Lobbyist Framing of Artificial Intelligence in Canada

Our research looks at the role lobbying plays in influencing artificial intelligence (AI) policy in Canada, especially during the agenda-setting and problem definition stages. Our research uses Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and policy agenda-setting theory to analyze federal parliamentary committee hearings and to uncover the underlying power dynamics of these stakeholder engagement venues. This research highlights a significant lack of representation of marginalized voices in this public forum, creating additional social exclusion for these groups in AI policymaking. As a result, policy recommendations stemming from these meetings did not properly account for AI-related risks felt by marginalized communities. Our findings show that lobbying groups use specific discursive strategies to further their self-interest, and that negativity bias strongly influences policymakers, prioritizing AI-related risks over benefits. Our findings contribute to the literature on social inclusion, lobbying, and AI governance. Thus, we emphasize the need for more equitable representation in AI policy discussions.

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of the Association for Information Systems
Published
2025-08-15
Primary Topic
Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Lobbyist Framing of Artificial Intelligence in Canada

Journal of the Association for Information Systems
Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
article

Lobbyist Framing of Artificial Intelligence in Canada

article en

Abstract

Our research looks at the role lobbying plays in influencing artificial intelligence (AI) policy in Canada, especially during the agenda-setting and problem definition stages. Our research uses Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and policy agenda-setting theory to analyze federal parliamentary committee hearings and to uncover the underlying power dynamics of these stakeholder engagement venues. This research highlights a significant lack of representation of marginalized voices in this public forum, creating additional social exclusion for these groups in AI policymaking. As a result, policy recommendations stemming from these meetings did not properly account for AI-related risks felt by marginalized communities. Our findings show that lobbying groups use specific discursive strategies to further their self-interest, and that negativity bias strongly influences policymakers, prioritizing AI-related risks over benefits. Our findings contribute to the literature on social inclusion, lobbying, and AI governance. Thus, we emphasize the need for more equitable representation in AI policy discussions.

Journal of the Association for Information Systems
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 37%
Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
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.

Lobbyist Framing of Artificial Intelligence in Canada · Journal of the Association for Information Systems (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS