Search

Begin New Search Topic Artificial Intelligence Publication Year within 3 Years

131. A gender perspective on artificial intelligence and jobs: The vicious cycle of digital inequality

Author:
Estrella Gomez-Herrera and Sabine Köszegi
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The worldwide artificial intelligence market is expected to increase enormously in the next few years. Because of AI’s immense potential, virtually all industries will be affected by the implementation of AI systems, resulting in the digitalisation and automation of work processes. This will cause disruptive shifts in labour markets, in terms of the number and profiles of jobs in industries as well as worker skill requirements. We take a gender perspective and analyse how gender stereotypes and gendered work segregation on the one hand, and digitalisation and automation (as a consequence of AI implementation) on the other hand, are entangled and result in a vicious cycle of digital gender inequality. We provide insights into the gender-specific impact of AI technologies, which is relevant for the mitigation of the potential risk of the creation of social inequality and exclusion. We show that existing empirical evidence already indicates that AI will not increase gender equality but will somewhat further exacerbate the gender inequality in labour markets, ranging from further horizontal and vertical occupational gender segregation to an increase in the gender pay gap. We summarise policy guidance and measures to decrease gender inequality in the future.
Topic:
Inequality, Digital Economy, Artificial Intelligence, Gender, and Work
Political Geography:
Global Focus

132. The impact of artificial intelligence on the nature and quality of jobs

Author:
Laura Nurski and Mia Hoffmann
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
Artificial intelligence (AI), like any workplace technology, changes the division of labour in an organisation and the resulting design of jobs. When used as an automation technology, AI changes the bundle of tasks that make up an occupation. In this case, implications for job quality depend on the (re)composition of those tasks. When AI automates management tasks, known as algorithmic management, the consequences extend into workers’ control over their work, with impacts on their autonomy, skill use and workload. We identify four use cases of algorithmic management that impact the design and quality of jobs: algorithmic work-method instructions; algorithmic scheduling of shifts and tasks; algorithmic surveillance, evaluation and discipline; and algorithmic coordination across tasks. Reviewing the existing empirical evidence on automation and algorithmic management shows significant impact on job quality across a wide range of jobs and employment settings. While each AI use case has its own particular effects on job demands and resources, the effects tend to be more negative for the more prescriptive (as opposed to supportive) use cases. These changes in job design demonstrably affect the social and physical environment of work and put pressure on contractual employment conditions as well. As technology development is a product of power in organisations, it replicates existing power dynamics in society. Consequently, disadvantaged groups suffer more of the negative consequences of AI, risking further job-quality polarisation across socioeconomic groups. Meaningful worker participation in the adoption of workplace AI is critical to mitigate the potentially negative effects of AI adoption on workers, and can help achieve fair and transparent AI systems with human oversight. Policymakers should strengthen the role of social partners in the adoption of AI technology to protect workers’ bargaining power.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Economy, Artificial Intelligence, Inclusion, and Work
Political Geography:
Global Focus

133. Future Uncertain: NATO in a Post-Quantum Post-AI World

Author:
James Sperling
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Turkish Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Institution:
Transatlantic Policy Quarterly (TPQ)
Abstract:
The emerging and disruptive technologies of the 21st century—artificial intelligence and quantum technologies—confront NATO with a paradox: the integration of those technologies into national armed forces will significantly narrow and possibly invert the systemic technology dominance NATO has enjoyed since 1945 and widen the technology gap within the Alliance with potentially debilitating consequences for operational effectives and allied cohesion. The precise impact of these disruptive technologies must remain largely speculative, but it is certain that they will change the nature of war-fighting, exacerbate the security dilemma, and precipitate in a recalibration of the global balance of power.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Regional Cooperation, Science and Technology, Military Strategy, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
Europe and North America

134. Commitment to Control Weaponised Artificial Intelligence: A Step Forward for the OSCE and European Security

Author:
Anna Nadibaidze
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
The global debate on weaponised artificial intelligence (AI) often focuses on futuristic “killer robots”, which risks overlooking the fact that these technologies are already part of the security landscape. Diminishing human control over the use of force and the differences in states’ discourse pose a considerable risk for European security and stability. The impact of AI is not inevitable, and states should address this issue through political means, such as a political declaration with a commitment to ensuring human control over the use of force. With its inclusive membership, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) can and should become the platform through which its participating States can take a step forward in the global debate on weaponised AI.
Topic:
Security, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, Artificial Intelligence, and OSCE
Political Geography:
Europe

135. Securing AI-based Security Systems

Author:
Sandra Scott-Hayward
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
Fundamental weaknesses of AI include brittleness, embedded bias, catastrophic forgetting and lack of explainability. Although research is under way to address some of these issues, the adoption of AI techniques and models in security systems exposes potentially critical security systems to weaknesses/vulnerabilities such as these. Adversarial training is one strongly recommended approach to increase the robustness (i.e. reduce the brittleness) of the AI model. In this approach, the training dataset is extended to include adversarial examples representative of potential attacks on the system. However, the implementation of adversarial training is currently ad hoc. Given the evidence of AI weaknesses, the omission of adversarial training and similar hardening techniques for AI-based security systems is unacceptable. Standardised testing and evaluation of AI-based security systems is recommended. From a governance perspective, evidence of adversarial robustness evaluation should be a minimum requirement for the acceptance of an AI-based security system. The production of strong adversarial samples does not account for “black swan” events, i.e. random and unexpected events that have an extreme impact. Given that security systems tend to be designed to detect “old” or “known” types of attack, ways need to be found to manage the occurrence of “new” attacks.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Artificial Intelligence, and Emerging Technology
Political Geography:
Global Focus

136. Women in AI: Is There a Singapore Model?

Author:
Tamara Nair
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
Abstract:
The 4ᵗʰ Industrial Revolution introduced Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence (AI) to the forefront and very soon, if not already, AI will be embedded in almost all spheres of our lives. While AI technologies like Alexa and Siri have female names and voices, there are very few women involved in developing AI products and services. Is there a model Singapore can offer?
Topic:
Industrial Policy, Artificial Intelligence, Industrialization, Emerging Technology, and Gender
Political Geography:
Asia and Singapore

137. Choking off China’s Access to the Future of AI

Author:
Gregory Allen
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
On October 7, 2022, the Biden administration announced a new export controls policy on artificial intelligence (AI) and semiconductor technologies to China. These new controls—a genuine landmark in U.S.-China relations—provide the complete picture after a partial disclosure in early September generated confusion. For weeks the Biden administration has been receiving criticism in many quarters for a new round of semiconductor export control restrictions, first disclosed on September 1. The restrictions block leading U.S. AI computer chip designers, such as Nvidia and AMD, from selling their high-end chips for AI and supercomputing to China. The criticism typically goes like this: China’s domestic AI chip design companies could not win customers in China because their chip designs could not compete with Nvidia and AMD on performance. Chinese firms could not catch up to Nvidia and AMD on performance because they did not have enough customers to benefit from economies of scale and network effects. Because of the new export controls, revenues that formerly flowed to U.S. chip companies will now go to Chinese chip companies, offering a viable path to economies of scale and competitive performance. In the short term, this policy will significantly harm Chinese AI data center companies. However, blocking U.S. AI chip designers from selling their world-leading chips is actually good for China in the longer term because it will strengthen China’s domestic chip design ecosystem. While the reasoning in this criticism is sound, it does not imply that the Biden administration’s actions are self-defeating. Rather, it shows how the policy as disclosed in September was incomplete. A policy like this would not make sense if that is the only step the administration planned to take. Clearly something was missing, and industry experts have been waiting for the other shoe to drop ever since. On October 7, the other shoe dropped. The Biden administration announced a massive policy shift on semiconductor exports to China as well as revised rules for how the lists of restricted parties are managed. In recent decades, U.S. semiconductor policy has been primarily market driven and laissez faire. With the new policy, which comes on the heels of the CHIPS Act’s passage, the United States is firmly focused on retaining control over so-called “chokepoint” (or as it is sometimes translated from Chinese “stranglehold”) technologies in the global semiconductor technology supply chain. The most important chokepoints in the context of this discussion are AI chip designs, electronic design automation software, semiconductor manufacturing equipment, and equipment components. The Biden administration’s latest actions simultaneously exploit U.S. dominance across all four of these chokepoints. In doing so, these actions demonstrate an unprecedented degree of U.S. government intervention to not only preserve chokepoint control but also begin a new U.S. policy of actively strangling large segments of the Chinese technology industry—strangling with an intent to kill.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Hegemony, Artificial Intelligence, Rivalry, and Emerging Technology
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

138. A Two-Track Approach for Trustworthy AI

Author:
Michel Girard
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI)
Abstract:
Standards and certification programs are developed to support new trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI) legislation. Recent developments point to the emergence of a two-track approach. One track would focus on the certification of AI applications embedded in tangible products using objective criteria through established conformity assessment bodies. Regarding AI interacting with humans and used in delivering services, there is a need to create a new track. This track is needed to verify and validate compliance against subjective criteria, values and ethics, seen by many as an integral part of what constitutes trustworthy AI. The practice of “assurance as a service” can be adapted to verify and validate conformance to upcoming trustworthy AI standards. This policy brief provides an update on key legislative and policy developments framing trustworthy AI. It sketches possible approaches for the certification, verification and validation of AI embedded in products and in services and looks at recent proposals regarding the creation of a new chartered profession to deliver assurance services to achieve trustworthy AI.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Regulation, Artificial Intelligence, Emerging Technology, and Trust
Political Geography:
Global Focus

139. Unmanned Aerial Vehicle - a Lethal Weapon of Tomorrow for Terrorists

Author:
Aleksander Olech
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Nowa Polityka Wschodnia
Institution:
Faculty of Political Science and International Studies, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń
Abstract:
Terrorism has been used as a form of combat for centuries. Over the years, the tools used by terrorists have evolved. While attacks with cold weapons still take place, nowadays terrorists also use explosives, machine guns, guided missiles and increasingly often drones. The present growth of the arms market has led to terrorist groups being heavily militarized, as they can successfully acquire modern weapons and subsequently use them in their attacks. This state of affairs has directly affected the security of states and societies, and subsequently became a principal subject of discussion on international security forums. Contemporary global terrorist threats also harness artificial intelligence that supports weaponized robots, missiles, as well as clusters of killer drones. This narrative arose a few years ago, indicating that terrorists may have a vastly greater array of options at their disposal because they may cooperate with some states that would back them up. The chance for terrorist organisations to gain access to artificial intelligence technologies only increased due to the global competition surrounding it. Due to this potential spreading, terrorists will have a chance to operate weapons supported by AI. These events then merge into a deeply concerning scenario which conceivably may have to be confronted. The threat of terrorist organisations possessing and using swarms of drones does not seem to be very distant.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Terrorism, Weapons, Drones, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
Global Focus

140. Commitment to Control Weaponised Artificial Intelligence: A Step Forward for the OSCE and European Security

Author:
Anna Nadibaidze
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Geneva Centre for Security Policy
Abstract:
Recent technological and political developments in OSCE participating States suggest a strong interest in pursuing, testing and using weaponised AI and weapons systems with increasingly autonomous features controlled by algorithms. In May 2021 Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu announced that Russia had begun producing combat robots “capable of fighting on their own”,1 while the French Army is planning to introduce robotic systems by 2040.2 The United Kingdom (UK) government has stated its objective of achieving “a leading role in critical and emerging technologies”3 and has established a Defence Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy Unit to better understand them.4 In the United States, the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence has urged the government “not [to] be a witness to the AI revolution in military affairs”.5 The global discussion about autonomous weapons systems is often framed in a futuristic way and focuses on lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) – colloquially called “killer robots” – or the “AI arms race”. But weaponised AI is already a reality of European security. Thus far participating States have been reluctant to utilise the OSCE platform to address the risks caused by the increasing autonomy of weapons systems. Building on this issue, this essay intends to address the following questions: (1) how does the lack of regulation of weaponised AI affect security and stability in Europe? and (2) what role can the OSCE play in mitigating the risks related to weaponised AI?
Topic:
Science and Technology, Military Strategy, Artificial Intelligence, and Emerging Technology
Political Geography:
Global Focus