Responsible AI & Governance

Resourcehip uses AI to produce HIP Scores — product ratings based on material resilience, repairability, and environmental impact. This page sets out the voluntary safeguards we apply and how we stay accountable.


AI Act status

The EU AI Act (Regulation 2024/1689) entered into force on 1 August 2024, with obligations phased in over several years. High-risk AI obligations under Annex III apply from 2 August 2026.

The HIP Score is not a high-risk AI system under the EU AI Act. High-risk classification under Article 6(2) applies to AI systems listed in Annex III: biometrics, critical infrastructure, education, employment, credit scoring, law enforcement, migration, and administration of justice. A consumer product sustainability rating is not in that list.

As a UK-based provider, the AI Act may apply to Resourcehip where our output is used in the EU (Article 2). Our most likely classification is limited or minimal risk, where the main obligations are AI literacy (Article 4) and, where relevant, transparency (Article 50).

We apply the safeguards described below as voluntary good practice, not because a regulator requires them for our risk classification.


What we do

These governance practices go beyond what is legally required for a system at our risk level.


How our AI pipeline works

HIP Scores are produced using a local AI pipeline running on Resourcehip's own hardware. No product data is sent to external cloud AI services.

Component Detail
AI model qwen3.5:35b, running locally via Ollama
Scoring method Structured rubrics across 7 dimensions — not a pure neural black-box
Data sources Public, peer-reviewed datasets (USGS, EPA, LCA databases)
Temperature 0.1 — produces more consistent outputs
Human oversight Every rating reviewed before publication

For full scoring methodology details, see the Methodology page.


Risk management

We have identified and documented the following risks:

Risk Mitigation
Category bias — model under/over-scores a product category Conservative category defaults; quarterly bias audit; rubric-based scoring
Data quality / hallucination — model produces scores contradicting input data Rubric-based scoring; mandatory human review; conservative defaults
Model drift — scores change unexpectedly after model updates Version-pinned AI model; re-validation required before any update
Dispute backlog — challenges not resolved in time Published dispute and appeal SOPs; 30-day response SLA; CEO escalation path

Read the full Risk Register.


Transparency and accountability


Complaints and regulatory contacts

Score disputes: If you believe a rating contains a factual error, see Dispute a Rating or email methodology@resourcehip.com.

Formal appeals: For a formal appeal with independent review escalation, see the Appeal Procedure or email score-appeal@resourcehip.com.

UK data protection: If you have a concern about how Resourcehip handles personal data, you may contact the UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) at ico.org.uk.

EU AI Act: If you believe the AI Act applies to your use of HIP Scores and wish to raise a concern, the relevant authority is the market surveillance authority in your EU member state (Article 85 of Regulation 2024/1689). The ICO does not enforce the EU AI Act.


Audit reports

We publish periodic audit reports covering bias testing, score distribution analysis, and dispute outcomes. See Audit Reports.


Regulatory references


Provider: Resourcehip Ltd (SC873386), Scotland
Page last updated: 16 June 2026
Next review: 16 December 2026

Questions about our AI governance? Email hello@resourcehip.com.