Agency of Digital Transformation, State of Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
Responses
In your opinion, what outcomes would make the first Global Dialogue on AI Governance a success?
Moving beyond principles toward practical cooperation, with concrete mechanisms for joint work and knowledge exchange. Establishment of working groups with specific agendas and the participation of actors directly involved in AI governance, including governments, companies, academia, civil society, and technical institutions. A clear strategy for dialogue with big tech companies and academic institutions to foster practical collaboration around AI governance. Recognition that AI governance cannot rely only on legal frameworks, but must also include technical capacities such as evaluation, alignment, risk assessment, monitoring, and auditing. Launch of a call for case studies focused on relevant real-world scenarios, including critical AI use cases in government and the private sector. Development of practical outputs from the Dialogue, such as shared methodologies and governance tools and recommendations that can be adapted across different institutional contexts.
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
- AI capacity-building
- Transparency, accountability, and human oversight
- Protection and promotion of human rights
Please briefly explain your selection.
3
As governments, we face a big challenge: there are many avaliable solutions for better public policy with use of AI (desaster prevention, security, health). On the other hand, public officials in Brazil are, in average, very low skilled to understend and avaluate technology possibilities and risks. We need to have tools and frameworks that allow governments to guarantee oversight and checks and balances. In the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, we are creating an Ethical Comitee, with academia participation, to make this possible. But there are still so many gaps on how this Comitee should act regarding explicability, impact measuring and other relevant topics. We are excited to build frameworks that could be reproduced in other locations and governments.
In your opinion, are there any cross-cutting or emerging issues not captured by the listed themes above? If so, please explain.
1
Cross-sector cooperation: AI governance should include meaningful dialogue with those who produce, deploy, and shape AI systems.
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.
In Brazil, the use of AI in government is already a reality. However, there are serious gaps in the capacity of public servants to understand and monitor its impacts and risks, as well as to build technically appropriate solutions for the intended use cases. These challenges are compounded by a lack of transparency, which reduces the capacity for external checks and balances.
What role can the AI Dialogue play in advancing international cooperation on AI governance?
The AI Dialogue can bring together people with different capacities and perspectives to work jointly on common problems. It can also help move beyond dialogue itself by establishing concrete frameworks for long-term cooperation on AI 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?
The AI Dialogue should build upon existing initiatives such as GovAI, MATS, Mila, UNESCO's work on ethical AI, and the OECD AI initiatives. Its added value would be to foster coordination among different actors and help scale discussions and solutions that are already being developed.
Which voices, communities, or perspectives are currently underrepresented in global discussions on AI governance? How could they be included?
The Global South, especially Latin America. Being invited is an important first step, but continuous collaboration requires active efforts to fund and support participation.
What innovative engagement formats could most effectively foster meaningful and dynamic engagement during the AI Dialogue?
Activities with automated translation could enhance the participation of non-English speakers. AI-generated subtitles, in particular, could make a significant difference.
Please share examples of policies, practices, platforms, or approaches that promote effective AI governance or offer concrete solutions to addressing its challenges.
2
One example is the State AI Ethics Committee, proposed as part of the Fluminense Artificial Intelligence Policy (PIAF) in the State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The Committee is designed as a consultative body to support the responsible use of AI in government. Its role would include conducting technical studies, requesting information, engaging with public institutions, academia, civil society, and experts, and proposing guidelines, good practices, and complementary governance measures. This approach can help address a key challenge in AI governance: moving from broad principles to practical institutional capacity. A body such as this can support the assessment of concrete AI use cases, including questions of transparency, risk, technical adequacy, human oversight, and accountability.