IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/telpol/v48y2024i10s0308596124001472.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Two paths of balancing technology and ethics: A comparative study on AI governance in China and Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Tuzov, Viktor
  • Lin, Fen

Abstract

Artificial intelligence is rapidly becoming a transformative technology on the agenda of global competition. Although it provides groundbreaking opportunities to benefit societies, the technology also evokes tremendous concerns about potential risk and harm. Mitigating such risks and turning technology into a responsible asset for humanity have been essential agendas in the emerging global architecture of AI governance. Thus, this study proposes an integrated CAMS framework of AI governance to examine the content, actors, means, and scope of AI technology regulations in China and Germany. Regarding AI governance as an active negotiation and regulatory trajectory, we investigate laws and policies on AI governance and the policy-making processes in both countries and articulate two paths of balancing technology and ethics. China adopts a utility-oriented approach featuring a state-led governance structure with complex central-local dynamics. In the Chinese model, AI technology is a driver of economic development, and ethics serves as a utilitarian tool to safeguard the advancement of technology. Germany constructs a right-based approach governed by multisectoral discussion and cooperation platforms with state supervision. In the German model, AI technology is a high-risk arena, and ethics represents the rights for which technological development should serve. This comparative study offers nuance to further understand the dynamic transformation of emerging AI governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Tuzov, Viktor & Lin, Fen, 2024. "Two paths of balancing technology and ethics: A comparative study on AI governance in China and Germany," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:48:y:2024:i:10:s0308596124001472
    DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102850
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596124001472
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102850?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Blind, Knut & Mangelsdorf, Axel, 2016. "Motives to standardize: Empirical evidence from Germany," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 13-24.
    2. Simon, Adam F. & Xenos, Michael, 2004. "Dimensional Reduction of Word-Frequency Data as a Substitute for Intersubjective Content Analysis," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(1), pages 63-75, January.
    3. Palladino, Nicola, 2023. "A ‘biased’ emerging governance regime for artificial intelligence? How AI ethics get skewed moving from principles to practices," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5).
    4. Inga Ulnicane & William Knight & Tonii Leach & Bernd Carsten Stahl & Winter-Gladys Wanjiku, 2021. "Framing governance for a contested emerging technology:insights from AI policy [The next space race is Artificial Intelligence]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(2), pages 158-177.
    5. Fritz Sager, 2009. "Governance and Coercion," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57, pages 537-558, October.
    6. Vesnic-Alujevic, Lucia & Nascimento, Susana & Pólvora, Alexandre, 2020. "Societal and ethical impacts of artificial intelligence: Critical notes on European policy frameworks," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).
    7. Helen Margetts & Cosmina Dorobantu, 2019. "Rethink government with AI," Nature, Nature, vol. 568(7751), pages 163-165, April.
    8. Peter Cihon & Matthijs M. Maas & Luke Kemp, 2020. "Fragmentation and the Future: Investigating Architectures for International AI Governance," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 11(5), pages 545-556, November.
    9. Fritz Sager, 2009. "Governance and Coercion," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(3), pages 537-558, October.
    10. Roxana Radu, 2021. "Steering the governance of artificial intelligence: national strategies in perspective [AI ethics guidelines inventory]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(2), pages 178-193.
    11. Feijóo, Claudio & Kwon, Youngsun & Bauer, Johannes M. & Bohlin, Erik & Howell, Bronwyn & Jain, Rekha & Potgieter, Petrus & Vu, Khuong & Whalley, Jason & Xia, Jun, 2020. "Harnessing artificial intelligence (AI) to increase wellbeing for all: The case for a new technology diplomacy," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6).
    12. Jia, Kai & Kenney, Martin & Mattila, Juri & Seppälä, Timo, 2018. "The Application of Artificial Intelligence at Chinese Digital Platform Giants: Baidu, Alibaba and Tencent," ETLA Reports 81, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    13. Araz Taeihagh, 2021. "Governance of artificial intelligence [Application of artificial intelligence for development of intelligent transport system in smart cities]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(2), pages 137-157.
    14. Allen, Beth, 1990. "Information as an Economic Commodity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 268-273, May.
    15. Irwin, Alan & Vedel, Jane Bjørn & Vikkelsø, Signe, 2021. "Isomorphic difference: Familiarity and distinctiveness in national research and innovation policies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vasiliki Koniakou, 2023. "From the “rush to ethics” to the “race for governance” in Artificial Intelligence," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 71-102, February.
    2. Eryn Rigley & Caitlin Bentley & Joshua Krook & Sarvapali D. Ramchurn, 2024. "Evaluating international AI skills policy: A systematic review of AI skills policy in seven countries," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(1), pages 204-217, February.
    3. Fritz Sager & Yvan Rielle, 2013. "Sorting through the garbage can: under what conditions do governments adopt policy programs?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 46(1), pages 1-21, March.
    4. Saima Javed & Yu Rong & Babar Nawaz Abbasi, 2024. "Convergence analysis of artificial intelligence research capacity: Are the less developed catching up with the developed ones?," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(4), pages 2172-2192, May.
    5. Tero Erkkilä, 2023. "Global indicators and AI policy: Metrics, policy scripts, and narratives," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(5), pages 811-839, September.
    6. Josep Lloret & Rafael Abós-Herràndiz & Sílvia Alemany & Rosario Allué & Joan Bartra & Maria Basagaña & Elisa Berdalet & Mònica Campàs & Arnau Carreño & Montserrat Demestre & Jorge Diogène & Eva Fontde, 2020. "The Roses Ocean and Human Health Chair: A New Way to Engage the Public in Oceans and Human Health Challenges," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-19, July.
    7. Ohmura, Tamaki & Creutzburg, Leonard, 2021. "Guarding the For(es)t: Sustainable economy conflicts and stakeholder preference of policy instruments," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    8. Nicole Lemke & Philipp Trein & Frédéric Varone, 2023. "Agenda-setting in nascent policy subsystems: issue and instrument priorities across venues," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(4), pages 633-655, December.
    9. Jongheon Kim, 2023. "Traveling AI‐essentialism and national AI strategies: A comparison between South Korea and France," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(5), pages 705-728, September.
    10. Esmat Zaidan & Imad Antoine Ibrahim, 2024. "AI Governance in a Complex and Rapidly Changing Regulatory Landscape: A Global Perspective," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-18, December.
    11. Eva Thomann, 2018. "“Donate your organs, donate life!” Explicitness in policy instruments," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(4), pages 433-456, December.
    12. Inga Ulnicane & Tero Erkkilä, 2023. "Politics and policy of Artificial Intelligence," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(5), pages 612-625, September.
    13. Daniel S. Schiff, 2023. "Looking through a policy window with tinted glasses: Setting the agenda for U.S. AI policy," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(5), pages 729-756, September.
    14. Frederiksen, Marianne Harbo & Wolf, Patricia & Klotz, Ute, 2024. "Citizen visions of drone uses and impacts in 2057: Far-future insights for policy decision-makers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    15. Ingold, Karin & Stadelmann-Steffen, Isabelle & Kammermann, Lorenz, 2019. "The acceptance of instruments in instrument mix situations: Citizens’ perspective on Swiss energy transition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    16. Marullo, Cristina & Ahn, Joon Mo, 2024. "Knowledge tensions and decision-making challenges in open innovation: Standardization as a de-biasing mechanism," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    17. Justus Baron & Jorge Contreras & Martin Husovec & Pierre Larouche, 2019. "Making the Rules: The Governance of Standard Development Organizations and their Policies on Intellectual Property Rights," JRC Research Reports JRC115004, Joint Research Centre.
    18. Baron, Justus, 2020. "Counting standard contributions to measure the value of patent portfolios - A tale of apples and oranges," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3).
    19. Sanjith Gopalakrishnan & Moksh Matta & Hasan Cavusoglu, 2022. "The Dark Side of Technological Modularity: Opportunistic Information Hiding During Interorganizational System Adoption," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(3), pages 1072-1092, September.
    20. Tan Yigitcanlar & Rashid Mehmood & Juan M. Corchado, 2021. "Green Artificial Intelligence: Towards an Efficient, Sustainable and Equitable Technology for Smart Cities and Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-14, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:telpol:v:48:y:2024:i:10:s0308596124001472. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30471/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.