By Javier Surasky-
Between July and early August 2024,
a series of events occurred with varying impacts on Artificial Intelligence
(AI) governance:
- The co-facilitators of negotiations for adopting the United Nations Global Digital Compact presented a third revision of the text. Put under silence procedure on July 12, several states and state groups (G-77, EU, Australia, Canada, the United States, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, among others) "broke the silence," necessitating further content negotiations.
- The International Labor Organization (ILO) published its report "Buffer or Bottleneck? Employment Exposure to Generative AI and the Digital Divide in Latin America."
- From July 29 to August 9, the resumed Closing Session of the Ad Hoc Committee to Elaborate a Comprehensive International Convention on Countering the Use of Information and Communications Technologies for Criminal Purposes took place in New York, after failing to conclude its work in the seven working sessions held between February 2022 and 2024.
- On October 1, parts of the European Artificial Intelligence Act, adopted by the European Parliament last March, came into effect.
These four events demonstrate the intensity
of international debates around AI, which already occupied a central
place in sustainable development debates at the 2023 SDG Summit. However, they
also reveal obstacles in strengthening international cooperation on digital
matters and constructing a global AI governance model.
The reasons for failing to adopt the
third revision of the Global Digital Compact are directly related to those
hampering agreement on a convention to counter the use of information and
communication technologies for criminal purposes. Not only do countries hold
different positions regarding expectations for digital technologies, but
elements of economic and military power associated with these
technologies turn any debate into a sensitive international issue.
Simultaneously, as evidenced in the
Global Digital Compact process, the nature of digital technologies, including
AI, means that discussing their potential benefits and risks requires addressing
inherently sensitive matters, such as human rights, sovereignty (in this
case associated with big data management), environmental care, or weapons
development.
These difficulties create a negative
cycle: lacking international progress, countries are establishing national
systems by adopting legislation and strategies on AI and big data
management, assuming different models, making it more challenging to move
towards possible meeting points. For example, if countries set different
standards for using private big data, which ones will agree to change them to
achieve international consensus after investing resources in their development?
Who will pay for the necessary adjustments?
Another well-known but no less
relevant difficulty is the open competition between the United States and China
in digital technologies, combining technological, military, and
standard-setting competition that, in the short term, defines the direction of
massive financial flows in one direction or another. A country's AI
capabilities can no longer be considered an element of "soft power." Possessing
and developing AI is now a "hard power" variable.
Like any power variable, its
uncontrolled development promotes the growth of new global inequities, which
could only be prevented through concerted international action and
international law. Being "AI-rich" or "AI-poor" became
an increasingly relevant part of the XXI Century North-South divide update.
The problem is more severe than on
other occasions. As we move towards an increasingly digital and technological
world, with economies based on knowledge and innovation, those who "fall
behind" now will suffer the consequences for the long time that the international
society reorganization will take. It's hypocritical to say we will integrate
the needs of future generations into decision-making while allowing such a
powerful and long-term gap to develop between countries.
Under these premises, and the need
to adopt an approach favoring ethical AI-oriented towards good (AI4Good) or
sustainable development (AI4SD), in upcoming posts we will analyze each of the
four elements listed at the beginning of this blog entry.
As we see it, the upcoming Future
Summit is an opportunity to build intergenerational global justice: The "Wretched
of the Earth" Fanon spoke of yesterday will tomorrow be those without
access to digital technology progress, especially AI. The "white
masks" the author mentions can also take the form of Instagram filters
programmed in ChatGPT.
