IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v68y2022ics0160791x21003183.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Voluntary safety commitments provide an escape from over-regulation in AI development

Author

Listed:
  • Han, The Anh
  • Lenaerts, Tom
  • Santos, Francisco C.
  • Pereira, Luís Moniz

Abstract

With the introduction of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and related technologies in our daily lives, fear and anxiety about their misuse as well as their inherent biases, incorporated during their creation, have led to a demand for governance and associated regulation. Yet regulating an innovation process that is not well understood may stifle this process and reduce benefits that society may gain from the generated technology, even under the best intentions. Instruments to shed light on such processes are thus needed as they can ensure that imposed policies achieve the ambitions for which they were designed. Starting from a game-theoretical model that captures the fundamental dynamics of a race for domain supremacy using AI technology, we show how socially unwanted outcomes may be produced when sanctioning is applied unconditionally to risk-taking, i.e. potentially unsafe, behaviours. We demonstrate here the potential of a regulatory approach that combines a voluntary commitment approach reminiscent of soft law, wherein technologists have the freedom of choice between independently pursuing their course of actions or establishing binding agreements to act safely, with either a peer or governmental sanctioning system of those that do not abide by what they pledged. As commitments are binding and sanctioned, they go beyond the classic view of soft law, akin more closely to actual law-enforced regulation. Overall, this work reveals how voluntary but sanctionable commitments generate socially beneficial outcomes in all scenarios envisageable in a short-term race towards domain supremacy through AI technology. These results provide an original dynamic systems perspective of the governance potential of enforceable soft law techniques or co-regulatory mechanisms, showing how they may impact the ambitions of developers in the context of the AI-based applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Han, The Anh & Lenaerts, Tom & Santos, Francisco C. & Pereira, Luís Moniz, 2022. "Voluntary safety commitments provide an escape from over-regulation in AI development," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:68:y:2022:i:c:s0160791x21003183
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101843
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X21003183
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101843?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. Alessandro Tavoni & Astrid Dannenberg & Giorgos Kallis & Andreas L�schel, 2011. "Inequality, communication and the avoidance of disastrous climate change," GRI Working Papers 34, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    2. Vítor V. Vasconcelos & Francisco C. Santos & Jorge M. Pacheco, 2013. "A bottom-up institutional approach to cooperative governance of risky commons," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(9), pages 797-801, September.
    3. de Neufville, Robert & Baum, Seth D., 2021. "Collective action on artificial intelligence: A primer and review," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    4. Sandy Campart & Etienne Pfister, 2014. "Technological races and stock market value: evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Post-Print halshs-00933723, HAL.
    5. Tatsuya Sasaki & Isamu Okada & Satoshi Uchida & Xiaojie Chen, 2015. "Commitment to Cooperation and Peer Punishment: Its Evolution," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-14, November.
    6. Martin A. Nowak & Akira Sasaki & Christine Taylor & Drew Fudenberg, 2004. "Emergence of cooperation and evolutionary stability in finite populations," Nature, Nature, vol. 428(6983), pages 646-650, April.
    7. Vincenzo Denicolo & Luigi A. Franzoni, 2010. "On the Winner-Take-All Principle in Innovation Races," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 8(5), pages 1133-1158, September.
    8. Sandy Campart & Etienne Pfister, 2014. "Technological races and stock market value: evidence from the pharmaceutical industry," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 215-238, April.
    9. Chen, Xiao-ping & Komorita, S. S., 1994. "The Effects of Communication and Commitment in a Public Goods Social Dilemma," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 367-386, December.
    10. The Anh Han & Luís Moniz Pereira & Tom Lenaerts & Francisco C Santos, 2021. "Mediating artificial intelligence developments through negative and positive incentives," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-21, January.
    11. Mariarosaria Taddeo & Luciano Floridi, 2018. "Regulate artificial intelligence to avert cyber arms race," Nature, Nature, vol. 556(7701), pages 296-298, April.
    12. Ricardo Vinuesa & Hossein Azizpour & Iolanda Leite & Madeline Balaam & Virginia Dignum & Sami Domisch & Anna Felländer & Simone Daniela Langhans & Max Tegmark & Francesco Fuso Nerini, 2020. "The role of artificial intelligence in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
    13. Todd Cherry & David McEvoy, 2013. "Enforcing Compliance with Environmental Agreements in the Absence of Strong Institutions: An Experimental Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 54(1), pages 63-77, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Paolo Bova & Alessandro Di Stefano & The Anh Han, 2023. "Both eyes open: Vigilant Incentives help Regulatory Markets improve AI Safety," Papers 2303.03174, arXiv.org.
    2. Tan, Bing Qing & Kang, Kai & Zhong, Ray Y., 2023. "Electric vehicle charging infrastructure investment strategy analysis: State-owned versus private parking lots," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 54-71.
    3. Sarita Rosenstock, 2023. "Beneficence Signaling in AI Development Dynamics," Papers 2305.02561, arXiv.org.
    4. Liu, Linjie & Chen, Xiaojie, 2022. "Effects of interconnections among corruption, institutional punishment, and economic factors on the evolution of cooperation," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 425(C).

    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. Federica Alberti & Edward J. Cartwright, 2016. "Full agreement and the provision of threshold public goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 205-233, January.
    2. Chica, Manuel & Hernández, Juan M. & Santos, Francisco C., 2022. "Cooperation dynamics under pandemic risks and heterogeneous economic interdependence," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    3. Jorge M Pacheco & Vítor V Vasconcelos & Francisco C Santos & Brian Skyrms, 2015. "Co-evolutionary Dynamics of Collective Action with Signaling for a Quorum," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-12, February.
    4. Andreas Löschel & Dirk Rübbelke, 2014. "On the Voluntary Provision of International Public Goods," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 81(322), pages 195-204, April.
    5. Yan, Fang & Hou, Xiaorong & Tian, Tingting & Chen, Xiaojie, 2023. "Nonlinear model reference adaptive control approach for governance of the commons in a feedback-evolving game," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    6. Valentina Bosetti & Melanie Heugues & Alessandro Tavoni, 2017. "Luring others into climate action: coalition formation games with threshold and spillover effects," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(2), pages 410-431.
    7. Greer Gosnell & Alessandro Tavoni, 2017. "A bargaining experiment on heterogeneity and side deals in climate negotiations," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 575-586, June.
    8. Tavoni, Alessandro & Levin, Simon, 2014. "Managing the climate commons at the nexus of ecology, behaviour and economics," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60823, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Jon Truby, 2020. "Governing Artificial Intelligence to benefit the UN Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 946-959, July.
    10. Du, Jinming, 2019. "Redistribution promotes cooperation in spatial public goods games under aspiration dynamics," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 363(C), pages 1-1.
    11. The Anh Han & Luís Moniz Pereira & Tom Lenaerts & Francisco C Santos, 2021. "Mediating artificial intelligence developments through negative and positive incentives," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-21, January.
    12. Ding, Rui & Wang, Xianjia & Liu, Yang & Zhao, Jinhua & Gu, Cuiling, 2023. "Evolutionary games with environmental feedbacks under an external incentive mechanism," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    13. Appelbaum, Elie & Katz, Eliakim, 2022. "Bonding by guilt: A resolution of the finite horizon prisoners’ dilemma," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    14. Christian Feige & Karl-Martin Ehrhart & Jan Krämer, 2018. "Climate Negotiations in the Lab: A Threshold Public Goods Game with Heterogeneous Contributions Costs and Non-binding Voting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(2), pages 343-362, June.
    15. Astrid Dannenberg & Andreas Löschel & Gabriele Paolacci & Christiane Reif & Alessandro Tavoni, 2015. "On the Provision of Public Goods with Probabilistic and Ambiguous Thresholds," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(3), pages 365-383, July.
    16. Flávio L Pinheiro & Vítor V Vasconcelos & Francisco C Santos & Jorge M Pacheco, 2014. "Evolution of All-or-None Strategies in Repeated Public Goods Dilemmas," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-5, November.
    17. Chica, Manuel & Santos, Francisco C., 2023. "Seeding leading cooperators and institutions in networked climate dilemmas," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    18. Adil Baykasoğlu & Burcu Kubur Özbel, 2021. "Explicit flow-risk allocation for cooperative maximum flow problems under interval uncertainty," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 2149-2179, September.
    19. Chen, Yunong & Belmonte, Andrew & Griffin, Christopher, 2021. "Imitation of success leads to cost of living mediated fairness in the Ultimatum Game," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 583(C).
    20. Balint, T. & Lamperti, F. & Mandel, A. & Napoletano, M. & Roventini, A. & Sapio, A., 2017. "Complexity and the Economics of Climate Change: A Survey and a Look Forward," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 252-265.

    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:teinso:v:68:y:2022:i:c:s0160791x21003183. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.