{"title":"平衡技术与伦理的两条路径:中德人工智能治理比较研究","authors":"Viktor Tuzov , Fen Lin","doi":"10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102850","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>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.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":22290,"journal":{"name":"Telecommunications Policy","volume":"48 10","pages":"Article 102850"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two paths of balancing technology and ethics: A comparative study on AI governance in China and Germany\",\"authors\":\"Viktor Tuzov , Fen Lin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.telpol.2024.102850\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>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.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22290,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Telecommunications Policy\",\"volume\":\"48 10\",\"pages\":\"Article 102850\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Telecommunications Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596124001472\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telecommunications Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596124001472","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Two paths of balancing technology and ethics: A comparative study on AI governance in China and Germany
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.
期刊介绍:
Telecommunications Policy is concerned with the impact of digitalization in the economy and society. The journal is multidisciplinary, encompassing conceptual, theoretical and empirical studies, quantitative as well as qualitative. The scope includes policy, regulation, and governance; big data, artificial intelligence and data science; new and traditional sectors encompassing new media and the platform economy; management, entrepreneurship, innovation and use. Contributions may explore these topics at national, regional and international levels, including issues confronting both developed and developing countries. The papers accepted by the journal meet high standards of analytical rigor and policy relevance.