AI for Good Denmark
Responses
In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?
A global AI treaty aligning development with human rights, data dignity, and democratic oversight—enabling retroactive accountability for harm, misuse, and market abuse, while ensuring environmental responsibility and fair distribution of benefits across all affected jurisdictions.
From your perspective, which of the following thematic areas identified by the General Assembly Resolution 79/325 for the AI Dialogue reflect your priorities for urgent action and active engagement?
- Safe, secure and trustworthy AI
- Protection and promotion of human rights
- Transparency, accountability, and human oversight
- Interoperability of governance approaches
Please briefly explain your selection.
4
Current trends in monopolistic and monolithic tech stacks leaves the public at the mercy of larger system players that build opaque and extractive data harvesting methods to corner market share and IP. This extreme lack of transparency and safety as well as cost of enforcement thru regulations leads to many democratic and human protections as an afterthought with little repercussions for retribution.
In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.
3
A huge factor in this crisis will be environmental and social monitoring with retroactive laws in place to ensure that companies and government officials are held accountable for short sighted gains. This adds to the continued Jevons paradox of energy blindness of the entire supply chain not leading towards degrowth strategies to mitigate climate crisis.
How are the governance gaps and related developments/advances in the thematic areas you selected above affecting your country, region, or sector? Please highlight the most significant challenges.
Hidden resource and energy costs, along with top-down AI mandates, have led to workarounds, reduced agency, and weakened public discourse and democratic oversight. Meanwhile, tech companies' and leaders' ignorance leaves society, democracy, and children vulnerable due to gaps in AI literacy and cybersecurity, without adequate guardrails, transparency, reporting mechanisms, or mitigation protocols to protect the public.
What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?
Ability and influence to build consensus globally on what we allow companies to create and implement into our society and how we report whistleblowing for mitigation and justice
What are some of the existing initiatives, partnerships, or mechanisms that the AI Dialogue should build upon or connect with, and what added value could the AI Dialogue bring?
Encourage more public discourse that builds transparency on dissonance of companies and politicians actions vs public needs, counter AI-driven misinformation, and increase transparency around lobbying and its targets to reduce bias and enable democratic scrutiny of motives and incentives.
How can different stakeholders contribute to the AI Dialogue? Please share recommendations for the format and structure of the AI Dialogue.
There are many think tanks, orgs, and research already contributing to this. Funding and payment for their IP, work, time, and consultation to allow their survival and encourage critical overview, public surveying, and alternative perspectives without politically- ethically washing it to fit a general narrative, but allowing more nuances in the context of the people, especially the voices of the global south and the outsourced labor groups not mentioned in the larger AI supply chain.
Which voices, communities, or perspectives are currently underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance? How could they be included?
Global south, data workers, software developers that have no influence or agency to what they are building but must build for job security, whistle-blowers and activists against AI as well as environmental reporting from private utility companies hiding costs of AI data centres, privacy technologists, students and youth, independent journalists
What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?
Delphi process as proposed by from Patterns (cell press journal) bridging practioners https://www.cell.com/patterns/fulltext/S2666-3899(26)00021-8
Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.
MIT risk repository mapping tool of risks https://eihrgf.yourbrand.studio/ and https://airisk.mit.edu/ PAUSE framework *funded by Mozilla: https://pause-framework.vercel.app/ Open Ethics: https://openethics.ai/oemm/ Safe-AI framework Mitre: https://atlas.mitre.org/ OWASP GEN AI Security project: https://genai.owasp.org/ Book: Sustainable AI Sustainable AI" by Raghavendra Selvan (2025) https://github.com/raghavian/sustainable_ai