Nasscom
Responses
In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?
1. It should establish clear areas of coordination such as access to compute beforehand. 2. The Dialogue must centre people and communities in the Global South, not just state actors. This means engaging educators, workers, small enterprises, and civil society groups who are directly experiencing the effects of AI systems. The Dialogue would be judged not only by the strength of its statements, but by whether it creates pathways through which global governance translates into locally relevant, inclusive, and practical outcomes.
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?
- Interoperability of governance approaches
- Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI
- AI capacity-building
- Protection and promotion of human rights
Please briefly explain your selection.
2
These four themes appear to me less as discrete priorities and more as the core conditions under which AI governance can be both legitimate and effective in unevenly developed technological landscapes. For example, interoperability of governance approaches speaks to the reality of a plural and fragmented regulatory landscape. Any meaningful governance framework must be attentive to context.
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.
The governance gaps across these thematic areas are already visible in India and, more broadly, across the Global South. A central challenge is the uneven pace of capacity-building relative to deployment. These gaps are further compounded when considering the social and cultural dimensions of AI. As a woman, I am particularly conscious of how such systems can reinforce existing gendered disparitiesthrough biased datasets and more. These dynamics point to a persistent gap between the speed of technological advancement and the inclusiveness of governance responses.
What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?
Translate principles into practice: Support pilot initiatives, capacity-building programmes, and implementation pathways across diverse contexts Facilitate knowledge exchange: Create structured channels for sharing policy learnings, technical standards, and governance experiments Address asymmetries: Focus on access to compute, data, and talent to ensure more equitable participation in AI development and 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?
Regional/national AI strategies (e.g. EU AI Act, India AI Mission) – practical regulatory and policy experimentation Link currently disjoint initiatives across UN, OECD, regional, and national levels
What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?
Problem-driven working sessions (not panels): Small, mixed-stakeholder groups tasked with producing concrete outputs (e.g. policy options, pilot ideas) within the session Open consultation tracks (hybrid): Combine in-person sessions with structured digital participation to include voices unable to attend, particularly from underrepresented regions
Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.
2
Responsible AI toolkits in industry and frameworks developed by companies and industry bodies to guide ethical deployment, risk mitigation, and governance practices