Narrative dynamics in European Commission AI policy—Sensemaking, agency construction, and anchoring

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become a global policy issue that is actively governed by international actors producing governance indicators. This article argues that despite the arguments about disruptions to governance and policy due to AI, the global rankings increasingly constitute a strong path dependence on AI policy, leading to conformity with existing policies and institutional practices of economic competitiveness. By analyzing the composition and data sources of global indices in competitiveness, innovation, human capital, and artificial intelligence, I will show how the global rankings now evolve by sharing data and concepts. Consequently, these metrics and related policy scripts promote the seeming continuity of current activities of global competitiveness. AI is discussed as a “revolution” but framed as a matter of “competitiveness,” “openness,” and “talent competition,” implying standard perceptions of economic competitiveness and innovation. There is also a narrative element in the policy script, as the future policies on AI are promoted with references to history that also project the past into the future. My article concludes that while path‐dependent policy indicators and related future narratives give a sense of orientation, they are problematic as they portray a seeming continuity of activities in times of disruptions, delimiting policy alternatives such as AI ethics.

“…As a response to disruptive technology, AI policy is often constructed through narratives on the uncertain future (af Malmborg, 2022; cf. Jasanoff & Kim, 2015).…”

Section: Numerical Global Governance: Rankings Policy Scripts and Nar...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Global indicators and AI policy: Metrics, policy scripts, and narratives

Erkkilä

2023

“…Thus, representatives of the EU have bluntly stated that the EU will actively promote universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, the rule of law, and democratic principles in the digital space (Council of the European Union, 2022), and will generally “defend [its] interests on emerging and critical technologies” (Lambrinidis, 2022). These statements are part of a new narrative (af Malmborg, 2022) that portrays digital issues as “the battleground of technology, values and narratives” (Stano, 2022). This stance is also reflected in the EU AI Act (Meltzer & Tielemans, 2022, p. 2), which EU officials likely hope will cause a “Brussels effect” (Bradford, 2012) in which the EU AI Act will influence other countries' regulatory regimes (Siegmann & Anderljung, 2022).…”

Section: Emergent Patterns Of Competition and Cooperation In Ai Stand...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Competition and cooperation in artificial intelligence standard setting: Explaining emergent patterns

Ingersleben‐Seip

2023

Efforts to set standards for artificial intelligence (AI) reveal striking patterns: technical experts hailing from geopolitical rivals, such as the United States and China, readily collaborate on technical AI standards within transnational standard‐setting organizations, whereas governments are much less willing to collaborate on global ethical AI standards within international organizations. Whether competition or cooperation prevails can be explained by three variables: the actors that make up the membership of the standard‐setting organization, the issues on which the organization's standard‐setting efforts focus, and the “games” actors play when trying to set standards within a particular type of organization. A preliminary empirical analysis provides support for the contention that actors, issues, and games affect the prospects for cooperation on global AI standards. It matters because shared standards are vital for achieving truly global frameworks for the governance of AI. Such global frameworks, in turn, lower transaction costs and the probability that the world will witness the emergence of AI systems that threaten human rights and fundamental freedoms.

“…AI policy has become a domain of global competition, where countries and regions are pitted against each other in trying to harness its full potential (Erkkilä, 2023). However, in attempting to gain competitive advantage over their perceived competitors, governments adopt similar traveling discourses and imaginaries of AI (Kim, 2023) and tend to privilege economic and geopolitical problem framings over social and ethical concerns (Schiff, 2023), while future oriented narratives are used to contain uncertainty (af Malmborg, 2023).…”

Section: Local National Regional and Global Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Politics and policy of AI is a moving target, which is co-shaped by technological and political developments. Several contributions examine in depth the content and adoption of AI policy documents, guidelines and standards (af Malmborg, 2023;Erkkilä, 2023;Kim, 2023;Schiff, 2023;Ulnicane & Aden, 2023;von Ingersleben-Seip, 2023). In future, it will be important to turn the focus to their implementation.…”

Section: Future Research Agenda On Politics and Policy Of Artificial ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Politics and policy of Artificial Intelligence

Ulnicane,

Erkkilä

2023

While recent discussions about Artificial Intelligence (AI) as one of the most powerful technologies of our times tend to portray it as a predominantly technical issue, it also has major social, political and cultural implications. So far these have been mostly studied from ethical, legal and economic perspectives, while politics and policy have received less attention. To address this gap, this special issue brings together nine research articles to advance the studies of politics and policy of AI by identifying emerging themes and setting out future research agenda. Diverse but complementary contributions in this special issue speak to five overarching themes: understanding the AI as co‐shaped by technology and politics; highlighting the role of ideas in AI politics and policy; examining the distribution of power; interrogating the relationship between novel technology and continuity in politics and policy; and exploring interactions among developments at local, national, regional and global levels. This special issue demonstrates that AI policy is not an apolitical field that can be dealt with just by relying on knowledge and expertise but requires an open debate among alternative views, ideas, values and interests.