Nbr | Ryan Calo, Xinzi Lyu
Governments across the Indo-Pacific have adopted markedly diverging AI governance structures, despite generally seeking similar outcomes such as economic development and public-sector innovation, alongside addressing growing concerns regarding safety, accountability, and societal impact. This analysis distinguishes between top-down governance, characterized by centralized authority, binding laws, formal procedures, and state-led oversight, and multi-stakeholder governance, which involves distributed coordination among government bodies, industry actors, and civil society, often relying on nonbinding instruments. While these are conceptual simplifications, most Indo-Pacific countries blend these approaches based on their particular legal traditions, administrative capacities, and development priorities. The United States employs a largely precatory and sectoral AI policy with multi-stakeholder input, whereas the European Union utilizes a centralized, omnibus approach through instruments like the AI Act, organizing governance around risk classification and compliance obligations. These varying structures influence innovation, risk management, and regulatory compliance within the Indo-Pacific region.
No comments:
Post a Comment