A new report from the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change outlines a governance framework aimed at helping countries in the Global South develop artificial intelligence (AI) regulations that balance innovation with risk management. The report highlights the disparity between AI governance efforts in wealthier nations and emerging economies, emphasizing the need for regulatory strategies that consider local economic and social contexts.
The report argues that while AI policies in the Global North are shaping global standards, many nations in the Global South lack the resources or infrastructure to implement similar frameworks. It warns that without clear governance structures, developing economies risk becoming dependent on AI technologies created elsewhere, with little control over their deployment or ethical implications.
To address this, the institute proposes a five-step roadmap for AI regulation, encouraging governments to focus on regulatory clarity, risk-based oversight, capacity-building, and partnerships with both public and private sectors. The framework is designed to help policymakers navigate the complex trade-offs between fostering AI-driven economic growth and ensuring protections against bias, misinformation, and security threats.
One of the key recommendations is the creation of adaptive regulations that allow for AI experimentation while ensuring oversight mechanisms evolve alongside technological advancements. The report also stresses the importance of public sector investment in AI education and infrastructure to prevent dependency on foreign technology providers.
However, the recommendations have drawn scrutiny from some AI policy experts. Critics argue that frameworks developed by Western policy think tanks may not always align with the needs of Global South nations, particularly if they favor regulatory models that prioritize foreign investment over local industry development. Others caution that AI governance discussions must include perspectives from regional stakeholders to avoid reinforcing digital colonialism, where major AI firms dictate the terms of technology use in emerging markets.
Despite these concerns, the report provides a structured approach to addressing AI governance gaps in countries that may not have the regulatory capacity of the European Union or the United States. As AI continues to shape global economies, the question remains whether developing nations will be able to craft governance strategies that are both locally relevant and internationally competitive.
The report is likely to spark further debate on AI policy in the Global South, particularly as governments consider how to regulate AI in a way that maximizes economic benefits while ensuring ethical oversight.
Need Help?
If you have questions or concerns about how to navigate the global AI regulatory landscape, don’t hesitate to reach out to BABL AI. Their Audit Experts can offer valuable insight, and ensure you’re informed and compliant.
