UN effort afoot to address the world’s ‘governance deficit with respect to AI’

The AI advisory board of the United Nations is calling for the creation of a global AI data framework. 

The board would like to see the agenda “developed through a process initiated by a relevant agency such as the U.N. Commission on International Trade Law and informed by the work of other international organizations.” 

This is just one recommendation of seven laid out in a 100-page report, Governing AI for Humanity, which the AI advisory board released this month. Here are four more of the report’s recommendations. 

1. An international scientific panel on AI. 

“We recommend the creation of an independent scientific panel on AI, made up of diverse multidisciplinary experts in the field serving in their personal capacity on a voluntary basis,” the report’s authors write. Supported by the proposed United Nations AI office and other relevant United Nations agencies, and partnering with other relevant international organizations, this panel’s mandate would include:

a.) Issuing an annual report surveying AI-related capabilities, opportunities, risks and uncertainties, identifying areas of scientific consensus on technology trends and areas where additional research is needed;

b.) Producing quarterly thematic research digests on areas in which AI could help to achieve the SDGs, focusing on areas of public interest which may be under-served; and

c.) Issuing ad hoc reports on emerging issues, in particular the emergence of new risks or significant gaps in the governance landscape.

2. Policy dialogue on AI governance. 

“We recommend the launch of a twice-yearly intergovernmental and multi-stakeholder policy dialogue on AI governance on the margins of existing meetings at the United Nations.” This dialogue’s purpose would be to:

a.) Share best practices on AI governance that foster development while furthering respect, protection and fulfillment of all human rights, including pursuing opportunities as well as managing risks;

b.) Promote common understandings on the implementation of AI governance measures by private and public sector developers and users to enhance international interoperability of AI governance;

c.) Share voluntarily significant AI incidents that stretched or exceeded the capacity of State agencies to respond; and

d.) Discuss reports of the international scientific panel on AI, as appropriate.

3. AI standards exchange. 

“We recommend the creation of an AI standards exchange, bringing together representatives from national and international standard-development organizations, technology companies, civil society and representatives from the international scientific panel.” The exchange would be tasked with:

a.) Developing and maintaining a register of definitions and applicable standards for measuring and evaluating AI systems;

b.) Debating and evaluating the standards and the processes for creating them; and

c.) Identifying gaps where new standards are needed

4. Global fund for AI. 

“We recommend the creation of a global fund for AI to put a floor under the AI divide,” the authors state. “Managed by an independent governance structure, the fund would receive financial and in-kind contributions from public and private sources and disburse them, including via the capacity development network, to facilitate access to AI enablers to catalyze local empowerment for sustainable development goals (SDGs).” These would include: 

a.) Shared computing resources for model training and fine-tuning by AI developers from countries without adequate local capacity or the means to procure it;

b.) Sandboxes and benchmarking and testing tools to mainstream best practices in safe and trustworthy model development and data governance;

c.) Governance, safety and interoperability solutions with global applicability;

d.) Data sets and research into how data and models could be combined for SDG-related projects; and

e.) A repository of AI models and curated data sets for the SDGs.

In making their case for the framework, the authors note the world’s “governance deficit with respect to AI.” 

“Despite much discussion of ethics and principles, the patchwork of norms and institutions [under consideration] is still nascent and full of gaps,” they add. “AI governance is crucial—not merely to address the challenges and risks [inherent in AI], but also to ensure that we harness AI’s potential in ways that leave no one behind.”

The goal is noble and the report is worth a look.