Southeast Asia’s Approach to AI Regulation: A Business-Friendly Model
Introduction
In recent years, the development of artificial intelligence (AI) has been a topic of global interest and concern. Different regions and countries have varied approaches to AI regulation, with some favoring stringent rules and others opting for a more business-friendly stance. In this article, we will explore Southeast Asia’s approach to AI regulation, which diverges from the European Union’s (EU) efforts to establish globally harmonized rules.
Southeast Asia’s Guide to AI Ethics and Governance
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a 10-member regional organization, has been working on a “guide to AI ethics and governance” that takes a business-friendly approach to AI regulation. This guide, which is currently in draft form and expected to be finalized at the end of January 2024, diverges from the EU’s AI Act in several key aspects.
Unlike the EU’s prescriptive approach, the ASEAN guide acknowledges the importance of cultural differences and does not prescribe unacceptable risk categories. Instead, it emphasizes voluntary compliance and aims to serve as a guiding framework for domestic regulations within ASEAN member countries. This approach recognizes the diversity of Southeast Asian nations, which have distinct rules governing censorship, misinformation, public content, and hate speech.
Business-Friendly Approach
ASEAN’s relatively hands-off approach to AI regulation has been welcomed by technology companies operating in the region. Executives view this approach as more business-friendly, as it reduces the compliance burden and allows for greater innovation. Companies such as Meta (formerly Facebook), IBM, and Google have received the draft guide and are providing feedback.
IBM Asia’s vice president of government affairs, Stephen Braim, commended the guide for aligning closely with other leading AI frameworks, such as the United States’ NIST AI Risk Management Framework. This alignment with established frameworks provides a sense of familiarity and consistency for companies operating globally.
Balancing Benefits and Risks
The ASEAN guide acknowledges the potential benefits of AI while also recognizing the risks it poses. It urges governments to support companies through research and development funding and establishes an ASEAN digital ministers working group on AI implementation. This collaborative approach aims to strike a balance between fostering innovation and managing the risks associated with AI technologies.
Officials from ASEAN countries express optimism about the potential of AI for Southeast Asia. They believe that the EU has been too quick to push for regulation without fully understanding the harms and benefits of AI. By adopting a more cautious and nuanced approach, ASEAN aims to put in place “guardrails” for safer AI without stifling innovation.
AI Risks and Governance
The ASEAN guide advises companies to establish an AI risk assessment structure and provide AI governance training. However, it leaves the specifics to be determined by individual companies and local regulators. This flexibility allows for customized approaches that consider the unique circumstances and needs of each ASEAN member country.
The guide also highlights the risks associated with AI, including misinformation, deepfakes, and impersonation. However, it recognizes that the best way to address these risks may differ among countries and encourages them to find their own solutions. This approach respects the autonomy of ASEAN member countries to develop regulations that suit their specific cultural, social, and legal contexts.
Contrasting Approaches in Asia
Southeast Asia is not the only region taking a business-friendly approach to AI regulation. Other Asian nations, such as Japan and South Korea, have also signaled a more relaxed stance compared to the EU. This divergence raises doubts about the EU’s ambition to establish a global standard for AI governance based on its own rules.
The EU’s push for AI regulation stems from concerns about the rapid development of AI and its potential impact on civil rights and security. The proposed legislation emphasizes risk controls and enforcement. However, ASEAN’s preference for member states to make their own policy determinations sets it on a different track from the EU.
Seeking Common Principles
Despite the differences in approach, EU officials and lawmakers continue to engage in discussions with Southeast Asian states to align over broader principles. While full harmonization is not the goal, the EU recognizes the importance of having similar underlying principles. This recognition of cultural differences seeks to strike a balance between global convergence and local autonomy.
Dutch Minister for Digitalization, Alexandra van Huffelen, emphasizes the importance of agreeing on basic principles of human rights for the responsible use of AI. She remains hopeful that the differences between the EU and Southeast Asia can be bridged through ongoing dialogue.
Conclusion
Southeast Asia’s business-friendly approach to AI regulation, as outlined in the ASEAN guide to AI ethics and governance, highlights the region’s recognition of the importance of cultural differences and the need for flexibility in AI governance. By prioritizing voluntary compliance and guiding domestic regulations, ASEAN aims to strike a balance between fostering innovation and managing AI risks. While diverging from the EU’s harmonization efforts, ongoing discussions between the EU and Southeast Asian states seek to find common principles for the responsible use of AI on a global scale.
