Mind the AI policy gap: a policy analysis across global funding bodies

Abstract Research funding bodies have significant influence on what research is prioritised, how it is conducted, and what standards are enforced. While a number of global frameworks provide normative guidance on AI ethics, there is a clear gap in understanding how these principles are implemented at the funding-body level. This study aims to examine the current AI policies and guidelines of research funding bodies across different geographical regions. Inductive thematic analysis was adopted to analyse 56 AI-related policies from 46 funding agencies across the US, the UK, Europe, Australia, Singapore, Mainland China, and Hong Kong. The analysis revealed five common themes: human-centredness, safeguarding, embeddedness, governance, and AI readiness. It was also found that current funding-specific policies lack explicit guidelines on how broad principles and macro-level regulations can be interpreted and applied in AI-enabled research funding processes. The findings underscore the important role of funding agencies as key actors in defining responsible AI use in research processes. Finally, the practical implications of this study for regulators, funding bodies, and researchers are discussed, highlighting the value of policy document analysis in shaping ethical, transparent, and responsible AI frameworks.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
Published
2026-11-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-026-00637-2
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

Mind the AI policy gap: a policy analysis across global funding bodies

Cecilia Ka Yuk Chan
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Mind the AI policy gap: a policy analysis across global funding bodies

Cecilia Ka Yuk Chan
article en

Abstract

Abstract Research funding bodies have significant influence on what research is prioritised, how it is conducted, and what standards are enforced. While a number of global frameworks provide normative guidance on AI ethics, there is a clear gap in understanding how these principles are implemented at the funding-body level. This study aims to examine the current AI policies and guidelines of research funding bodies across different geographical regions. Inductive thematic analysis was adopted to analyse 56 AI-related policies from 46 funding agencies across the US, the UK, Europe, Australia, Singapore, Mainland China, and Hong Kong. The analysis revealed five common themes: human-centredness, safeguarding, embeddedness, governance, and AI readiness. It was also found that current funding-specific policies lack explicit guidelines on how broad principles and macro-level regulations can be interpreted and applied in AI-enabled research funding processes. The findings underscore the important role of funding agencies as key actors in defining responsible AI use in research processes. Finally, the practical implications of this study for regulators, funding bodies, and researchers are discussed, highlighting the value of policy document analysis in shaping ethical, transparent, and responsible AI frameworks.

International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher EducationVol. 23(1)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
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.

Laika access coming soon
Mind the AI policy gap: a policy analysis across global funding bodies — Cecilia Ka Yuk Chan · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS