LIST OF PANELS

The panel aims to bring together an interdisciplinary set of scholars exploring artificial intelligence (AI) policy and governance from across the globe. It seeks to push the frontiers of the state-of-the-art with critical research inquiries across four dimensions: 

(1)    Conceptually, the panel addresses scholarly complacency with "techno-solutionist" ideology (Morozov 2014; Paul 2022). It explores how, and to what effect, notions of rational problem-solving and discourses proposing technical fixes for ethical questions such as algorithmic bias, explainability, or undemocratic surveillance depoliticise AI governance. How can we apply, inter alia, normative democracy theory, gender studies, decolonial lenses, critical political economy, or studies on grassroots movements most fruitfully to explore the hidden politics of governing (with) AI and inequalities resulting from it?

(2)    Analytically speaking, the panel draws on the – so far rare – work of policy analysts and science and technology scholars focusing on the concrete practices of governing AI beyond “the letter of the law”, for example by using ethnographic methods to generate data (i.e. in the case of predictive policing ‘on the ground’: Sandhu and Fussey 2021; Selten et al. 2023). How do public authorities across the world use chatbots or algorithmic scoring systems in their daily operations, how do they concretize existing AI policies when doing so (Liu, Lin and Chen 2019)? How do actors in regulatory sandboxes or standardization fora struggle over meanings of “responsible AI”? How do such policy concretizations vary across space, why so, and to what effect for global AI governance? How do Big Tech corporations tap into the data wealth of marginalized communities in their increasing involvement in the humanitarian sector?

(3)    Empirically, the panel enrichens existing analyses on European and North American cases. Based on our experience in running the Surveillance in the Majority World Network (Akbari), we aim to explore articulations of AI policy and governance in usually marginalized places, all while contextualizing them in geopolitical power struggle over AI between the US, China and Europe (Bradford 2023). For example, how do Asian jurisdictions negotiate a common AI governance framework or facilitate normative interactions when faced with the rise of China as a regulatory power? How do diverse political, economic, and cultural contexts in Asian or Latin American jurisdictions shape AI governance regimes at multiple levels? How do global autocratisation tendencies affect efforts for “human-centric” AI governance? How do colonial legacies shape tech diplomacy interactions between African countries and Europe and what strategies emerge to counteract hegemonic global AI governance (Birhane 2020; Omutobora and Basu 2024)?

(4)    The panel aims to unfold societal impact by going beyond a "desk-based critique" of contemporary AI governance. Inspired by critical AI studies (Pasquinelli 2023), surveillance studies (Akbari 2022) and critical policy studies (Fischer 2016), we ask: how can our joint research, engaging critically with ideology and power in contemporary AI policy and governance, help generate alternative pathways for more democratic and sustainable AI futures? How can collaborative interdisciplinary work and policymaking address the complex global nature of AI governance in an intersectional and situated way?

AI is reshaping societies across the globe, but discourses surrounding its governance have often been conditioned by uneven power dynamics, techno-solutionist ideologies, and lack of socio-economic contexts. As AI systems become integral also public sector decision-making and define how various actors exercise authority at various governance levels, it is crucial to critically examine how AI governance frameworks are constructed. How do policy norms and practices travel across the globe? To what extent do they reflect the diverse social, economic, cultural, and political underpinnings in respective jurisdictions or regions? How do countries outside the global power centers (in this case: the US, China and Europe) adapt, localize, re-shape, negotiate, or resist global norms and institutional regulatory frameworks?

We call for papers which explore the deeper political, ethical, legal, and social dimensions of global AI governance, with a special emphasis on the diverse theoretical, empirical, and methodological perspectives across contexts.  We invite scholars from across disciplines—political science, ethics, law, technology studies, gender studies, decolonial studies, critical political economy, and more—to submit papers that engage with the following themes and questions:

Conceptualizing AI Governance in Political and Socioeconomic Contexts
How does the framing of AI governance as a technical issue depoliticize the policy landscape, and what are the ramifications?  How can we analyze the politics of AI policymaking in ways that render ideological underpinnings, power asymmetries, hegemonic forms of knowledge generation and use, global inequalities resulting from AI uses, or big tech regulatory capture in AI governance more visible? What are the ideological underpinnings of current AI governance approaches, and how do they reinforce global power asymmetries? How can normative democracy theory, critical political economy, gender studies, or decolonial perspectives contribute to the understanding of AI policymaking?

Global Perspectives: AI Governance in the “Majority World”
How do the “Brussels Effect,” “Washington Effect,” or even “Beijing Effect” shape the forms and substance of global AI governance? How can theory and analysis be built from a “Majority World” (i.e. those countries outside the Northern and Western jurisdictions which dominate the debates) perspective aiming for epistemic justice in the knowledge production on AI governance? How do multinational corporations’ policy practices in standardization fora or government procurement arrangements impact various AI regulatory initiatives? What are drivers and trajectories of the normative interactions between countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America in AI governance, in light of in their unique geopolitical contexts? How do colonial legacies influence AI policymaking and tech diplomacy relations?

From Critique to Construction: Building Democratic and Sustainable AI Futures

How can interdisciplinary research on AI governance generate alternative pathways for more democratic and socially just AI futures? How can we understand and address the injustices induced by AI systems in an intersectional way? What theoretical frameworks, methodological choices, and practical strategies can policymakers, civil society, and academics adopt to navigate the growing governance complex of AI governance and ensure equitable AI futures?  

Please submit abstracts of 300-500 words, outlining the research question, methodology, empirical research program and expected contribution.