Historical Analogues That Can Inform AI Governance
ResearchPublished Aug 19, 2024
The author assesses similarities and differences between four historical examples of technology governance—nuclear technology, the Internet, encryption products, and genetic engineering—and artificial intelligence (AI) to identify lessons for AI governance. The author then discusses the importance of norms in technology governance, challenges in governing physical versus nonphysical assets, and partnerships between the public and private sectors.
The increasing capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI) have raised questions about how to maximize its benefits while minimizing the risks that it may pose. Similar questions regarding governance have arisen for four technologies in recent decades: nuclear technology, the Internet, encryption products, and genetic engineering. The histories of their governance illustrate three themes: the need for consensus on norms for the technology, important differences in the governance of physical and nonphysical assets, and the role of partnerships between the public and private sectors in governance. These technologies vary in terms of the resources they require to compete in their development, whether their uses are primarily in the public or private sector, the security risks they pose, consensus on these risks, their physical assets that can be controlled, whether they can foster a community of shared interests for governance, and whether public or private governance is best suited for minimizing risks and maximizing benefits.
Key Findings
- AI that poses serious risks of broad harm, requires substantial resources to acquire and use, and has physical assets that can be monitored and controlled may be suited to a broad international structure for governance similar to that created for nuclear technology.
- AI that poses minimal risks may be suited to a governance model like that created for the Internet.
- AI that is accessible but may pose great risks might be suited to a governance model similar to that used for genetic engineering, but stakeholders should be cautious about applying governance models similar to that used for encryption.
Topics
Document Details
- Copyright: RAND Corporation
- Availability: Available
- Year: 2024
- Print Format: Paperback
- Paperback Pages: 52
- Paperback Price: $17.00
- Paperback ISBN/EAN: 1-9774-1390-0
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/RRA3408-1
- Document Number: RR-A3408-1
Citation
RAND Style Manual
Chicago Manual of Style
Vermeer, Michael J. D., Historical Analogues That Can Inform AI Governance, RAND Corporation, RR-A3408-1, 2024. As of September 23, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA3408-1.html
Vermeer, Michael J. D., Historical Analogues That Can Inform AI Governance. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2024. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA3408-1.html. Also available in print form.
Research conducted by
This research was conducted within the Technology and Security Policy Center of RAND Global and Emerging Risks.
This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.