The real AI challenge: A ‘geopolitics of ethics’ makesit hard to agree on globalrules, experts sayFrance, Canada and othes are pushing for some international ‘rules of theroad’ for artificial intelligence. But differing cultures, industries and policiescomplicate efforts to develop a global approach, say international expertsat a Science|Business conference.

www.sciencebusiness.net  |  1

By Richard L. Hudson and Nicholas Wallace

Deciding how to regulateartificial intelligence is provinga tough task for lawmakersaround the world. In fact, itmay take a special AI systemto figure it all out. “We see the global communitystruggling to develop globalsolutions” for AI governance, saidAndrea Renda, a researcher atthe Centre for European PolicyStudies, a Brussels think tank. Indeed, more than 90 public andprivate groups around the worldhave published suggestedguidelines for AI ethics – butthere is no consensus yet onwhat, in concrete terms,governments should do about it.“It is not enough to focus ongeneral principles,” said AnnaJobin, an ETH Zurich researcherwho has analysed all theguidelines.

Now, she said, “we need to workon implementation.” A step towards action wasconfirmed 30 October by FrenchPresident Emmanuel Macron,who said France and Canada willfund “centres of excellence” forinternational AI policy work inParis and Montreal, working withthe Organisation for EconomicCooperation and Development. He described it as an effort “tofoster debate and hopefullyreach a consensus on key issues,such as facial recognition.” Butthe European Union, China, theUS, Canada, Russia and other AIinvestors aren’t in agreementyeton what to do exactly – and thatcould take some years todevelop, if itever does.

The difficulties, discussed at aScience|Business conferenceon AI governance 23September, boil down to oneoverarching issue: How tofashion policies that helphumanity get the benefits of AIwithout the potential harm? The benefits could be vast. AIcould help doctors improvediagnosis and treatment,teachers train students moreeffectively or humanity manageclimate change. Industry andthe economy would alsobenefit: In South Africa,researchers will start exploringwhether AI can make miningmore efficient. But equally, AI could causemore “flash crashes” in financialmarkets, violate privacy on amassive scale, discriminateagainst minority populations orworsen social tensions. “We need to make sure AI doesnot aggravate the digital divide,”said Beeuwen Gerryts, a chiefdirector in South Africa’sDepartment of Science andInnovation. Complicating the AI governancetask is a difference in viewsaround the world. Indeed, a“geopolitics of ethics” hasstarted to appear, noted JimDratwa, an ethics specialist inthe European Commission. EU policy in the worksIn Brussels, the Commission isrushing to fulfil a pledge byincoming President Ursula vonder Leyen to develop the firstcomprehensive policy on AIethics within the first 100 daysof her tenure, expected to start1 December.

7 November 2019

www.sciencebusiness.net    |    2

Lucilla Sioli, director for AI and digital industryat the Commission’s tech policy division, DGConnect, said that the AI work will be “part of anindustrial policy, balancing regulation with theneed not to stifle innovation in the market.”  Amajor priority, she said, is to get the benefits ofAI – but avoid the potential harm that couldturn people against AI. “Our main objective is toensure deployment, not to slow it down.” Sioli said the framework will build on work bythe Commission’s High-Level Expert Group onAI. The group this year published ethicalguidelines for AI development – for instance,that AI systems be “transparent” so peoplecanunderstand how they work, and that therebe “accountability” if something goes wrong. The EU is betting that a head-start on ethicsregulation could also benefit its globalcompetitiveness: “Some say China has all thedata, and the US has all the money. But inEurope, we have purpose,” is howCommissioner Margrethe Vestager put it at an8 October European Parliament hearing.In theParliament, the concerns are palpable. “We areworried about the (potential) problems,” saidMaria Manuel Leitão Marques, vice chair of theEuropean Parliament’s Internal Market andConsumer Protection Committee, at theScience|Business conference. Among MEPs, “Ifear a lack of confidence (in the technology)could be more important than optimism aboutthe results” when deciding on legislation.

The key question, she said: “Is AI for good orevil?” To avoid a backlash, she said, ethicalprinciples must be built into new AI systems.“We need to introduce ethics by design, to planfor AI for good from the beginning.” If society isto see the benefits of AI, people must trust it.“How do we replace fear with enthusiasm, likein the early days of the Internet?” The Montreal principlesCanada is coupling investment in basic AIresearch with studies of ethical risks arisingfrom different implementations of AI, said RémiQuirion, chief scientist of the Province ofQuebec. In 2017 researchers at the Universityof Montreal and partners began drafting one ofthe first global statements of ethical principlesfor AI – and it has become “a living document”that is being updated with input from others, asthe technology and concerns change. For anyresulting policies, he said, “we have to beengaging citizens” openly, rather than makingtop-level political decisions in isolation. Quirion added that with AI applications sovaried, it was important to have a focus area,which for Quebec is climate change. “Everyonewants AI, but they don’t know what for,” henoted.

Beeuwen Gerryts, Chief Director, Technology Localisation,Beneficiation and Advanced Manufacturing, Department ofScience and Innovation, Republic of South Africa

Lucilla Sioli, Director, Artificial intelligence and Digital industry,DG Communications, Networks, Content and Technology,European Commission

Maria Manuel Leitão Marques, Member; Vice-Chair,Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection,European Parliament

Meanwhile, OECD work helped lead in May to“the beginning of a global policy benchmark” for“trustworthy” AI, said Karine Perset,administrator for AI policy at the OECD. The 36OECD countries and six partners adopted a setof international standards for the responsiblestewardship of trustworthy AI systems. Like theEU ethics principles, the OECD principles are“high level” and provide for flexibility to meetthe test of time, she said. At a June meeting inJapan, the G20 nations also agreed to a set ofethical guidelines drawn from the OECD’sprinciples. Next, the OECD is working on its AIPolicy Observatory, to help countries implementthe AI Principles by monitoring global AI trends,data, policies and case studies, as well asanalysing policy and offering guidance to policymakers.

www.sciencebusiness.net    |  3

These different uses not only throw up risks,they also present dilemmas on which differentcountries and cultures can disagree – forinstance, what’s more important: the right toknow how an AI system is handling data aboutyou and being able to seek redress for misuse,or deploying AI systems efficiently andaccurately so society gets the benefit of them?“Is there a trade-off between accuracy andefficiency, vs. societal outcomes?” Renda asked. AI also touches every policy area – never aneasy situation for ministries accustomed todealing with policy in silos. For instance, AIaffects EU cohesion policy because it couldworsen differences in digital developmentbetween Europe’s richer and poorer regions.Further, experts at the Science|Businessconference said, it won’t work for one region ofthe world to try to set policy on its own; actionmust be global. No country an islandIndeed, AI industry leaders are starting to urgesome global action, rather than risk seeing theworld market divided up into conflicting legalregimes. Collectively, global investment in AI isexpected to hit $37.5 billion this year, accordingto market-research firm IDC.  That makes itcostly for industry if every government takes adifferent direction on regulation, fragmentingmarkets and creating unexpected liabilities.

That OECD effort, Macron said in October, willsupport a G7 agreement to set up a “GlobalPartnership for AI”. The Canadian governmentin September announced plans to spend C$15million over five years on a related Montreal-based AI centre. And Macron said the sister-centre in Paris will open next year France’spublic ICT research organisation, INRIA. At thesame time, the Saudi government is planning AIwork as incoming G20 chair; and Japan, China,the US and other governments have beenweighing in with plans of their own. Part of the diplomatic problem lies in the sheerdiversity of AI uses, from autonomous vehiclesto market trading software, said Renda ofCEPS. 

Rémi Quirion, Chief Scientist, Québec

Karine Perset, Administrator, Digital Economy and ArtificialIntelligence Policy, OECD

About Science|BusinessWe are a meeting-point in Brussels forstrategic discussion of all aspects ofresearch and innovation policy. Wemanage a network of over 60universities, companies, and public-sector organisations – from theSorbonne University to Imperial CollegeLondon, Microsoft to Sanofi, and CERNto South Africa’s Ministry of Science andTechnology. Our members conveneregularly for private and publicmeetings and we produce special policyreports and a regular news service onR&I developments.

“Legislators need to wake up to the ethicaldilemmas this is creating”, said CorneliaKutterer, senior director for EU governmentaffairs at Microsoft. Facial recognition is fraughtwith complications and needs a lot moreconsideration around how it should and shouldnot be used, she said. For instance, do securityobjectives justify the digital processing of facesof innocent people, other than peoplesuspected of crimes and persons of interest? Atwhat point does a facial recognition systembecome acceptable for public use to ensuresafety, and what are the implications of allowingit to be used everywhere? We need to have therule of law enshrined in our fundamental rightsgoverning how this technology is used, she said. For all of these issues, said the Commission’sDratwa, there is a need for “mapping ofdifferent initiatives that are popping up all overthe world,” and building bridges between them. The ultimate question, he said: “What kind ofworld do we want to live in together?”

www.sciencebusiness.net    | 4

Cornelia Kutterer, Senior Director, EU Government Affairs,Microsoft

Jim Dratwa, Head, European Group on Ethics, DG Research andInnovation, European Commission

© 2019 Science Business Publishing Ltd.Avenue des Nerviens 79, Brussels, Belgium 1040

info@sciencebusiness.net+322-304-7577

@scibus