evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Auditing Machine Learning Algorithms — A White Paper and Audit Catalogue Co-Developed by Five Supreme Audit Institutions

Norway · Oslo · See the Norway profile · See the Oslo profile

Top 74% 47/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Norway's Auditor General led four other national audit institutions in publishing an open white paper and audit catalogue so public auditors can examine ML systems; adoption results are not yet publicly measured.

Details

Promoter
Office of the Auditor General of Norway (Riksrevisjonen), with the SAIs of Finland, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK
Period
2020-present
Keywords
audit, algorithmic accountability, public sector AI, oversight

Description

In November 2020 the Office of the Auditor General of Norway, working with data scientists from the supreme audit institutions (SAIs) of Finland, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, published 'Auditing Machine Learning Algorithms: A White Paper for Public Auditors'. It was written because limited guidance existed on how auditors should examine AI and machine-learning systems used in public services.
The paper summarises key risks, including automated and institutionalised unequal treatment and mass production of incorrect or discriminatory decisions, and proposes an audit catalogue with methodological approaches in three areas: project management and governance, data considerations (quality, bias, privacy, GDPR), and model development (documentation, reproducibility, fairness). It is guidance, not a fixed checklist. It is published openly at auditingalgorithms.net, and the INTOSAI Journal and the UK National Audit Office have both described it.
Evidence limits: neither source reports how many audits have used the catalogue or what they found, so impact and replication are undocumented. Its value is as an open, multi-institution method that other SAIs can reuse.

Read the full analysis: https://www.auditingalgorithms.net

Implementation

Implementation detail (cost, timeline, staffing, conditions for success) is not yet available for this practice.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Similar practices you may find useful