Excellent paper with a good summary / coverage of international governance options. One hindrance to international cooperation that other regulatory movements have come into has been the challenge in getting dominant players to cede their advantaged positions or to incur what they would see as disproportionate costs. The challenge around getting large economies & polluters to agree to meaningful carbon measures is indicative.
In the AI space, a few actors large State both perceive each other to be strategic competitors, have a disproportionate amount of access to talent, capital and hardware, and have recently signalled a decrease in willingness to bind themselves to cooperative ventures. Thinking particularly here of the US’s difference in signalling coming out of the Paris Summit compared to their positions at Berkeley and Seoul.
One possible way that other State level actors in the space could seek to influence the forerunners at the moment is covered by Christoph, Lipcsey and Kgomo writing commentary for the Equiano Institute. Their argument is that already existing groups like the EU, African Union and ASEAN can combine to provide regulatory leadership, inclusive AI development and supply chain resilience, respectively. I think this strategic approach dovetails nicely with challenges raised in the paper about how to effectively motivate China and the US from engaging with multilateral treaties.
Excellent paper with a good summary / coverage of international governance options. One hindrance to international cooperation that other regulatory movements have come into has been the challenge in getting dominant players to cede their advantaged positions or to incur what they would see as disproportionate costs. The challenge around getting large economies & polluters to agree to meaningful carbon measures is indicative.
In the AI space, a few actors large State both perceive each other to be strategic competitors, have a disproportionate amount of access to talent, capital and hardware, and have recently signalled a decrease in willingness to bind themselves to cooperative ventures. Thinking particularly here of the US’s difference in signalling coming out of the Paris Summit compared to their positions at Berkeley and Seoul.
One possible way that other State level actors in the space could seek to influence the forerunners at the moment is covered by Christoph, Lipcsey and Kgomo writing commentary for the Equiano Institute. Their argument is that already existing groups like the EU, African Union and ASEAN can combine to provide regulatory leadership, inclusive AI development and supply chain resilience, respectively. I think this strategic approach dovetails nicely with challenges raised in the paper about how to effectively motivate China and the US from engaging with multilateral treaties.
Paper URL: https://www.equiano.institute/assets/R1.pdf
Thank you for the compliment, and interesting approach!