Refugee Dignity Initiative

A successful first Global Dialogue on AI Governance would deliver clear, practical, and inclusive outcomes that move beyond discussion into action. First, it should establish a shared understanding of key AI governance principles, including transparency, accountability, safety, and respect for human rights. Agreement on these core values would provide a common foundation for global cooperation. Second, the Dialogue should produce a roadmap for international collaboration, identifying priority areas such as ethical AI development, data protection, risk management, and equitable access to AI technologies. This roadmap should include specific commitments from governments, private sector actors, and civil society to ensure implementation. Third, meaningful inclusion must be a central outcome. The Dialogue should amplify the voices of underrepresented regions, particularly from the Global South, refugees, and marginalized communities, ensuring that AI governance frameworks reflect diverse realities and do not widen existing inequalities. Additionally, the establishment of multi-stakeholder partnerships would be a key success indicator. Bringing together policymakers, researchers, industry leaders, and grassroots organizations can foster innovation while ensuring accountability and shared responsibility. Finally, the Dialogue should result in tangible follow-up mechanisms, such as working groups, monitoring frameworks, and regular review processes, to track progress and adapt to the fast-evolving nature of AI. Overall, success would be defined by the ability of the Dialogue to translate global consensus into actionable steps that promote responsible, inclusive, and sustainable AI governance for the benefit of all of us.

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

My selection reflects a strong commitment to inclusive, ethical, and people-centered AI governance, particularly for underserved and vulnerable communities. AI capacity-building is a top priority because many communities, especially refugees and marginalized groups, are at risk of being left behind in the rapidly advancing digital landscape. Empowering these groups with AI knowledge and skills is essential for promoting equal participation and opportunity. Protection and promotion of human rights is central to ensuring that AI systems do not reinforce discrimination, exclusion, or harm. In contexts involving displaced and vulnerable populations, it is critical that AI is developed and deployed in ways that uphold dignity, privacy, and fundamental freedoms. Transparency, accountability, and human oversight are necessary to build trust in AI systems. Clear mechanisms must be in place to ensure that decisions made by AI can be understood, challenged, and corrected where necessary, especially when they impact people's lives. Finally, addressing the social, economic, ethical, cultural, linguistic, and technical implications of AI ensures that governance frameworks are grounded in real-world diversity. AI systems must be responsive to different cultural contexts and languages, and should not deepen existing inequalities. Together, these priorities support a vision of AI that is inclusive, fair, and aligned with global human development goals.

Yes, while the listed themes are comprehensive, there are several important cross-cutting and emerging issues that deserve greater attention. One key issue is the digital divide and unequal access to AI infrastructure. Beyond capacity-building, many communities-particularly in the Global South and among displaced populations-lack reliable internet, computing power, and access to data. Without addressing these structural gaps, the benefits of AI will remain unevenly distributed. Another emerging concern is data justice and representation. Many AI systems are trained on datasets that underrepresent or misrepresent certain populations, leading to biased outcomes. Ensuring inclusive, locally relevant, and ethically sourced data is critical for fair and effective AI systems. AI and displacement or humanitarian contexts is also an area that requires more focus. AI is increasingly used in migration management, identity systems, and aid distribution, yet there are significant risks related to surveillance, exclusion, and misuse of sensitive data. Tailored governance approaches are needed for these high-risk environments. Additionally, the environmental impact of AI is an often overlooked issue. The energy consumption and resource demands of large-scale AI systems raise sustainability concerns, especially for countries already facing climate challenges. Finally, youth engagement and participation should be recognized as a cross-cutting priority. Young people are both key users and future leaders in AI, yet they are often excluded from governance discussions. Addressing these issues would help ensure that AI governance is not only technically sound but also equitable, context-sensitive, and sustainable.

In my context—working in Kenya and engaging with refugee and underserved communities across the region—gaps in AI governance are already having both significant challenges and emerging opportunities. One of the most pressing challenges is limited AI capacity and digital literacy. Many young people and marginalized groups lack access to the skills and tools needed to benefit from AI, increasing the risk of exclusion from education, employment, and innovation opportunities. This is further compounded by infrastructure gaps such as limited internet access and inadequate digital resources. There are also serious concerns around human rights and data protection. Weak regulatory frameworks and limited oversight can expose vulnerable populations to risks such as data misuse, surveillance, and algorithmic bias. For example, in humanitarian and refugee contexts, the use of digital identity systems and data-driven tools raises concerns about privacy, consent, and potential discrimination. Additionally, lack of transparency and accountability in AI systems makes it difficult for individuals to understand or challenge automated decisions that may affect access to services, financial opportunities, or information. This can deepen mistrust and inequality. However, there are also important opportunities. AI has the potential to improve service delivery, enhance access to education through digital platforms, and support entrepreneurship and innovation among youth. With the right governance frameworks, AI can help address local challenges in sectors such as healthcare, agriculture, and disaster response. Overall, addressing these governance gaps presents an opportunity to build inclusive, ethical, and locally relevant AI systems that empower communities rather than exclude them.

The AI Dialogue can play a critical role in advancing international cooperation by serving as an inclusive platform for aligning global efforts on AI governance. It can help bridge gaps between countries at different stages of technological development by fostering shared understanding, trust, and coordinated action. First, the Dialogue can facilitate the harmonization of governance principles and standards, promoting consistency in areas such as ethics, safety, and human rights. This reduces fragmentation and helps countries, especially those with limited regulatory capacity, adopt adaptable and globally informed frameworks. Second, it can promote knowledge-sharing and capacity-building, enabling countries in the Global South to access technical expertise, policy guidance, and best practices. This is essential for ensuring that all regions can meaningfully participate in and benefit from AI development. Third, the Dialogue can support the creation of multi-stakeholder partnerships, bringing together governments, private sector actors, academia, and civil society. Such collaboration is key to addressing complex AI challenges and ensuring that governance approaches are both practical and inclusive. Additionally, the Dialogue can act as a platform to amplify underrepresented voices, including those from developing countries, youth, and vulnerable communities, ensuring that global AI governance reflects diverse perspectives and realities. Finally, it can help establish follow-up mechanisms and cooperative initiatives, such as joint research, policy pilots, and monitoring frameworks, to translate discussions into tangible outcomes. Overall, the AI Dialogue can strengthen international cooperation by promoting coordination, inclusivity, and shared responsibility in shaping a safe, equitable, and sustainable AI future.

The AI Dialogue should build upon existing global and regional initiatives that are already shaping AI governance, while adding value through greater coordination, inclusivity, and action-oriented outcomes. Key initiatives include the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, which provides a globally recognized framework grounded in human rights and ethical principles; the OECD AI Principles, which guide responsible AI development among member and partner countries; and the Global Partnership on AI (GPAI), which promotes international collaboration between governments, industry, and academia. Additionally, processes such as the UN Global Digital Compact and regional efforts across Africa on digital transformation and data governance offer important foundations for alignment. The AI Dialogue can also connect with multi-stakeholder platforms and civil society-led initiatives that focus on digital inclusion, open data, and AI for social good. These efforts are essential for ensuring that governance approaches are not only top-down but also informed by grassroots realities. The added value of the AI Dialogue lies in its ability to bring these fragmented efforts into a more coherent and inclusive global framework. It can serve as a neutral space under the United Nations to align priorities, reduce duplication, and encourage interoperability between different governance approaches. Importantly, the Dialogue can elevate underrepresented voices, particularly from the Global South, youth, and vulnerable communities, ensuring their perspectives shape global standards. It can also focus on translating principles into practice by supporting actionable commitments, pilot initiatives, and measurable follow-up mechanisms. Overall, the AI Dialogue can act as a unifying platform that strengthens collaboration, enhances accountability, and ensures that AI governance is both globally coordinated and locally relevant.

Effective participation in the AI Dialogue requires an inclusive, multi-stakeholder approach where each group contributes its unique expertise and perspective. Governments can provide policy direction, regulatory frameworks, and national priorities, ensuring alignment with public interest and international commitments. Private sector actors can contribute technical expertise, innovation, and practical insights into AI development and deployment. Academia and research institutions can offer evidence-based analysis, risk assessments, and policy recommendations. Civil society organizations, including those working with vulnerable communities, can highlight real-world impacts, advocate for human rights, and ensure accountability. Youth and grassroots actors should also be actively engaged, as they bring fresh perspectives and are directly affected by future AI systems. To ensure meaningful engagement, the AI Dialogue should adopt a hybrid and inclusive format, combining in-person and virtual participation to enable global access, especially for stakeholders from the Global South. Structurally, the Dialogue could include: Plenary sessions for high-level discussions and shared priorities Thematic breakout sessions focused on key areas such as ethics, capacity-building, and human rights Interactive workshops and roundtables to encourage practical problem-solving and collaboration Open consultation segments where participants can share inputs and experiences Additionally, incorporating regional consultations before and after the main Dialogue would ensure that local perspectives inform global discussions and that outcomes are effectively implemented at the regional level. Finally, clear documentation, feedback mechanisms, and follow-up processes should be established to ensure transparency, continuity, and accountability. This structure would promote meaningful participation and translate dialogue into impactful action.

Several important voices remain underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance, which risks creating policies that do not fully reflect global realities. First, communities from the Global South, particularly in Africa, are often excluded due to limited resources, access, and representation in high-level forums. Their perspectives are critical, as they face unique challenges related to infrastructure, digital access, and localized impacts of AI. Second, refugees, displaced persons, and marginalized communities are rarely included, despite being among the most affected by data-driven systems in areas such as identity management, aid distribution, and surveillance. Their lived experiences are essential for shaping ethical and protective governance frameworks. Youth voices are also underrepresented, even though young people are both major users of AI technologies and future leaders in this space. Their inclusion can bring innovation, long-term perspectives, and accountability. Additionally, grassroots organizations and small civil society groups often lack the platforms or resources to participate, yet they have deep insights into community-level impacts. To improve inclusion, the AI Dialogue should provide financial and logistical support such as travel grants, stipends, and connectivity support to enable participation from underrepresented groups. It should also prioritize hybrid and accessible formats, including virtual participation and multilingual engagement. Creating dedicated spaces, such as community panels or stakeholder forums, can ensure these voices are not overshadowed by larger actors. Partnering with local organizations can further help identify and amplify diverse perspectives. Finally, embedding inclusion into decision-making processes—not just consultation—will ensure that these voices meaningfully shape outcomes rather than being symbolically represented.

To foster meaningful and dynamic engagement, the AI Dialogue should move beyond traditional panel discussions and adopt innovative, participatory formats that encourage collaboration, inclusion, and practical outcomes. One effective approach is interactive co-creation workshops, where diverse stakeholders work together in small groups to develop solutions, policy ideas, or prototypes around specific AI governance challenges. This encourages active participation and shared ownership of outcomes. Scenario-based simulations and role-playing sessions can also be impactful. Participants can engage in real-world case studies—such as AI use in humanitarian settings or public services—to better understand risks, trade-offs, and decision-making processes from different perspectives. Multi-stakeholder roundtables with balanced representation (government, private sector, civil society, and youth) can create safe spaces for open dialogue and exchange, especially when moderated to ensure all voices are heard. Incorporating digital engagement tools, such as live polls, collaborative online platforms, and real-time feedback systems, can enhance participation, particularly for virtual attendees and those from remote regions. Another innovative format is "innovation labs" or mini-hackathons, where participants collaborate over a short period to design practical solutions, tools, or frameworks that address specific governance gaps. Additionally, storytelling and lived-experience sessions can provide powerful insights, allowing individuals from underrepresented communities to share how AI impacts their daily lives. This human-centered approach can ground policy discussions in real-world realities. Finally, structured commitment sessions at the end of the Dialogue—where stakeholders present clear actions or partnerships—can help translate engagement into tangible outcomes. These formats would make the Dialogue more inclusive, interactive, and action-oriented.

Several existing policies, frameworks, and platforms provide strong examples of effective AI governance and practical solutions to its challenges. A key global example is the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, which offers a comprehensive human-rights-based framework covering transparency, fairness, accountability, and sustainability. It is widely adopted and provides a strong normative foundation for national AI policies. The OECD AI Principles also stand out as a practical governance framework, guiding countries on responsible AI development, risk management, and trustworthy AI systems. These principles are particularly valuable because they are adaptable across different regulatory environments. At the regional level, the African Union's Digital Transformation Strategy (2020-2030) provides a forward-looking approach to digital governance, including AI. It emphasizes digital inclusion, infrastructure development, and capacity-building across African countries. In practice, data protection laws such as the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) demonstrate how strong legal frameworks can protect privacy and increase accountability in data-driven systems. Many countries are now adapting similar laws to their local contexts. In terms of platforms, initiatives like the Global Partnership on AI (GPAI) promote collaboration between governments, industry, and civil society, supporting research, policy experimentation, and knowledge sharing. Additionally, AI for Good initiatives led by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) highlight how AI can be applied to humanitarian and development challenges, including health, climate, and education. Together, these examples show that effective AI governance requires a combination of ethical frameworks, legal regulation, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and practical implementation platforms. They also demonstrate the importance of adapting global standards to local contexts to ensure inclusive and equitable outcomes.