Skip to content

United States Council for International Business (USCIB)

Private Sector Western Europe and Other States

Responses

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

The inaugural, first Dialogue should reflect the call for a trustworthy, credible and inclusive multistakeholder forum that will demonstrate how organizations are building and utilizing AI. It should harmonize ongoing international efforts and help to share best practices that mitigate fragmentation and gaps that impede the growth of responsible AI development and adoption. A successful dialogue will examine how domestic, risk-based AI governance, rooted in global, consensus-based and voluntary AI standards can facilitate interoperability and positively impact all businesses. It will also affirm the importance of human-centered AI systems, designed to augment human judgment, with appropriate transparency and meaningful human oversight as foundational principles that underpin trust in AI development and deployment. The inaugural Dialogue is an important early test of whether the UN can serve as a credible, useful, and legitimate coordinating platform across the increasingly complex and fragmented AI governance ecosystem. Its value will depend on grounding discussions in the realities of deployment and governance already taking place across jurisdictions and sectors. The Dialogue could add significant value by connecting the growing number of multilateral, multistakeholder, and sectoral AI governance initiatives and focusing collective effort towards closing gaps rather than duplicating work. International experience is increasingly demonstrating that principles-based, voluntary guidelines offer the most adaptable and inclusive foundation for AI governance – enabling countries at different stages of development to participate and benefit, while more prescriptive approaches risk raising compliance costs and fragmenting markets in ways that slow adoption and limit cross-border collaboration. The Dialogue is well positioned to map where these efforts converge and where gaps remain, and to help build interoperability between frameworks so that governance keeps pace with the technology without creating barriers to access and innovation. Expanding AI will require a sustained commitment to capacity building and closing the widening AI divide. Recent data from our membership shows that AI adoption in the Global North (24.7%) outpaces the Global South (14.1%), and this gap is growing. The experiences of successful adopters demonstrate that the right combination of government strategy, infrastructure investment, workforce development, and language localization can accelerate adoption rapidly. The private sector has actively engaged in expanding access to infrastructure, skills, and data, and stands ready to deepen these partnerships. The Dialogue can play a key role by identifying and sharing proven approaches to reducing AI adoption costs and supporting scalable local deployment - serving as a platform where successful models are documented and replicated. It can also demonstrate how governance frameworks that front-load compliance costs risk pricing out the very countries they aim to protect – entrenching the divide rather than closing it. Regulatory barriers and barriers to cross-border data flows can hinder the development of advanced technologies such as AI. Creating an environment that reduces these barriers and will support innovation, investment, and enhance access to publicly available data that will help to develop accurate and reliable systems. The Dialogue can serve as a place where balanced approaches can be considered and advanced. To maximize impact, the Dialogue should prioritize areas where the UN's unique convening power and universal membership add genuine value — particularly in supporting institutional capacity-building in emerging economies and ensuring coherence across the growing number of international AI governance initiatives — rather than duplicating work already underway in other fora.

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?

1

Safe, secure and trustworthy AI;Transparency, accountability, and human oversight;AI capacity-building;Interoperability of governance approaches;

Please briefly explain your selection.

Please refer to our first submission above.

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

N/A

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.

Please refer to our first submission above.

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

Please refer to our first submission above.

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?

Please refer to our first submission above.

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

USCIB believes the inaugural Dialogue should reflect the call for a credible and inclusive multistakeholder forum that demonstrates how organizations are building and utilizing AI. It should be a space where governments, industry, civil society, and technical communities share practical experience and best practices that can inform governance approaches worldwide.

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

The private sector remains committed to address gaps in the digital divide through capacity building. We are focused on working with our multistakeholder partners to identify and address these underrepresented communities.

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

Formats that would be most effective allow for smaller breakout discussions and a true multistakeholder structure where all stakeholders can meaningfully contribute.

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

1

There are several good global efforts underway. One such effort is G7 Hiroshima AI Process (HAIP) . Please note, due to space constraints our full submission will be emailed to co-facilitators.