For Humans Sake Initiative

A successful first Global Dialogue on AI Governance would be one that delivers concrete, inclusive, and actionable outcomes. First, it should establish a shared understanding of key principles for responsible AI, such as transparency, accountability, fairness, and human rights protection. These principles should be adaptable across different national and regional contexts. Second, the dialogue should meaningfully include voices from the Global South, youth, and marginalized communities, ensuring that AI governance is not dominated by a few countries or corporations. Creating mechanisms for ongoing participation from these groups would be a critical success factor. Third, the dialogue should lead to the development of practical policy recommendations or a roadmap that governments, organizations, and stakeholders can begin implementing. This could include guidelines for ethical AI use, data protection standards, and risk mitigation frameworks. Fourth, fostering multi-stakeholder collaboration is essential. Bringing together governments, private sector actors, civil society, and academia can help bridge gaps and encourage shared responsibility in AI governance. Finally, success would include commitments to continued engagement, such as follow-up dialogues, working groups, or partnerships that ensure the conversation translates into long-term impact. Overall, the dialogue should move beyond discussion to action, laying the foundation for inclusive, ethical, and globally coordinated AI governance.

• Protection and promotion of human rights
• Transparency, accountability, and human oversight
• AI capacity-building
• Social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic and technical implications of AI

My selection reflects a strong commitment to ensuring that AI governance is inclusive, ethical, and responsive to the needs of vulnerable and underrepresented communities. I prioritized protection and promotion of human rights because AI systems can significantly impact fundamental rights, especially in fragile and conflict-affected contexts where safeguards are often limited. Closely linked to this is transparency, accountability, and human oversight, which are essential to prevent misuse, bias, and harm, and to build trust in AI systems. I also selected AI capacity-building as a key priority. Many communities, particularly in the Global South, lack access to the knowledge and tools needed to engage with AI meaningfully. Strengthening local capacities ensures more equitable participation in shaping AI policies and solutions. Finally, I chose the social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic, and technical implications of AI to emphasize the need for context-sensitive approaches. AI does not operate in a vacuum, and its impacts vary widely across different societies. Addressing these dimensions is critical to ensure that AI systems are inclusive, culturally aware, and aligned with local realities. Together, these priorities support a people-centered approach to AI governance that promotes fairness, inclusion, and sustainable development.

Yes, while the listed themes are comprehensive, there are several cross-cutting and emerging issues that deserve further attention. One key issue is the impact of AI in conflict and fragile settings. AI technologies can influence information ecosystems, surveillance, and even security dynamics in ways that may exacerbate instability if not carefully governed. There is a need for context-specific safeguards to ensure AI does not deepen inequalities or contribute to harm in these environments. Another emerging concern is digital inequality and infrastructure gaps. Many communities, particularly in the Global South, lack access to reliable internet, data systems, and technical resources. Without addressing these structural disparities, AI governance risks reinforcing existing global inequalities. Additionally, youth inclusion and intergenerational equity should be more explicitly recognized. Young people are both key users and future leaders in AI, yet they remain underrepresented in decision-making processes. Ensuring their meaningful participation is essential for sustainable and forward-looking governance. Finally, the environmental impact of AI systems, including energy consumption and resource use, is an important and often overlooked issue. As AI expands, its carbon footprint and sustainability implications must be addressed in alignment with global climate goals. Addressing these cross-cutting issues would strengthen AI governance frameworks and ensure they are more inclusive, equitable, and responsive to real-world challenges.

Governance gaps in AI are already having visible impacts on my region, particularly in conflict-affected and resource-constrained contexts. One of the most significant challenges is the lack of clear regulatory frameworks and oversight mechanisms, which increases the risk of misuse, including misinformation, digital surveillance, and biased decision-making systems. In fragile environments, these risks can exacerbate social tensions and undermine trust in institutions. Another major challenge is limited AI capacity and digital infrastructure. Many communities lack access to technical knowledge, data systems, and educational opportunities, which restricts their ability to engage with AI development or governance. This deepens existing inequalities between regions and limits local ownership of technological solutions. From a human rights perspective, gaps in transparency and accountability raise concerns about data privacy, consent, and potential discrimination, particularly for marginalized groups whose voices are already underrepresented. However, these challenges also present important opportunities. There is growing interest among youth and civil society to engage with AI, which creates a strong foundation for capacity-building and inclusive innovation. AI can also support development efforts in areas such as education, humanitarian response, and access to information if implemented responsibly. Additionally, the current gaps provide an opportunity for my region to shape emerging governance frameworks in a way that reflects local realities and priorities, rather than adopting models that may not be context-appropriate. Overall, addressing these gaps can help ensure that AI becomes a tool for empowerment, resilience, and equitable development rather than a source of further inequality.

The AI Dialogue can play a critical role in advancing international cooperation by serving as an inclusive platform that brings together governments, private sector actors, civil society, and underrepresented communities to build shared understanding and collective action on AI governance. First, it can help align global principles and standards for responsible AI, including human rights protection, transparency, and accountability. By fostering consensus, the Dialogue can reduce fragmentation in governance approaches and promote interoperability across regions. Second, the AI Dialogue can amplify diverse perspectives, particularly from the Global South, youth, and marginalized communities. Ensuring these voices are included is essential for creating equitable and context-sensitive governance frameworks that reflect global realities rather than the priorities of a few actors. Third, it can facilitate knowledge-sharing and capacity-building, enabling countries with limited resources to access expertise, tools, and best practices. This is particularly important for bridging digital divides and supporting more inclusive participation in AI development and regulation. Additionally, the Dialogue can act as a space to build partnerships and trust among stakeholders, encouraging collaboration on joint initiatives, research, and policy development. Finally, it can drive action-oriented outcomes, such as policy recommendations, collaborative frameworks, and follow-up mechanisms that ensure sustained engagement beyond the initial discussions. Overall, the AI Dialogue has the potential to strengthen coordinated, inclusive, and forward-looking global governance of AI.

The AI Dialogue should build upon and connect with existing global and multi-stakeholder initiatives that are already shaping AI governance. These include efforts such as UNESCO's Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, the OECD AI Principles, the Global Partnership on AI (GPAI), and ongoing UN processes related to digital cooperation. Regional frameworks and civil society-led initiatives also play an important role in advancing inclusive and context-specific approaches. Additionally, partnerships led by the private sector and academia—such as responsible AI research networks and open-source communities, offer valuable technical expertise and innovation that can inform governance discussions. Youth-led and Global South initiatives should also be recognized, as they bring critical perspectives that are often underrepresented in global policy spaces. The added value of the AI Dialogue lies in its ability to connect these fragmented efforts into a more coherent and inclusive global process. It can serve as a bridge between policy, practice, and lived experiences by bringing together diverse stakeholders who do not interact in the same space. Moreover, the Dialogue can enhance coordination and avoid duplication, while identifying gaps that existing initiatives may not fully address—particularly in areas such as conflict-affected settings, digital inequality, and capacity-building. By fostering collaboration, promoting shared accountability, and ensuring broader representation, the AI Dialogue can strengthen the overall global governance ecosystem and help translate existing principles into actionable and locally relevant outcomes.

Different stakeholders can contribute to the AI Dialogue by bringing complementary expertise, perspectives, and lived experiences that are essential for inclusive and effective AI governance. Governments can provide policy leadership, regulatory frameworks, and international coordination. The private sector can contribute technical knowledge, innovation, and practical insights on AI development and deployment. Civil society organizations can represent community perspectives, advocate for human rights, and ensure accountability. Academia can offer research-based evidence and interdisciplinary analysis. Importantly, youth and marginalized communities should be actively engaged to ensure that governance processes reflect diverse realities and future generations' needs. To ensure meaningful participation, the AI Dialogue should adopt a multi-layered and inclusive structure. This could include: Plenary sessions for high-level discussions and alignment on global priorities. Thematic working groups focused on specific issues (e.g., human rights, capacity-building, governance frameworks). Interactive workshops and roundtables that allow for practical exchanges and collaborative problem-solving. Open consultation mechanisms, including virtual participation, to enable broader global engagement, especially from underrepresented regions. Additionally, the Dialogue should ensure accessibility and inclusivity by providing multilingual support, hybrid (online and in-person) formats, and safe spaces for diverse voices to contribute. Finally, establishing clear follow-up mechanisms, such as ongoing working groups or progress reviews, would ensure that discussions lead to concrete actions and sustained collaboration. This approach would create a dynamic, .participatory, and action-oriented AI Dialogue

Global discussions on AI governance continue to underrepresent several key voices and perspectives, particularly those from the Global South, conflict-affected and fragile settings, and marginalized communities. Youth, grassroots organizations, and individuals with limited digital access are also often excluded, despite being directly impacted by AI systems. Additionally, linguistic minorities and culturally diverse communities are frequently overlooked, which can lead to governance frameworks that do not reflect local realities. One major gap is the limited inclusion of communities that experience the real-world consequences of AI, such as those affected by misinformation, surveillance, or unequal access to digital technologies. Their lived experiences are essential for shaping policies that are both effective and equitable. To address this, intentional and structured inclusion mechanisms are needed. This includes funding and support for participation, such as travel grants, stipends, and access to digital tools, to ensure that resource constraints do not prevent engagement. The use of hybrid and accessible formats (online and in-person) can also broaden participation. Furthermore, AI Dialogue processes should include community-led consultations, partnerships with local organizations, and dedicated spaces for youth and marginalized voices. Providing multilingual resources and culturally sensitive facilitation is also critical. Finally, moving from symbolic inclusion to meaningful participation, where these voices influence decision-making and outcomes—is essential. This will ensure that AI governance is more inclusive, context-aware, and responsive to global needs.

To foster meaningful and dynamic engagement, the AI Dialogue should move beyond traditional panel discussions and adopt innovative, participatory formats that encourage collaboration and inclusivity. One effective format is co-creation labs or policy sprints, where diverse stakeholders work together in small groups to develop practical solutions or policy recommendations within a limited timeframe. This approach promotes active participation and tangible outcomes. Scenario-based simulations and role-playing exercises can also be valuable, allowing participants to explore real-world challenges—such as AI governance in crisis or conflict settings, and understand different stakeholder perspectives. This helps bridge the gap between theory and practice. Fishbowl discussions and open space sessions can create more inclusive and flexible dialogue environments, enabling participants to contribute dynamically rather than passively listening. These formats are particularly useful for amplifying underrepresented voices. Additionally, interactive digital platforms (e.g., live polling, collaborative whiteboards, and virtual breakout rooms) can enhance hybrid participation and ensure that remote participants are equally engaged. Storytelling and lived-experience sessions are also powerful, giving space to communities directly affected by AI to share their perspectives and influence discussions in a human-centered way. Finally, youth-led sessions and innovation showcases can highlight emerging ideas and empower the next generation of leaders in AI governance. By combining these formats, the AI Dialogue can create a more engaging, inclusive, and action-oriented experience that leads to meaningful outcomes.

Several policies, practices, and platforms demonstrate effective AI governance and provide concrete solutions to its challenges. 1. International frameworks and principles: UNESCO's Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence and the OECD AI Principles offer globally recognized guidelines emphasizing transparency, accountability, human rights, and inclusivity. These frameworks provide a foundation for governments and organizations to develop context-sensitive AI policies. 2. Multi-stakeholder platforms: The Global Partnership on AI (GPAI) brings together governments, civil society, and industry to collaborate on AI research, governance, and responsible deployment. By combining technical expertise with policy dialogue, GPAI fosters actionable solutions while promoting accountability. 3. Open-source and collaborative initiatives: Platforms like OpenMined and the Open Data Institute encourage transparency and community-driven innovation in AI. Open-source AI tools enable verification, reduce biases, and increase accessibility for underrepresented communities. 4. Regulatory approaches: The European Union's AI Act proposes risk-based regulation, focusing on high-risk AI applications while encouraging innovation in low-risk areas. This approach balances safety and innovation and provides clear compliance guidelines for developers and users. 5. Capacity-building and education programs: Initiatives such as AI for Development (AI4D) and local digital literacy programs strengthen knowledge and technical skills in underrepresented regions. These programs ensure equitable participation in AI development and governance. 6. Ethical review boards and audits: Companies and governments are increasingly establishing independent ethics committees and conducting algorithmic audits to detect biases, prevent harm, and ensure compliance with legal and ethical standards. Together, these policies and practices illustrate how collaboration, transparency, accountability, and capacity-building can address AI governance challenges while promoting responsible and inclusive AI adoption. They provide practical models that the AI Dialogue can build upon to create globally coherent and equitable governance frameworks.