Recurring Series
What happens when governments rely on systems that sound right instead of being right? Drawing on OpenFisca’s spread from France to governments across Europe, Africa, and Oceania, Beth Simone Noveck’s interview with Matti Schneider makes the case for public infrastructure that computes the law, as well as the risks of sidelining it as generative AI scales globally.
Across contexts like India, where author Anirudh Dinesh’s family lives, AI chatbots such as xAI’s Grok are increasingly used not to inform but to generate arguments that reinforce existing political views, creating “generative echo chambers.” Unlike passive social media exposure, users actively prompt AI to validate positions, often producing confident but inaccurate claims that go unchecked. While some research suggests AI can moderate views in neutral dialogue, real-world use skews toward advocacy, compounded by low verification and high trust in outputs. The result is that AI may not just reflect polarization, but actively deepen it, depending on how these systems are designed and used.
Developed by the International Training Centre of the International Labour Organization with and for employer organizations, ReguLens responds to a growing policy bottleneck. The rapid surge in complex, overlapping regulations is outpacing institutional capacity. Built through iterative co-creation with users across regions, the tool helps organizations analyze proposals, identify impacts, and engage earlier in policy debates.
Designing a one-hour course on democratic engagement and AI means confronting genuinely hard questions about representativeness, political framing, and audience, where thoughtful experts disagree, and every choice involves a real tradeoff. Over the past week, we drafted, debated, and cut more than 25,000 words to a working script, informed by over 300 comments from 50 advisors across 24 countries and a room full of democratic theorists in Barcelona. This post explains the three hardest calls we had to make and why we made them.
Growing up in Kakuma refugee camp, Nhial Deng experienced what it means to be excluded from opportunities. Returning years later, he saw young people using AI not as aid, but as a tool to build skills, income, and futures in real time. This piece argues that AI is already functioning as an economic opportunity layer, but one that remains uneven and fragile without intentional design. Drawing on examples from Canada, Singapore, and Kenya, Deng outlines how governments can move from accidental access to structured opportunity by connecting AI to jobs, embedding it in trusted institutions, and building safeguards alongside deployment.
Dr. Sara Bazoobandi examines how Iran’s doctrine of “knowledge jihad” shaped the development of its digital and AI infrastructure, transforming technology into an instrument of state control. The piece traces how this system, built for surveillance and centralized authority, has also created strategic fragility, offering a cautionary lesson for democracies designing the foundations of AI governance.
In this commentary, originally published by InDaily South Australia, Matt Ryan argues that artificial intelligence can help governments deliver more effective, human-centered services, but only if it builds public trust and democratic legitimacy. Drawing on examples from Spain, San Francisco, and the UK, he outlines a path for South Australia to develop “sovereign AI capability.” His proposal focuses on three priorities: participatory AI governance, stronger public-sector AI skills, and reinvesting efficiency gains into public services, ensuring AI improves government while strengthening democracy.
In this interview, B Cavello discusses findings from an Aspen Institute global survey and reflects on what it reveals about the intersection of AI and food systems. Practitioners consistently emphasized institutional capacity, governance, and distributional challenges as central constraints. The conversation explores how AI might support greater transparency, participation, and resilience, and what these insights mean for U.S. state and local policymakers working on food security, land governance, and public-sector capacity.
Building domestic AI systems or reducing reliance on big tech is not the same as making AI work for the public. Examples such as Spain’s ALIA project, the EU AI Act, and Italy’s new AI law show that ownership and regulation go only so far. What really matters is whether public institutions have the people, skills, and authority to oversee these systems once they’re in use.
In Argentina, the Red de Innovación Local (RIL) experimented with its AI-powered platform, PortalRIL, to shift from fragmented work plans to an inquiry-driven planning process anchored in a “Question Tree.” By surfacing patterns, trade-offs, and synergies across teams, AI helped compress months of coordination into weeks of shared clarity. The result suggests that AI’s real promise is to expand strategic horizons and accelerate collective insight, freeing public servants to focus on judgment, identity, and long-term public value.
As Korea aims to become a top-three global AI power, the government has staked its strategy on “sovereign AI” as both an economic and national security priority. In this reflection, originally published in the Herald Insight Collection, Merve Hickok examines Korea’s multibillion-dollar investment in a national foundation model amid U.S.–China competition and the rise of Open-Source AI, asking whether alternative investments—such as small language models, compute and energy efficiency, and AI governance and evaluation—might better secure Korea’s long-term autonomy and global leadership.
Crowdsourced mapping of schools in Uzbekistan and Bhutan combined with AI data analysis created greater insight into on-the-ground conditions. By treating geography as essential, spatial data, participatory collection, and AI analysis reshaped how evidence-informed public investment and policy decisions are made in Uzbekistan and Bhutan.
India's Bhashini platform is democratizing access to digital services for 1.4 billion people by treating multilingual capability as public infrastructure. Through crowdsourced voice donations and open APIs, this initiative could transform how underserved populations access rights and resources that were previously locked behind language barriers.
Facing worsening congestion and no room to build new roads, Hillerød, Denmark, turned to its residents for direction. Diverse engagement channels and AI tools helped the city identify priorities politicians hadn’t anticipated.
Conventional Wisdom presents mid-sized economies with two options for accessing advanced AI: rely on American or Chinese systems, or fall behind. Neither choice preserves the technological sovereignty that countries increasingly see as essential. But there is a third path we explore in detail in a recent memo. Collectively, nations outside the US-China duopoly possess substantial computing infrastructure, a majority of the world’s top researchers, and the growing political will to create a third path. The question is whether they can come together to make it work.
InnovateUS