AI and Global Governance: Modalities, Rationales, Tensions

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a salient but polarizing issue of recent times. Actors around the world are engaged in building a governance regime around it. What exactly the “it” is that is being governed, how, by who, and why—these are all less clear. In this review, we attempt to shine some light on those questions, considering literature on AI, the governance of computing, and regulation and governance more broadly. We take critical stock of the different modalities of the global governance of AI that have been emerging, such as ethical councils, industry governance, contracts and licensing, standards, international agreements, and domestic legislation with extraterritorial impact. Considering these, we examine selected rationales and tensions that underpin them, drawing attention to the interests and ideas driving these different modalities. As these regimes become clearer and more stable, we urge those engaging with or studying the global governance of AI to constantly ask the important question of all global governance regimes: Who benefits? Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Law and Social Science, Volume 19 is October 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Typology of Risks of Generative Text-to-Image Models

“…These tools could potentially address some socio-legal concerns associated with TTI systems and similar generative model-induced technologies, including data privacy, intellectual property infringement, and security vulnerabilities [70,138,161]. For instance, the EU AI Act can help provide a legal framework for the responsible use of TTI systems, setting out the rights and responsibilities of different stakeholders [53,73,87,101].…”

“…Government legislation and local and global regulation can play a pivotal role [70,138,161], with potential measures ranging from defining limits to controlling the dissemination of harmful content [29,171]. The strategy of limiting monetary rewards from the spread of misinformation can serve as a potent deterrent [4].…”

Artificial Intelligence and Democracy: A Conceptual Framework

“…Building on this, systematic work on the regulation of AI in different countries and contexts is also needed (Veale et al, 2023). While these are early days for official regulation of AI, there are already interesting activities-notably, government support for AI-focused research and development.…”

State roles in platform governance: AI’s regulatory geographies

“…Werner (2020: 4) provides a plausible reason for this gap, arguing that most analyses ‘have tended to focus on consumer goods as opposed to strategic sectors such as energy, infrastructure and defence’ (sectors in which state ownership and public procurement practices are more common). Undoubtedly, platforms and AI are cross-sectoral issues that are of geopolitical relevance to governments around the world, illustrated by the mushrooming of national and supranational AI strategies (Cihon et al, 2020; Veale et al, 2023). Therefore, it is worth probing how economic geographers have empirically studied the state’s buyer and producer roles in other sectors.…”

“…The governance of generative AI systems – which are defined by their ability to generate content such as text, video, images, or audio – exemplifies the need for such an alternative theory of platform governance. Given that most high-profile generative AI systems ‘are sold as-a-service through new, platform-based business models (…), global AI governance seems likely to become highly enmeshed with platform governance’ (Veale et al, 2023: 5–6). Governments around the world are currently facing the task to set guardrails and safeguards for generative AI systems like ChatGPT.…”