AI Governance Cannot Be Left to Technologists Alone
AI governance decisions are being made by technologists and policymakers while billions of affected citizens are excluded. Democratic processes are essential for legitimate AI regulation.
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence has sparked urgent debates about safety, alignment, and regulation. Yet the frameworks being developed to govern AI are largely shaped by the same technology companies that stand to profit from its deployment, supplemented by a small group of government officials and academic researchers.
Who Is Missing from the Table?
Workers whose jobs may be displaced. Communities targeted by algorithmic surveillance. Artists whose creative works train generative models. Patients whose medical data feeds diagnostic systems. Voters whose information environment is shaped by recommendation algorithms.
These stakeholders are not abstract. They are billions of people whose lives are being reshaped by AI decisions made in boardrooms and research labs thousands of miles away.
The Limits of Expert-Led Governance
Technical expertise is necessary but insufficient for AI governance. The question of whether a facial recognition system should be deployed in public spaces is not purely technical -- it involves tradeoffs between security and privacy, between efficiency and civil liberties, between majority convenience and minority rights.
These are fundamentally democratic questions. They require democratic processes to resolve legitimately.
Toward Democratic AI Governance
Several models show promise:
- Citizens assemblies on AI -- Ireland and France have demonstrated that ordinary citizens, given adequate information and deliberation time, can make nuanced recommendations on complex technology policy
- Participatory technology assessment -- Involving affected communities in evaluating AI systems before deployment, not after harm has occurred
- Global AI observatories -- Publicly funded institutions that monitor AI development and deployment, reporting to citizens rather than to industry
- Democratic standard-setting -- Moving AI safety standards from voluntary industry commitments to democratically legitimated regulation
The Path Forward
AI governance is too important to be left to any single stakeholder group. Technology companies bring technical knowledge. Governments bring regulatory authority. Civil society brings the perspectives of affected communities. But only democratic processes can legitimately balance these interests.
The Global Federation is designed to facilitate exactly this kind of cross-border democratic deliberation. As AI systems increasingly operate across national boundaries, the need for transnational democratic governance of AI becomes not aspirational but essential.