Artificial Intelligence (AI) has transitioned from a niche computational field to a foundational General-Purpose Technology (GPT) that exerts a Schumpeterian force of creative destruction across the global economy. This chapter synthesizes the volume’s findings to map the transition from today’s fragmented regime complex toward a coherent, polycentric governance architecture as a system with multiple, semi-autonomous centers of decision-making (e.g., states, regulators, courts, standards bodies, firms, and civil society) that are coordinated through shared norms, interoperability, and mutual accountability. By integrating the principled, pragmatic and framework, the chapter argues that the normative core of AI policy must transcend binary debates between innovation and regulation. Instead, it advocates for institutionalizing adaptive governance, leveraging compute thresholds, Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), and  standardize evolving epistemic resources (evaluation reports, provenance/logging records, red-team scenario libraries, and post-deployment monitoring results), to balance technological acceleration with fundamental rights, democratic accountability, and ecological constraints.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Conclusion

  • Ann Fitz-Gerald,
  • Vijay Ganesh,
  • Jatin Nathwani,
  • Maral Niazi,
  • Münür Sacit Herdem

摘要

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has transitioned from a niche computational field to a foundational General-Purpose Technology (GPT) that exerts a Schumpeterian force of creative destruction across the global economy. This chapter synthesizes the volume’s findings to map the transition from today’s fragmented regime complex toward a coherent, polycentric governance architecture as a system with multiple, semi-autonomous centers of decision-making (e.g., states, regulators, courts, standards bodies, firms, and civil society) that are coordinated through shared norms, interoperability, and mutual accountability. By integrating the principled, pragmatic and framework, the chapter argues that the normative core of AI policy must transcend binary debates between innovation and regulation. Instead, it advocates for institutionalizing adaptive governance, leveraging compute thresholds, Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), and  standardize evolving epistemic resources (evaluation reports, provenance/logging records, red-team scenario libraries, and post-deployment monitoring results), to balance technological acceleration with fundamental rights, democratic accountability, and ecological constraints.