu sektörü sistemleri oluşturmaya yardımcı olma potansiyeline sahip olduğunu göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Tamer, O. Ü., Mcdonald, B., Hemıcı, F., Kontogeorga, G. (2025). Utilizing Artificial Intelligence as a Strategic Risk Management Tool for Public Sector Operations and Auditing Processes. Sayıştay Dergisi, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 139, 659–680. https://doi.org/10.52836/sayistay.1819606

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (37)

  1. Bandy, J. (2021). Problematic machine behavior: A systematic literature review of algorithm audits. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW1), pp. 1–34. doi:10.1145/3449148.
  2. Bates v Post Office Ltd (2019). Bates v Post Office Ltd (No 6: Horizon Issues) [2019] EWHC 3408 (QB) [online]. https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/bates-others-v-postoffice- ltd-judgment-no-6-horizon-issues/ (Accessed: 4 December 2025).
  3. Brookings Institutions — West, D.M. (2021). Using artificial intelligence and machine learning to reduce government fraud. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/usingai- and-machine-learning-to-reduce-government-fraud/ (Accessed: 8 September 2025).
  4. Castro, C. and Lopes, I. C. (2023). E-government as A Tool in Controlling Corruption. International Journal of Public Administration, 46(16), 1137-1150.
  5. Chen, C. and Ganapati, S. (2023). Do Transparency Mechanisms Reduce Government Corruption? A Meta-Analysis. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 89(1), 257-272.
  6. Christie, J. (2020). The Post Office Horizon IT scandal and the presumption of the dependability of computer evidence. Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review, 17, pp. 49–70.
  7. Chung, H., Kara, B., McShea, M.F., Pathak, R. and Williams, D. (2025). Using Large Language Models to Forecast Local Government Revenue. Public Finance Journal, 2(2), 85- 98. https://doi.org/10.59469/pfj.2025.46.
  8. Criado, J.I. (2021). Inteligencia Artificial (y Administración Pública). Eunomía. Revista en Cultura de la Legalidad, 20, pp. 348–372. doi:10.20318/eunomia.2021.6097.
  9. Coşkun, E. and Bozkuş Kahyaoğlu, S. (2023). Digital Transformation and The Role of Digital Technologies in The Transformation of Audit: Opportunities and Threats. (Eds. Önder, M. and Köse, H.Ö.) Kamu Yönetiminde Denetim: Temel Paradigmalar, Değişim ve Yeni Yönelişler. Ankara: Sayıştay Yayınları.
  10. Di Vaio, A., Hassan, R. and Alavoine, C. (2022). Data intelligence and analytics: A bibliometric analysis of human–artificial intelligence in public sector decision-making effectiveness. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174. doi:10.1016/j. techfore.2021.121201.
  11. Erasmus, L.J. and Kahyaoğlu, S.B. (eds.) (2024). Continuous Auditing with AI in the Public Sector. 1st edn. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. doi:10.1201/9781003382706.
  12. European Commission (2024). Artificial Intelligence Act: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689. Brussels: European Commission. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32024R1689 (Accessed: 20 September 2025).
  13. European Court of Auditors (2024). Special report 08/2024: EU Artificial intelligence ambition: Stronger governance and increased, more focused investment essential going forward. Publications Office of the European Union. http://www.eca.europa. eu/en/publications/SR-2024-08 (Accessed: 8 November 2025).
  14. G7 (2023). G7 Toolkit for Artificial Intelligence in the Public Sector. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/421c1244-en (Accessed: 23 September 2025).
  15. Genaro-Moya, D., López-Hernández, A.M. & Godz, M. (2025). Artificial Intelligence and Public Sector Auditing: Challenges and Opportunities for Supreme Audit Institutions. World, 6(2), pp. 1–19. doi:10.3390/world6020078.
  16. Gebru, T., Morgenstern, J., Vecchione, B., Vaughan, J.W., Wallach, H., Daumé III, H. and Crawford, K. (2021). Datasheets for datasets. Communications of the ACM, 64(12), pp. 86–92. doi:10.1145/3458723.
  17. Goodman, E. P. ve Trehu, J. (2023). Algorithmic Auditing: Chasing AI Accountability. Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal, 39(3), 289-337.
  18. Issa, H., Sun, T. and Vasarhelyi, M.A. (2016). Research ideas for artificial intelligence in auditing: The formalization of audit and workforce supplementation. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 13(2), pp. 1–20. doi:10.2308/jeta-10511.
  19. Kokina, J. and Davenport, T.H. (2017). The emergence of artificial intelligence: How automation is changing auditing. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 14(1), 115–122. doi:10.2308/jeta-51730.
  20. Köse, H. Ö. (2023). Kamu Yönetiminde Denetimin İşlevleri, Dinamikleri ve Geleceği. (Eds. Önder, M. and Köse, H.Ö.) Kamu Yönetiminde Denetim: Temel Paradigmalar, Değişim ve Yeni Yönelişler, pp. 37-67. Ankara: Sayıştay Yayınları.
  21. Köse, H. Ö. and Polat, N. (2021). Dijital Dönüşüm ve Denetimin Geleceğine Etkisi, Sayıştay Dergisi, 32(123), 9-41.
  22. Lee, M.E.M., Hayes, D. and Maher, C.S. (2024). AI as a Budgeting Tool: Panacea or Pandora’s Box? Public Finance Journal, 1(1), 49-65. https://doi.org/10.59469/pfj.2024.6.
  23. LVV v The Netherlands (2020). Landelijke Vereniging van Vertrouwenspersonen (LVV) et al. v The Netherlands. Rechtbank Den Haag, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2020:1878 (05.02.2020). https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/details?id=ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2020:1878 (Accessed: 04.12.2025).
  24. Minkkinen, M., Laine, J. and Mäntymäki, M. (2022). Continuous auditing of artificial intelligence: A conceptualization and assessment of tools and frameworks. Digital Society, 1, article 21. doi:10.1007/s44206-022-00022-2.
  25. Mitchell, M., Wu, S., Zaldivar, A., Barnes, P., Vasserman, L., Hutchinson, B., Spitzer, E., Raji, I.D. and Gebru, T. (2019). Model cards for model reporting. in Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT19). Atlanta, GA: ACM, pp. 220–229. doi:10.1145/3287560.3287596.
  26. Morbey, R.A., Elliot, A.J., Harcourt, S. and Smith, G.E. (2023). Using machine learning to predict peak healthcare demand: a time-series analysis of syndromic surveillance data. PLOS ONE, 18(10), e0291932. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/ journal.pone.0291932 (Accessed: 4 December 2025).
  27. NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) (2023). AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0). Gaithersburg, MD: U.S. Department of Commerce. https:// nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ai/NIST.AI.100-1.pdf (Accessed: 28.09.2025).
  28. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2019). OECD Principles on Artificial Intelligence. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://oecd.ai/en/ai-principles (Accessed: 28 September 2025).
  29. Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry (2024). Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry: Publications [online]. https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk/ (Accessed: 04.12.2025).
  30. Raji, I.D., Smart, A., White, R.N., Mitchell, M., Gebru, T., Hutchinson, B., Smith-Loud, J., Theron, D. and Barnes, P. (2020). Closing the AI accountability gap: Defining an end-to-end framework for internal algorithmic auditing. in Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT20) *. Barcelona, Spain: ACM, pp. 33–44. doi:10.1145/3351095.3372873.
  31. SAI20 (2023). Compendium on Responsible Artificial Intelligence. Supreme Audit Institution of India (SAI India). https://sai20.org/storage/app/uploads/public/679/ c97/4b0/679c974b0954d084882913.pdf (Accessed: 20.11.2025).
  32. Tiron-Tudor, A. and Deliu, D. (2022). Reflections on the human-algorithm complex duality: Perspectives in the auditing process. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 19(3), pp. 255–285. doi:10.1108/QRAM-04-2021-0059.
  33. Vasarhelyi, M.A., Alles, M.G. and Kogan, A. (2018). Principles of analytic monitoring for continuous assurance. in Vasarhelyi, M.A. and Kogan, A. (eds.) Continuous Auditing: Theory and Application. Bingley: Emerald Publishing, pp. 191–217.
  34. Wirtz, B.W., Weyerer, J.C. and Geyer, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence and the public sector— Applications and challenges. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(7), pp. 596–615. doi:10.1080/01900692.2018.1498103.
  35. Wired (2024). Denmark’s welfare algorithms under fire. Wired. https://www.wired.com/ story/denmark-welfare-algorithms-under-fire/ (Accessed: 28.09.2025).
  36. Yavuz, E. (2025). Digitalization in the Fight Against Corruption: Feasibility of a Blockchain- Based System in Türkiye. TCA Journal/Sayıştay Dergisi, 36 (137), 255-287. https://doi.org/10.52836/sayistay.1675048
  37. Yener, M., Charoenpol, M., Suntharanurak, S. and Köse, H.Ö. (2025). Strategic Cooperation of Supreme Audit Institutions of Thailand and Türkiye for Digital Transformation and Innovation in Public Sector Auditing. TCA Journal/Sayıştay Dergisi, 36 (136), 9-34, doi: 10.52836/sayistay.1633666