Innovation and opportunity: review of the UK’s national AI strategy

Abstract

The publication of the UK’s National Artificial Intelligence (AI) Strategy represents a step-change in the national industrial, policy, regulatory, and geo-strategic agenda. Although there is a multiplicity of threads to explore this text can be read primarily as a ‘signalling’ document. Indeed, we read the National AI Strategy as a vision for innovation and opportunity, underpinned by a trust framework that has innovation and opportunity at the forefront. We provide an overview of the structure of the document and offer an emphasised commentary on various standouts. Our main takeaways are: Innovation First: a clear signal is that innovation is at the forefront of UK’s data priorities. Alternative Ecosystem of Trust: the UK’s regulatory-market norms becoming the preferred ecosystem is dependent upon the regulatory system and delivery frameworks required. Defence, Security and Risk: security and risk are discussed in terms of utilisation of AI and governance. Revision of Data Protection: the signal is that the UK is indeed seeking to position itself as less stringent regarding data protection and necessary documentation. EU Disalignment—Atlanticism?: questions are raised regarding a step back in terms of data protection rights. We conclude with further notes on data flow continuity, the feasibility of a sector approach to regulation, legal liability, and the lack of a method of engagement for stakeholders. Whilst the strategy sends important signals for innovation, achieving ethical innovation is a harder challenge and will require a carefully evolved framework built with appropriate expertise.

Public sector AI transparency standard: UK Government seeks to lead by example

“…Although the Standard isn't explicitly aimed at the private sector, it can be understood that implementation within the UK's sizable public sector will inform standards more widely and influence best practice in the private sector with the adoption of an identical or near-identical framework for algorithmic transparency. We see this approach as an example of 'public sector as an exemplar' [9][10][11] in line with the National AI Strategy [7]. • The Algorithmic Transparency Standard is being subjected to a pilot allowing scope for iteration and evolution.…”

“…In particular, the Standard responds to the suggestion, itself in response to the National Data Strategy consultation, that for 'enabling accountability in practice, one concrete recommendation is the use of algorithmic registers' [8] which cites the cities of Amsterdam and Helsinki as having "launched algorithmic registries detailing how city governments use algorithms to deliver public services". Moreover, the Standard is a concrete example of the 'public sector as an exemplar' [9], 'using the public sector as both an adopter and innovator of AI' [9], and using the public sector to 'set an example for the safe and ethical deployment of AI' [10] (see also [11]). Briefly, according to our reading, the UK is taking steps in establishing an ecosystem of trust (governance)-potentially an alternative to the EU's regime-that is underpinned by an innovation and opportunity agenda with a view to driving positive geopolitical and economic outcomes [9].…”

“…Moreover, the Standard is a concrete example of the 'public sector as an exemplar' [9], 'using the public sector as both an adopter and innovator of AI' [9], and using the public sector to 'set an example for the safe and ethical deployment of AI' [10] (see also [11]). Briefly, according to our reading, the UK is taking steps in establishing an ecosystem of trust (governance)-potentially an alternative to the EU's regime-that is underpinned by an innovation and opportunity agenda with a view to driving positive geopolitical and economic outcomes [9].…”

Overview and commentary of the CDEI's extended roadmap to an effective AI assurance ecosystem

“…However, if companies are apprehensive about sharing data or systems, this could lead to difficulty doing applied research. Presently, there are no obligations for private sector algorithmic transparency (Kazim et al, 2021 ). For researchers and industry to collaborate successfully, it is our view that industry transparency would either have to be mandated or there would need to be an increased culture of transparency between research organizations and the private sector.…”

“…Specifically, the then-forthcoming publication of The Roadmap was cited in the UK National AI Strategy as being part of its 10-year plan. This joint publication between the Department for Digital, Culture, Media, and Sport (DCMS), who published the National Data Strategy ( 2020 ), the Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy, and the Office for Artificial Intelligence (Kazim et al, 2021 ; National AI Strategy—HTML version, 2021 ), is, according to our reading, a signaling document for the vision for innovation and opportunity, underpinned by a trust framework that has innovation and opportunity at its center (Kazim et al, 2021 ). As such, The Roadmap should be read within the broader context of the industrial and legislative agenda of the UK government.…”