Why Western Frameworks Fail
Standard AI fairness frameworks were designed for Western contexts—race, gender, age. They miss the complex, intersectional biases that manifest in Indian AI applications.
The Gap in Current Approaches
Global AI fairness tools focus on attributes like race, gender, and age. While these matter in India too, they miss critical dimensions: caste discrimination encoded in surnames and locations, religious bias in name-based predictions, regional stereotypes affecting service quality, and economic assumptions based on language patterns.
An AI credit model might be "fair" by Western metrics while systematically disadvantaging applicants from certain castes, regions, or language backgrounds.
Manifestations in Indian AI Systems
| Domain | Western Framework Check | Actual Indian Bias Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Credit Scoring | Gender, age parity | Caste proxies in address, surname; regional discrimination |
| Hiring AI | Gender balance | University tier bias, regional accent discrimination |
| Customer Service | Response time parity | Language-based service quality; accent-based routing |
| Insurance | Age, gender pricing | Pincode-based risk (caste/religion proxy); occupation bias |
| Healthcare AI | Gender-balanced training | Urban-rural diagnostic gaps; economic status assumptions |
The Research Foundation
RotaLabs research analyzed 2.3 million AI decisions across Indian financial services, healthcare, and customer service applications. We identified 47 distinct bias patterns across five primary dimensions, with complex intersectional effects.
Proxy Variables
68% of detected bias operated through proxy variables—surnames, pincodes, language—not direct protected attributes.
Intersectionality
Bias effects multiply at intersections: a Dalit woman from a rural area faces compounded disadvantage invisible to single-axis analysis.
