A new era of public procurement: critical issues of procuring artificial intelligence systems to produce public services

Purpose This study aims to shed light on how artificial intelligence based on robust algorithms is used in providing public services and the public’s fears about dealing with these systems. The challenges facing governments that use these systems are accountability, transparency, integrity and addressing errors in advanced technologies. Design/methodology/approach This study used the descriptive approach to describe and analyze public procurement and how public service systems are purchased. The analytical approach was also used to analyze the problems and issues that could result from using artificial intelligence in providing public services regarding concerns about its use and issues of transparency, access to information, accountability and responsibility. Findings The government sector must uphold rights, freedoms, human rights and the rule of law, as well as a commitment to justice, responsibility, integrity, transparency, accountability and openness if this paper use private AI systems. These AI systems will still have the motivations and ideals of the organization and their creators. Accountability systems and governance processes are still needed. Therefore, developing these technologies in-house is not the solution to corporate adoption and interconnection. AI procurement requirements and documentation should apply to internal and external development scenarios. Originality/value This study outlined the difficulties public bodies have when purchasing AI systems and the long-term effects that call for developing procurement policies and procedures tailored to the needs of AI. Future studies might analyze the advantages and disadvantages of openness, particularly regarding disclosures made to the public. In what ways are disclosures made to the public aid in AI system governance? What restrictions apply to disclosures? Is it possible to use new forms of emerging technology to help the public engage meaningfully in discussions about due process and fundamental rights?