Government Risk Profiling: Discrimination Risks Remain High

Margriet Vermeer · 2026-05-07

Government agencies often use risk profiling to decide who gets extra scrutiny. But when these systems lack clear, principled rules, they can cause real harm. A new study from the University of Amsterdam warns that without strong safeguards, discrimination and injustice are almost guaranteed. ### What Is Risk Profiling? Risk profiling sounds technical, but it's simple. It means using data to predict who might commit a crime, default on a loan, or pose a security threat. Think of it like a weather forecast, but for human behavior. The problem? People aren't weather patterns. We have biases, histories, and complex lives that data can't fully capture. - Algorithms often rely on past data, which can reflect existing inequalities. - Profiling can target minority groups unfairly, leading to over-policing or denied services. - When rules are unclear, officials may rely on stereotypes instead of facts. ### The Core Problem: No Principled Measures The University of Amsterdam researchers argue that most current profiling systems lack "principled measures." That means they don't have clear, ethical guidelines built in from the start. Without these, the risk of discrimination isn't just possible—it's likely. Imagine a tool that flags people for extra security checks based on their zip code. If that zip code is mostly low-income or minority, you're punishing people for where they live, not what they've done. That's exactly what happens when profiling is unregulated. > "Without principled measures, the risk of discrimination and harm remains too great," the study states. This isn't just academic jargon. It's a warning that affects real lives. ### Why This Matters for the United States In the US, government risk profiling is everywhere. From airport security to welfare eligibility checks, algorithms decide who gets treated fairly and who gets singled out. The stakes are high: - **Policing:** Predictive policing tools can lead to more arrests in already over-policed neighborhoods. - **Housing:** Credit checks and tenant screening can lock people out of homes based on biased data. - **Employment:** Background checks and personality tests can filter out qualified candidates from certain backgrounds. These systems often operate in secret, making it hard to challenge unfair decisions. The study calls for transparency and accountability—something many US advocates have been demanding for years. ### What Needs to Change The researchers don't just point out problems. They offer solutions. Here's what they recommend: - **Clear rules:** Agencies must define exactly what data can be used and why. - **Regular audits:** Independent reviews should check for bias and harm. - **Public input:** Communities affected by profiling should have a say in how systems are built. - **Right to appeal:** People should be able to challenge profiling decisions easily. These steps sound common sense, but they're rarely followed. Without them, risk profiling becomes a tool for control, not safety. ### Real-World Impact Consider a family in a low-income neighborhood. A risk profiling system flags their address as "high risk" for fraud. Suddenly, they face extra paperwork, delayed benefits, or even home visits. All because of a computer model that uses flawed data. This isn't a hypothetical. It happens every day. The study reminds us that technology isn't neutral. It reflects the values of its creators. If we don't embed fairness into the design, we'll keep getting unfair outcomes. ### Moving Forward Risk profiling can be useful. It can help allocate resources and prevent crime. But only if it's done right. That means starting with principles: fairness, transparency, and accountability. The University of Amsterdam study is a wake-up call. We need to build systems that serve everyone, not just the powerful. As the researchers put it, "Without principled measures, the risk of discrimination and harm remains too great." That's a truth we can't afford to ignore.