Search results

ABSTRACT
The rapid developments in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the intensification in the adoption of AI in domains such as autonomous vehicles, lethal weapon systems, robotics and alike pose serious challenges to governments as they must manage the scale and speed of socio-technical transitions occurring. While there is considerable literature emerging on various aspects of AI, governance of AI is a significantly underdeveloped area. The new applications of AI offer opportunities for increasing economic efficiency and quality of life, but they also generate unexpected and unintended consequences and pose new forms of risks that need to be addressed. To enhance the benefits from AI while minimising the adverse risks, governments worldwide need to understand better the scope and depth of the risks posed and develop regulatory and governance processes and structures to address these challenges. This introductory article unpacks AI and describes why the Governance of AI should be gaining far more attention given the myriad of challenges it presents. It then summarises the special issue articles and highlights their key contributions. This special issue introduces the multifaceted challenges of governance of AI, including emerging governance approaches to AI, policy capacity building, exploring legal and regulatory challenges of AI and Robotics, and outstanding issues and gaps that need attention. The special issue showcases the state-of-the-art in the governance of AI, aiming to enable researchers and practitioners to appreciate the challenges and complexities of AI governance and highlight future avenues for exploration.

What are the similarities and differences between crowdsourcing and sharing economy? What factors influence their use in developing countries? In light of recent developments in the use of IT-mediated technologies, such as crowdsourcing and the sharing economy, this manuscript examines their similarities and differences, and the challenges regarding their effective use in developing countries. We first examine each individually and highlight different forms of each IT-mediated technology. Given that crowdsourcing and sharing economy share aspects such as the use of IT, a reliance on crowds, monetary exchange, and the use of reputation systems, we systematically compare the similarities and differences of different types of crowdsourcing with the sharing economy, thus addressing a gap in the current literature. Using this knowledge, we examine the different challenges faced by developing countries when using crowdsourcing and the sharing economy, and highlight the differences in the applicability of these IT-mediated technologies when faced with specific development issues.

AbstractThe deepening integration of social-technical systems creates immensely complex environments, creating increasingly uncertain and unpredictable circumstances. Given this context, policymakers have been encouraged to draw on complexity science-informed approaches in policymaking to help grapple with and manage the mounting complexity of the world. For nearly eighty years, complexity-informed approaches have been promising to change how our complex systems are understood and managed, ultimately assisting in better policymaking. Despite the potential of complexity science, in practice, its use often remains limited to a few specialised domains and has not become part and parcel of the mainstream policy debate. To understand why this might be the case, we question why complexity science remains nascent and not integrated into the core of policymaking. Specifically, we ask what the non-technical challenges and barriers are preventing the adoption of complexity science into policymaking. To address this question, we conducted an extensive literature review. We collected the scattered fragments of text that discussed the non-technical challenges related to the use of complexity science in policymaking and stitched these fragments into a structured framework by synthesising our findings. Our framework consists of three thematic groupings of the non-technical challenges: (a) management, cost, and adoption challenges; (b) limited trust, communication, and acceptance; and (c) ethical barriers. For each broad challenge identified, we propose a mitigation strategy to facilitate the adoption of complexity science into policymaking. We conclude with a call for action to integrate complexity science into policymaking further.

AbstractIn recent years, many sectors have experienced significant progress in automation, associated with the growing advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning. There are already automated robotic weapons, which are able to evaluate and engage with targets on their own, and there are already autonomous vehicles that do not need a human driver. It is argued that the use of increasingly autonomous systems (AS) should be guided by the policy of human control, according to which humans should execute a certain significant level of judgment over AS. While in the military sector there is a fear that AS could mean that humans lose control over life and death decisions, in the transportation domain, on the contrary, there is a strongly held view that autonomy could bring significant operational benefits by removing the need for a human driver. This article explores the notion of human control in the United States in the two domains of defense and transportation. The operationalization of emerging policies of human control results in the typology of direct and indirect human controls exercised over the use of AS. The typology helps to steer the debate away from the linguistic complexities of the term "autonomy." It identifies instead where human factors are undergoing important changes and ultimately informs about more detailed rules and standards formulation, which differ across domains, applications, and sectors.