BITS Pilani
Responses
In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?
I think giving a platform for civil society activist, non profit organizations and academicians a platform where they can express freely about harms and issues with AI systems would be a great success. As an academician, given such a platform I will pitch my research as an example which led national policies on an algorithm system to be banned (see impact stories on my website). This will enable researchers all over the globe to set a example by saying their work has a lot of value and people are there to listen.
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
- Transparency, accountability, and human oversight
- Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI
- Protection and promotion of human rights
Please briefly explain your selection.
1
For me, the topmost priority is the sociotechnical safety of the AI systems. If our public sector AI systems are not safe at the first hand to use then talking about trustworthy AI or even transparency or accountability comes later. Suppository, we are there then societal implications are the next big thing as people will endanger their reliance on AI systems where the actual harm of any system is unknown. Later follows FACT principles and promotion/protection of human rights. I also want to add that these rights should be tied closely with the initial design of the AI systems.
In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.
AI Safety is not always technical. A focus on sociotechnical approaches should be a priority for Safety.
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.
My findings suggest voluntary governance effectively privatizes benefits (innovation, market access, efficiency) while socializing costs (exclusion, discrimination, lack of recourse). Moreover, our methodological focus on elite stakeholders itself demonstrates a structural problem: AI governance debates occur primarily among those positioned to shape or benefit from systems rather than those most affected. Effective governance requires confronting power asymmetries rather than assuming collaborative partnerships can harmonize conflicting interests. Without mandatory fairness requirements, transparency about corporate influence, affected community participation, and foundational capacity building, the governance would often be failing.
What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?
From my understanding, these dialogues helps at first at the region specific viewpoints on governance.
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?
International AI Safely Report Specific labs around the world at universities who works on safety, trust and AI governance
Which voices, communities, or perspectives are currently underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance? How could they be included?
For sure, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Nepal and also India. We see limited representation
What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?
Theme specific workshops and design sessions in governance
Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3772363.3798776