The launch of ChatGPT in late 2022 led to major controversies about the governance of generative artificial intelligence (AI). This article examines the first international governance and policy initiatives dedicated specifically to generative AI: the G7 Hiroshima process, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development reports, and the UK AI Safety Summit. This analysis is informed by policy framing and governance literature, in particular by the work on technology governance and Responsible Innovation. Emerging governance of generative AI exhibits characteristics of polycentric governance, where multiple and overlapping centers of decision-making are in collaborative relationships. However, it is dominated by a limited number of developed countries. The governance of generative AI is mostly framed in terms of the risk management, largely neglecting issues of purpose and direction of innovation, and assigning rather limited roles to the public. We can see a “paradox of generative AI governance” emerging, namely, that while this technology is being widely used by the public, its governance is rather narrow. This article coins the term “governance fix” to capture this rather narrow and technocratic approach to governing generative AI. As an alternative, it suggests embracing the politics of polycentric governance and Responsible Innovation that highlight democratic and participatory co-shaping of technology for social benefit. In the context of the highly unequal distribution of power in generative AI characterized by a high concentration of power in a small number of large tech companies, the government has a special role in reshaping the power imbalances by enabling wide-ranging public participation in the governance of generative AI.

中文翻译：

---

治理修复？关于治理生成人工智能的争议中的权力和政治


ChatGPT 于 2022 年底推出，引发了有关生成式人工智能 (AI) 治理的重大争议。本文探讨了第一个专门针对生成人工智能的国际治理和政策举措：七国集团广岛进程、经济合作与发展组织报告和英国人工智能安全峰会。该分析以政策框架和治理文献为基础，特别是技术治理和负责任创新方面的工作。新兴的生成人工智能治理呈现出多中心治理的特征，其中多个重叠的决策中心处于协作关系。然而，它由少数发达国家主导。生成式人工智能的治理大多以风险管理为框架，很大程度上忽视了创新的目的和方向问题，并赋予公众相当有限的作用。我们可以看到一个“生成式人工智能治理的悖论”正在出现，即虽然这项技术被公众广泛使用，但其治理却相当狭窄。本文创造了“治理修复”一词来描述这种相当狭隘且技术官僚的治理生成人工智能的方法。作为替代方案，它建议拥抱多中心治理和负责任创新的政治，强调技术的民主和参与性共同塑造，以实现社会利益。在生成型人工智能权力分配高度不平等、权力高度集中于少数大型科技公司的背景下，政府在通过让公众广泛参与治理来重塑权力失衡方面发挥着特殊作用生成式人工智能。