The UK AI Summit: Time to Elevate Democratic Values

Not long ago, the United States and the United Kingdom were leading the effort to establish global norms for the governance of artificial intelligence (AI). Both nations backed the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) AI Principles of 2019, the first global AI policy framework, and the Global Partnership on AI that followed. But efforts slowed as the European Union took the lead on regulatory efforts with the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, now heading toward the finish line as final negotiations on the Act wrap up later this year.

Now Prime Minister Sunak is hosting a Global Summit on AI Safety from November 1 to 2, following meetings with tech leaders in the UK and the meeting with President Biden in Washington, D.C. Speaking with reporters after the event, Sunak described the United States and the UK as the “world’s foremost AI democratic powers.” He emphasized the shared values of freedom, democracy, and rule of law.

The UK AI summit now provides an opportunity for the United States and the UK to align on policy and move beyond the techno-libertarianism that characterized the early days of AI policymaking in both countries and begin to develop solutions to the challenges of AI, but there are challenges ahead. At the Summit and in future discussions on the role of AI, the UK should work to include civil society, integrate an AI fairness agenda into talks, and ensure that human rights and democratic values are central to any proposed international regulation.

First, the Global AI Summit must be inclusive. Prime Minister Sunak is already under criticism for a preliminary announcement that included statements from only tech CEOs and a plan that appears to sideline academics and civil society. While it is true that the tech CEOs had a White House meeting with the President, the Biden administration also quickly reached out to civil society organizations and labor leaders for input and advice on AI. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has already held an inaugural AI Insight Forum—to gather expert input, albeit behind closed doors, on his proposed SAFE Innovation Act, including the perspectives of labor leaders and civil rights leaders, as well as the insights of practitioners and researchers focused on bias mitigation Prime Minister Sunak would do well to follow the American lead on civil society participation and ensure that the AI Safety Forum fairly reflects those impacted by AI systems, including marginalized communities. 

Second, the AI safety agenda should not ignore the AI fairness agenda. Prime Minister Sunak is right to underscore the need for an international framework to ensure the safe and reliable development of AI. President Biden has also said that companies should not deploy AI systems that are not safe. Mitigating risk is a top priority, but so too is ensuring that AI systems treat people fairly, that systems are accountable, that adverse decisions are contestable, and that transparency is meaningful. In the rush to address existential risk there is the danger that the existing impact of AI on decisions in housing, credit, employment, education, and criminal justice will be ignored. The Prime Minister can address these concerns by including such topics as algorithmic bias, equity, and accountability in the meeting agenda.

Third, human rights and democratic values should remain key pillars of the UK AI Summit. There are many AI policy challenges ahead and several of the solutions do not favor democratic outcomes. For example, countries emphasizing safety and security are also establishing ID requirements for users of AI systems. And the desire to identify users and build massive new troves of personal data is not limited to governments. Several of the tech CEOs, including OpenAI’s Sam Altman and former Google head Eric Schmidt, also favor identity requirements for AI users, even as they argue against regulation of their own AI services. Altman is CEO of a company that is seeking to establish a global biometric database based on eye scans. Requiring biometric data from users of AI while leaving AI systems unregulated is an outcome that democratic states should avoid.

Countries that value human dignity and autonomy should choose instead technical solutions that are less data intensive. The United States and the UK have already launched important work on Privacy Enhancing Technology that could minimize or eliminate the collection of personal data. That work should be encouraged and user identification requirements should be dropped. Strong data protection safeguards will help ensure that AI innovation does not undermine privacy.

The UK government also needs to establish prohibitions and controls on AI systems that violate fundamental rights. The UK has already endorsed the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Recommendation on AI Ethics that proposes a ban on the use of AI for social scoring and mass surveillance. UK domestic law should implement these recommendations as well as other proposed limitations, including biometric categorization, predictive policing, and emotion detection. Drawing these red lines will be critical to ensure that AI systems are both human-centric and trustworthy, key goals set out in the OECD AI Principles and previously endorsed by the United States and the UK.

The renewed commitment to a regulatory framework for the governance of AI is welcome, especially as both the European Union and China pursue regulation for AI. As we have warned previously, the UK’s “light touch” strategy for AI was unlikely to establish the necessary guardrails for the safe deployment of artificial intelligence. President Biden has already warned tech firms that they should not deploy AI systems that are not safe, and the U.S. Congress is now considering several bills, including the Blumenthal-Hawley U.S. AI Act, to govern AI services. Again, the UK would be wise to follow the United States’ lead and build in the necessary guardrails for AI products and services. For the world’s “foremost AI democratic powers,” the summit is an excellent moment to align national AI policies with democratic values.

Merve Hickok is President of the Center for AI and Digital Policy (CAIDP). Marc Rotenberg is Executive Director of CAIDP and a CFR Life Member. CAIDP publishes the AI and Democratic Values Index annually.