This research examines algorithmic transparency as a regulatory principle increasingly deployed to address accountability and oversight challenges in artificial intelligence systems. Through comparative legal analysis of major international and regional frameworks (including the EU’s GDPR, AI Act, DSA, and DMA, the Council of Europe Framework Convention, OECD guidelines, UNESCO recommendations, and IEEE technical standards) combined with qualitative interviews with twelve multistakeholder experts from Brazil and Europe, the study reveals fundamental tensions between transparency’s democratic promise and its practical implementation. The analysis demonstrates that while European frameworks establish sophisticated procedural transparency requirements, global application remains uneven. Technology companies implement differential transparency standards based on regulatory stringency and market significance rather than uniform principles, with Global South jurisdictions receiving substantially less disclosure despite operating under nominally similar systems.
The research distinguishes between procedural transparency (disclosure of governance frameworks and processes) and material transparency (access to technical specifications and source code), finding that both face significant barriers including technical complexity, intellectual property concerns, and regulatory capacity asymmetries. Expert interviews establish consensus that transparency functions as an instrumental mechanism enabling accountability rather than a terminal objective, yet effectiveness depends critically on meaningful information presentation calibrated to recipient capacities. Current frameworks often prioritize formal compliance over substantive oversight, creating “performative transparency” that legitimizes existing power structures without challenging concentrated technological decision-making authority. The study concludes that algorithmic transparency, while necessary for democratic governance, operates within structural constraints limiting its effectiveness in addressing global power imbalances. Meaningful reform requires integrating transparency within broader frameworks of technological justice that address underlying capacity asymmetries between regulatory authorities and technology corporations, particularly affecting Global South jurisdictions.
