Overcoming Hurdles in Establishing Global Governance for Artificial Intelligence

108

The development and regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) present formidable challenges on the world stage, requiring international cooperation and effective governance. Despite calls for a unified approach, creating a comprehensive international organization for AI encounters numerous complexities.

1. Dual-Use Nature and Geopolitical Friction:

• AI’s dual-use nature, applicable for both peaceful and military purposes, complicates global consensus.
• Major powers, engaged in a technological “chip war” and geopolitical competition, may resist forming an institution for policing AI development.

2. Interstate Friction and Structural Issues:

• Current international institutions, like the UN Security Council, grapple with challenges due to interstate friction.
• Existing institutions face governance issues, exemplified by the dysfunctionality of the World Trade Organization’s Appellate Body.

3. Defining the Role of an AI-Specific Organization:

• Establishing the purpose of an AI-specific body raises critical questions about scientific cooperation, regulatory coordination, monitoring regimes, and enforcement of responsible AI development.

4. Differing Approaches to AI and Sovereignty Concerns:

• National sovereignty, security considerations, and divergent approaches to AI hinder consensus on the role of an international organization.
• The EU’s AI Act and the US’ stance contribute to the complexity of global AI governance.

5. Translation of Principles into Commitments:

• While general principles on AI are acknowledged, translating them into specific commitments in international law remains a formidable challenge.

6. Risk Assessments, Ethics, and Rights Prioritization:

• Varied risk assessments, ethical considerations, and prioritization of rights create divergent perspectives among nations.
• Balancing individual rights and security interests poses challenges in crafting a unified international approach to AI.

7. Institutional Character and Private Sector Inclusion:

• Determining the institutional character of an overseeing body is crucial, considering the significant role of the private sector in AI development.
• Incorporating private sector actors into governance frameworks that traditionally favor nations requires careful consideration.

8. Fragmented Approach to AI Governance:

• Current international cooperation on AI involves fragmented efforts by organizations such as the OECD, UNESCO, and the International Labor Organization.
• The UN’s High-Level Advisory Body on AI reflects the early stages of a coordinated response but faces challenges in achieving unity.

As the complexities of geopolitics, diverse national interests, and private sector involvement persist, the establishment of a standalone AI-focused international organization remains a distant goal. In the meantime, influential actors, particularly the US and the European Union, are poised to shape global AI regulation significantly.