The Meaning of Transparency in EU’s Regulation of AI

This article examines the concept of transparency in the regulation of artificial intelligence in the European Union, with a particular focus on the transparency requirements in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA). It further compares the legal concept of transparency in the GDPR and the AIA with transparency applied in the computer science literature. Transparency in law appears as an intuitive but also elusive concept, with no firm legal definition. Personal data shall be processed in a ‘transparent manner in relation to the data subject’ as outlined in GDPR Article 5(1)(a), and, according to AIA Article 13(1), high-risk AI systems shall be designed with ‘an appropriate type and degree’ of transparency. To better understand these and other legal transparency requirements applicable to the regulation of AI, the article offers an analytical framework of three distinct transparency concepts. Appropriate transparency, pursuant to the GDPR and the AIA, may be achieved by a combination of three types of transparency: simplicity, observation and explanation. These three distinct aspects of transparency have different qualities and should not be confused with each other.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Oslo Law Review
Published
2026-08-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.18261/olr.13.1.4
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Meaning of Transparency in EU’s Regulation of AI

Lars Arnesen
Oslo Law Review
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

The Meaning of Transparency in EU’s Regulation of AI

Lars Arnesen
article en

Abstract

This article examines the concept of transparency in the regulation of artificial intelligence in the European Union, with a particular focus on the transparency requirements in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA). It further compares the legal concept of transparency in the GDPR and the AIA with transparency applied in the computer science literature. Transparency in law appears as an intuitive but also elusive concept, with no firm legal definition. Personal data shall be processed in a ‘transparent manner in relation to the data subject’ as outlined in GDPR Article 5(1)(a), and, according to AIA Article 13(1), high-risk AI systems shall be designed with ‘an appropriate type and degree’ of transparency. To better understand these and other legal transparency requirements applicable to the regulation of AI, the article offers an analytical framework of three distinct transparency concepts. Appropriate transparency, pursuant to the GDPR and the AIA, may be achieved by a combination of three types of transparency: simplicity, observation and explanation. These three distinct aspects of transparency have different qualities and should not be confused with each other.

Oslo Law ReviewVol. 13(1)
Norwegian Computing Center (NO), University of Oslo (NO)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
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.