Author: saaronso

Posted on

AI and Trade: The WTO’s Thoughtful but Incomplete Assessment

When the World Trade Organization (WTO) decided in 2024 to produce a report on the trade implications of artificial intelligence (AI), it set out to answer two key questions: How can the WTO help ensure that the benefits of AI are widespread? And, how can the challenges surrounding AI be addressed in a globally coordinated manner? This paper analyses the WTO’s findings and explores how AI is prompting a re-examination of trade rules as well as how and what nations trade. Following an analysis of the trade and technology relationship, the author then discusses how AI poses challenges to how trade is conducted and the current rules system. The author’s recommendations for the WTO include partnering with civil society groups that have expertise in competition policy and data governance; doing research on trade-related global issues; and using trade policy reviews to better understand global data markets.

Read more

Read More Publications

Posted on

China-U.S. Rivalry Will Split the World into Competing AI Camps

The U.S. and China both put forward plans for artificial intelligence last month. The two have long sought to lead on AI, and their competition has led to technological breakthroughs, lower costs, and wider use of the technology. But as their new plans illustrate, that competition may also divide the world into competing realms of AI products and governance.

Read more

Read More Publications

Posted on

Taking the Wrong Lesson from China’s AI Strategy

Taking the Wrong Lesson from China’s AI Strategy

The United States is mimicking China’s approach to centralized data, risking privacy, security and democratic accountability in the name of AI leadership.

Chinese leaders early on recognized the importance of data for artificial intelligence (AI). In 2015, officials announced incentives to treat data as a key factor of production. More recently, China became the first country to create official markets for data. Chinese policy makers developed standards that enabled private entities to claim data as an asset on balance sheets. But China may have made a data “misstep.” In 2014, Beijing announced that it would allow government agencies to share data about Chinese companies and citizens, create a centralized scoring mechanism to assess the financial creditworthiness of individuals and companies, and use that data to nudge citizens toward state-sanctioned “moral values.” Observers noted that the plan has yielded mixed results, and spillover effects such as corruption and distrust. Nonetheless, on April 1, 2025, the government announced new guidelines on the social credit system, intended to create a “unified national market.”

Although the Trump administration has worked to thwart China’s AI leadership, it is copying some aspects of China’s data policies by creating a unified federal data set.

Read more

Read More Publications

Posted on

Regrets of the Tech Bros: In a land ruled by the law of the jungle

On his Inauguration Day, Donald Trump sent a message. The founders and CEOs of Apple,Amazon, Google, Meta, Open AI, and Uber, among other giant high-tech companies, sat in the front rows near the Trump family and cabinet nominees. Trump and his staff wanted to use that display of innovation, money, and power to convey that he was supported by America’s most successful companies. In turn, these leaders hoped the administration would ease the regulation of data-driven technologies and the business practices (surveillance capitalism) followed by many of these giant firms.

However, some two months later, many of these tech bros may regret their unabashed support for the future Trump
promised.

Read more

Read More Publications

Posted on

The Dangers of AI Nationalism and Beggar-Thy-Neighbour Policies

As they attempt to nurture and govern AI, some nations are acting in ways that – with or without direct intent – discriminate among foreign market actors. For example, some governments are excluding foreign firms from access to incentives for high-speed computing, or requiring local content in the AI supply chain, or adopting export controls for the advanced chips that power many types of AI. If policy makers in country X can limit access to the building blocks of AI – whether funds, data or high-speed computing power – it might slow down or limit the AI prowess of its competitors in country Y and/or Z. At the same time, however, such policies could violate international trade norms of non-discrimination. Moreover, if policy makers can shape regulations in ways that benefit local AI competitors, they may also impede the competitiveness of other nations’ AI developers. Such regulatory policies could be discriminatory and breach international trade rules as well as long-standing rules about how nations and firms compete – which, over time, could reduce trust among nations. In this article, the author attempts to illuminate AI nationalism and its consequences by answering four questions:

– What are nations doing to nurture AI capacity within their borders?

– Are some of these actions trade distorting?

 – Are some nations adopting twenty-first century beggar thy neighbour policies?

– What are the implications of such trade-distorting actions?

The author finds that AI nationalist policies appear to help countries with the largest and most established technology firms across multiple levels of the AI value chain. Hence, policy makers’ efforts to dominate these sectors, as example through large investment sums or beggar thy neighbour policies are not a good way to build trust.

Read more

Read More Publications

Posted on

Talking to a Brick Wall: The US Government’s Response to Public Comments on AI

April 28, 2025

Building trust in artificial intelligence (AI) is an elusive goal, especially if AI models are closed or partially open, making it difficult for users to determine if these models are reliable, fair or trustworthy. For this reason, the Biden administration sought public input on the potential risks and benefits of these models as well as policy approaches. In an executive order, he tasked the assistant secretary of commerce for communications and information (who was also head of the National Telecommunications and Information Agency [NTIA]) to solicit feedback through a public consultation process. NTIA advises the president on information, telecommunications and related technology policy, including AI. The author used a landscape analysis to examine the dialogue between US officials and the public response. Although some 300 Americans participated in the dialogue, these commenters did not provide a representative sample of Americans who use or might be affected by open versus closed AI systems. Those who did provide their opinions likely had a direct stake in these issues. The dialogue was also dysfunctional because policy makers did not really listen to — or even report on — what they heard.

Read more

Read More Publications

Posted on

US Import Tariffs Will Hurt Americans, Too

February 12, 2025
A tractor is parked beside a greenhouse in Kingsville, Ontario, Canada, February 4, 2025. A 25 percent US tariff on farm imports from Canada would be devastating for the agricultural sector (Carlos Osorio/REUTERS)

US President Donald Trump views tariffs as his Swiss Army Knife. He can use the threat of tariffs to prod other countries to change a wide range of domestic and international policies. For example, in a January 23 speech to the World Economic Forum, he said, “Come make your product in America….But if you don’t make your product in America, which is your prerogative, then, very simply, you will have to pay a tariff.”

But Trump’s tariffs will also harm American citizens and companies as he reinforces his authority. Employees and communities in affected sectors will have to contend with lost income, economic instability, job insecurity and job losses. These groups will have little leverage to dismantle tariffs once they are imposed.

Read more

Read More Publications

Posted on

Trump 2.0: Clash of the tech bros

December 11, 2024
The tech giants courting Trump administration officials have conflicting interests.
Getty Images

In 2016, tariff man couldn’t care less about tech. Newly elected U.S. President Donald J. Trump knew that the people who created and ran America’s tech giants were richer and smarter than him. Moreover, they had different values. They embraced openness, accountability, and the rule of law in international affairs. Moreover, they generally advocated for increased immigration of skilled workers, open markets, and relatively unfettered cross-border data flows. Unsurprisingly, his first term was characterized by disputes with many tech giants, including Facebook and Amazon. However, tech leaders and government officials had a common concern: China’s innovative tech firms.

Read more

Read More Publications

Posted on

The Age of AI Nationalism and Its Effects

September 30, 2024

Policy makers in many countries are determined to develop artificial intelligence (AI) within their borders because they view AI as essential to both national security and economic growth. Some countries have proposed adopting AI sovereignty, where the nation develops AI for its people, by its people and within its borders. In this paper, the author makes a distinction between policies designed to advance domestic AI and policies that, with or without direct intent, hamper the production or trade of foreign-produced AI (known as “AI nationalism”). AI nationalist policies in one country can make it harder for firms in another country to develop AI. If officials can limit access to key components of the AI supply chain, such as data, capital, expertise or computing power, they may be able to limit the AI prowess of competitors in country Y and/or Z. Moreover, if policy makers can shape regulations in ways that benefit local AI competitors, they may also impede the competitiveness of other nations’ AI developers. AI nationalism may seem appropriate given the import of AI, but this paper aims to illuminate how AI nationalistic policies may backfire and could divide the world into AI haves and have nots.

Read more

Read More Publications

Posted on

AI could become the ‘new steel’ as overcapacity risk goes unnoticed

July 24, 2024
Policymakers in the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Japan, the U.K., and the EU have announced huge public investments in artificial intelligence, which follow large private sector investments.
Hu Guan – Xinhua – Getty Images

In the 19th century, government officials came to understand that steel would be essential to both economic growth and national security. Thus, they devised policies that could sustain local production as well as prevent foreign producers from competing in domestic markets.

While steel and AI could not be more different, many economists view AI as a general-purpose technology that can stimulate both economic growth and innovation. Hence, policymakers must ensure domestic capacity.

However, many government officials also already see AI as a critical technology essential to both national security and economic progress.

Read more

Read More Publications

Viewing Message: 1 of 1.
 Notice

This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. Visit GW’s Website Privacy Notice to learn more about how GW uses cookies.