Navigating Governance Paradigms: A Cross-Regional Comparative Study of Generative AI Governance Processes & Principles

As Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) technologies evolve at an unprecedented rate, global governance approaches struggle to keep pace with the technology, highlighting a critical issue in the governance adaptation of significant challenges. Depicting the nuances of nascent and diverse governance approaches based on risks, rules, outcomes, principles, or a mix, across different regions around the globe, is fundamental to discern discrepancies and convergences, and to shed light on specific limitations that need to be addressed, thereby facilitating the safe and trustworthy adoption of GenAI. In response to the need and the evolving nature of GenAI, this paper seeks to provide a collective view of different governance approaches around the world. Our research introduces a Harmonized GenAI Framework, “H-GenAIGF”, based on the current governance approaches of six regions: (European Union (EU), United States (US), China (CN), Canada (CA), United Kingdom (UK), and Singapore (SG)). We have identified four constituents, fifteen processes, twenty-five sub-processes, and nine principles that aid the governance of GenAI, thus providing a comprehensive perspective on the current state of GenAI governance. In addition, we present a comparative analysis to facilitate identification of common ground and distinctions based on coverage of the processes by each region. The results show that risk-based approaches allow for better coverage of the processes, followed by mixed approaches. Other approaches lag behind, covering less than 50% of the processes. Most prominently, the analysis demonstrates that amongst the regions, only one process aligns across all approaches, highlighting the lack of consistent and executable provisions. Moreover, our case study on ChatGPT reveals process coverage deficiency, showing that harmonization of approaches is necessary to find alignment for GenAI governance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society
Published
2024-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1609/aies.v7i1.31692
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.68

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Navigating Governance Paradigms: A Cross-Regional Comparative Study of Generative AI Governance Processes & Principles

José Diogo Forte de Oliveira Luna, Xiaofei Xie, Lingxiao Jiang, Ivan Tan
7 citations
Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
3.68
article

Navigating Governance Paradigms: A Cross-Regional Comparative Study of Generative AI Governance Processes & Principles

José Diogo Forte de Oliveira Luna, Xiaofei Xie, Lingxiao Jiang, Ivan Tan
article en
7 citations

Abstract

As Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) technologies evolve at an unprecedented rate, global governance approaches struggle to keep pace with the technology, highlighting a critical issue in the governance adaptation of significant challenges. Depicting the nuances of nascent and diverse governance approaches based on risks, rules, outcomes, principles, or a mix, across different regions around the globe, is fundamental to discern discrepancies and convergences, and to shed light on specific limitations that need to be addressed, thereby facilitating the safe and trustworthy adoption of GenAI. In response to the need and the evolving nature of GenAI, this paper seeks to provide a collective view of different governance approaches around the world. Our research introduces a Harmonized GenAI Framework, “H-GenAIGF”, based on the current governance approaches of six regions: (European Union (EU), United States (US), China (CN), Canada (CA), United Kingdom (UK), and Singapore (SG)). We have identified four constituents, fifteen processes, twenty-five sub-processes, and nine principles that aid the governance of GenAI, thus providing a comprehensive perspective on the current state of GenAI governance. In addition, we present a comparative analysis to facilitate identification of common ground and distinctions based on coverage of the processes by each region. The results show that risk-based approaches allow for better coverage of the processes, followed by mixed approaches. Other approaches lag behind, covering less than 50% of the processes. Most prominently, the analysis demonstrates that amongst the regions, only one process aligns across all approaches, highlighting the lack of consistent and executable provisions. Moreover, our case study on ChatGPT reveals process coverage deficiency, showing that harmonization of approaches is necessary to find alignment for GenAI governance.

Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and SocietyVol. 7
Singapore Management University (SG)
National Research Foundation, National Research Foundation Singapore, Ministry of Education - Singapore, Bộ Giáo dục và Ðào tạo
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
3.68
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.