Justifying AI regulation: Examining multi-stakeholder responses to the AI Act

The regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) has sparked discussions among stakeholders since the introduction of the European AI Act (AIA) regulatory proposal. This study examines how stakeholders justified their arguments around AI and its regulation in multi-stakeholder feedback on the first draft of the AIA. Drawing on the framework of social justifications (Boltanski and Thévenot, 2006) and leveraging Natural Language Inference (NLI) for assisted reading, the paper identifies areas of contestation and similarity between stakeholders from the technology industry, academia, non-governmental organizations, and the public sector. The findings show that stakeholders employed similar justifications to differing ends, suggesting that there exists some shared conception or tactical recognition of the types of justifications that are considered effective in this context. The paper argues that industry-driven discourse influences how stakeholders argue for and against regulating AI, and that justifications differ in the means they propose for achieving a similar end goal.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Telematics and Informatics
Published
2025-04-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2025.102278
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.10
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Justifying AI regulation: Examining multi-stakeholder responses to the AI Act

Kaisla Kajava, Shintaro Sakai, Ana Paula Gonzalez Torres, Antti Rannisto
3 citations
Telematics and Informatics
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
7.10
article

Justifying AI regulation: Examining multi-stakeholder responses to the AI Act

Kaisla Kajava, Shintaro Sakai, Ana Paula Gonzalez Torres, Antti Rannisto
article en
3 citations

Abstract

The regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) has sparked discussions among stakeholders since the introduction of the European AI Act (AIA) regulatory proposal. This study examines how stakeholders justified their arguments around AI and its regulation in multi-stakeholder feedback on the first draft of the AIA. Drawing on the framework of social justifications (Boltanski and Thévenot, 2006) and leveraging Natural Language Inference (NLI) for assisted reading, the paper identifies areas of contestation and similarity between stakeholders from the technology industry, academia, non-governmental organizations, and the public sector. The findings show that stakeholders employed similar justifications to differing ends, suggesting that there exists some shared conception or tactical recognition of the types of justifications that are considered effective in this context. The paper argues that industry-driven discourse influences how stakeholders argue for and against regulating AI, and that justifications differ in the means they propose for achieving a similar end goal.

Telematics and InformaticsVol. 99
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
7.10
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.