Skip to content

University of the West of England (UWE Bristol)

Academia Western Europe and Other States

Responses

In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?

Defining guidelines and best practices for AI development and deployment.

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
  • Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI
  • Transparency, accountability, and human oversight
  • Interoperability of governance approaches

Please briefly explain your selection.

3

AI must be designed, trained, and implement with a 'human before profits' attitude. This mean defining for which tasks and scenarios the AI models should be created for and applied to. Also, AI has access to data from al around the world, and can have implications beyond any borders. We need over-national institutions to guide the use of AI also to avoid a blind competition in its development. last but not least, AI is disrupting the working market as we know it. It's important to assist people facing life-changing career and professional switches. It is not only a matter of financial difficulties, but also of a personal meaning and social role.

In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.

1

Privacy must be preserved as much as possible when training and deploying AI models. Also not all the uses of AI should be considered in the same way (e.g. marketing VS healthcare).

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.

Challenges: - people losing jobs. - privacy issues. - social isolation. Opportunities: - supporting research. - accelerate drug and material discoveries. - provide personalised and preventive medicine tools.

What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?

Companies' aim is profit. Countries are competing for tech supremacy. International bodies should offer a human-based approach.

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?

Interdisciplinary collaborations, involving tech and social experts, but also economists, and field-related professionals (e.g. in healthcare). universities could be valuable partners since they might have less conflictual interests.

How can different stakeholders contribute to the AI Dialogue? Please share recommendations for the format and structure of the AI Dialogue.

A mix of quantitative and qualitative insight collection, the former (e.g. experts panels) guiding the latter (e.g. online surveys), this can be done to design what to ask, how and to who; the latter capable of reaching a larger audience.

Which voices, communities, or perspectives are currently underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance? How could they be included?

Whoever has not tech of financial expertise is probably underrepresented at the moment. That's why international bodies should give them the chance to share their feedback.

What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?

A mix of quantitative and qualitative insight collection, the former (e.g. experts panels) guiding the latter (e.g. online surveys), this can be done to design what to ask, how and to who; the latter capable of reaching a larger audience.

Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.

2

EU AI Act has good principles, but it should have been designed within AI experts, while it seems mostly a work done by policy makers not fully prepared on the risk and opportunities that AI brings.