Rules as Code (RaC)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
A Rules as Code (RaC) is a business rules methodology that converts legislation rules, regulation rules, and policy rules into machine-readable rules.
- Context:
- It can enable government services and regulatory compliance to be more accessible and understandable by both machines and humans.
- It can (typically) result in a machine-consumable version of government rules, existing alongside their natural language counterparts.
- It can (often) aim to enhance service delivery efficiency, provide a trusted source for eligibility checks for government benefits, and improve the clarity and transparency of regulations.
- It can (often) be beneficial in reducing ambiguity, easing the difficulty of interpretation, and thus facilitating easier compliance with rules by citizens and organizations.
- ...
- Example(s):
- Counter-Example(s):
- Traditional rulemaking processes without a machine-readable component.
- See: Machine-readable Code, Service Delivery Efficiency, Government Services, Regulatory Compliance, Technology in Rulemaking.
References
2023
- (Witt et al., 2023) ⇒ Alice Witt, Anna Huggins, Guido Governatori, and Joshua Buckley. (2023). “Encoding legislation: a methodology for enhancing technical validation, legal alignment, and interdisciplinarity.” In: Artificial Intelligence and Law, doi:10.1007/s10506-023-09319-4.
- ABSTRACT: A critical challenge in "Rules as Code" ("RaC") initiatives is enhancing legal accuracy. In this paper, we present the preliminary results of a two-week, first of its kind experiment that aims to shed light on how different legally trained people interpret and convert Australian Commonwealth legislation into machine-executable code. We find that coders collaboratively agreeing on key legal terms, or atoms, before commencing independent coding work can significantly increase the similarity of their encoded rules. Participants nonetheless made a range of divergent interpretive choices, which we argue are most likely due to: (1) the complexity of statutory interpretation, (2) encoded provisions having varying levels of granularity, and (3) the functionality of our coding language. Based on these findings, we draw an important distinction between processes for technical validation of encoded rules, which focus on ensuring rules adhere to select coding languages and conventions, and processes of legal alignment, which we conceptualise as enhancing congruence between the encoded provisions and the true meaning of the statutory text in line with the modern approach to statutory interpretation. We argue that these processes are distinct but both critically important in enhancing the accuracy of encoded rules. We conclude by emphasising the need in RaC initiatives for multi-disciplinary expertise across specific legal subject matters, statutory interpretation and technical programming.
2020
- (Mohun & Roberts, 2020) ⇒ James Mohun, and Alex Roberts. (2020). “Cracking the Code: Rulemaking for humans and machines.” In: Not Provided.
- ABSTRACT: Rules as Code (RaC) is an exciting concept that rethinks one of the core functions of governments: rulemaking. It proposes that governments create an official version of rules (e.g. laws and regulations) in a machine-consumable form, which allows rules to be understood and actioned by computer systems in a consistent way. More than simply a technocratic solution, RaC represents a transformational shift in how governments create rules, and how third parties consume them. Across the world, public sector teams are exploring the concept and its potential as a response to an increasingly complex operating environment and growing pressures on incumbent rulemaking systems. Cracking the Code is intended to help those working both within and outside of government to understand the potential, limitations and implications of RaC, as well as how it could be applied in a public service context.