Framing governance for a contested emerging technology:insights from AI policy

TLDR

AI hype has sparked major public controversy over its positive and negative effects, and governance is framed as a way to diagnose problems and offer prescriptions. This paper examines how AI policy documents frame governance to resolve public controversies and proposes assigning more active, collaborative roles to state and society. The study draws on governance of emerging technologies, policy framing theory, and analysis of 49 AI policy documents, and it assigns the state roles of promoting development, mitigating risk, enabling engagement, while expecting broad public engagement to enhance diversity, representation, and equality. The current oligopolistic governance by a few large firms contributes to neglect of societal needs, and the proposed collaborative governance lacks specificity on mitigating capture risks or achieving consensus.

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper examines how the governance in AI policy documents have been framed as way to resolve public controversies surrounding AI. It draws on the studies of governance of emerging technologies, the concept of policy framing, and analysis of 49 recent policy documents dedicated to AI which have been prepared in the context of technological hype expecting fast advances of AI that will fundamentally change economy and society. The hype about AI is accompanied by major public controversy about positive and negative effects of AI. Against the backdrop of this policy controversy, governance emerges as one of the frames that diagnoses the problems and offers prescriptions. Accordingly, the current governance characterized by oligopoly of a small number of large companies is indicated as one of the reasons for problems such as lack of consideration of societal needs and concerns. To address these problems, governance frame in AI policy documents assigns more active and collaborative roles to the state and society. Amid public controversies, the state is assigned the roles of promoting and facilitating AI development while at the same time being a guarantor of risk mitigation and enabler of societal engagement. High expectations are assigned to public engagement with multiple publics as a way to increase diversity, representation and equality in AI development and use. While this governance frame might have a normative appeal, it is not specific about addressing some well-known challenges of the proposed governance mode such as risks of capture by vested interests or difficulties to achieve consensus.