Cihon, Maas, & Kemp: Fragmentation and the Future: Investigating Architectures for International AI Governance

Peter Cihon, Matthijs M. Maas, & Luke Kemp have published Fragmentation and the Future: Investigating Architectures for International AI Governance (Global Policy, Vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 545-556, November 2020). Here's the abstract:

The international governance of artificial intelligence (AI) is at a crossroads: should it remain fragmented or be centralised? We draw on the history of environment, trade, and security regimes to identify advantages and disadvantages in centralising AI governance. Some considerations, such as efficiency and political power, speak for centralisation. The risk of creating a slow and brittle institution, and the difficulty of pairing deep rules with adequate participation, speak against it. Other considerations depend on the specific design. A centralised body may be able to deter forum shopping and ensure policy coordination. However, forum shopping can be beneficial, and fragmented institutions could self‐organise. In sum, these trade‐offs should inform development of the AI governance architecture, which is only now emerging. We apply the trade‐offs to the case of the potential development of high‐level machine intelligence. We conclude with two recommendations. First, the outcome will depend on the exact design of a central institution. A well‐designed centralised regime covering a set of coherent issues could be beneficial. But locking‐in an inadequate structure may pose a fate worse than fragmentation. Second, fragmentation will likely persist for now. The developing landscape should be monitored to see if it is self‐organising or simply inadequate.

NY Times: U.N. Reclassifies Cannabis as a Less Dangerous Drug

From the NY Times: U.N. Reclassifies Cannabis as a Less Dangerous Drug - "A United Nations commission voted to remove marijuana for medical use from a list of the most risky narcotics, such as heroin.."

NY Times: Leadership of U.N. Human Rights Body Becomes Proxy Battle for World Powers

From the NY Times: Leadership of U.N. Human Rights Body Becomes Proxy Battle for World Powers - "A fight over the council’s presidency is seen by some as an effort by China, Russia and Saudi Arabia to put a more compliant state in control ahead of greater involvement by the Biden administration."

Hirschmann: Accountability in Global Governance: Pluralist Accountability in Global Governance

Gisela Hirschmann (Leiden Univ. - Institute of Political Science) has published Accountability in Global Governance: Pluralist Accountability in Global Governance (Oxford Univ. Press 2020). Here's the abstract:

How can international organizations (IOs) like the United Nations (UN) and their implementing partners be held accountable if their actions and policies violate fundamental human rights? This book provides a new conceptual framework to study pluralist accountability, whereby third parties hold IOs and their implementing partners accountable for human rights violations.

Based on a rich study of UN-mandated operations in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Kosovo, the EU Troika's austerity policy, and Global Public-Private Health Partnerships in India, this book analyzes how competition and human rights vulnerability shape the evolution of pluralist accountability in response to diverse human rights violations, such as human trafficking, the violation of the rights of detainees, economic rights, and the right to consent in clinical trials. While highlighting the importance of alternative accountability mechanisms for legitimacy of IOs, this book also argues that pluralist accountability should not be regarded as a panacea for IOs' legitimacy problems, as it is often less legalized and might cause multiple accountability disorder.

Special Issue: Global Power Shifts: How do International Institutions Adjust?

The latest issue of Global Policy (Vol. 11, Supp. no. 3, October 2020) is a special issue on "Global Power Shifts: How do International Institutions Adjust?" The table of contents is here.