UN human rights experts have warned that AI and related digital technologies could deepen gender inequalities if they are developed and deployed without meaningful regulation.
The Working Group on discrimination against women and girls said AI is reshaping the conditions in which women and girls exercise their rights. In a report to the Human Rights Council, the experts said the absence of gender-responsive AI governance could amplify exclusion, reinforce harmful stereotypes and worsen structural inequalities.
The report says AI and digital technologies can support gender equality when designed responsibly, including by expanding access to education, healthcare, financial services and justice. However, the experts warned that poorly governed systems can also create new forms of exclusion across political, civic and economic life.
The Working Group identified three urgent preconditions for substantive gender equality in the digital age: closing the digital divide, ensuring that AI and digital technologies support rather than undermine women’s and girls’ human rights, and promoting their meaningful participation and leadership in public and political life.
The experts also raised concern over gendered harms linked to AI and digital technologies, including technology-facilitated gender-based violence, mass surveillance, armed conflict, lethal autonomous weapons and climate-related impacts.
They called on states to adopt human rights-based and feminist approaches to AI governance, strengthen regulation and accountability, and ensure that women and girls can participate meaningfully in technological development and decision-making.
The Working Group said technology must serve equality, human rights and human dignity, framing gender-responsive AI governance as an obligation rather than an optional policy choice.
Why does it matter?
The report frames AI governance as a gender equality and human rights issue, not only a technical or innovation challenge. Without gender-responsive rules, AI systems can reproduce discrimination through biassed data, unequal access, surveillance, online violence and exclusion from decision-making. The report also matters because it connects AI policy with digital inclusion and political participation, areas where women and girls are often affected by overlapping forms of discrimination.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is rethinking how financial regulation should operate in the age of AI, according to a speech by chief executive Nikhil Rathi.
Speaking at techUK’s Agents of Change: Generative and Agentic AI in Financial Services 2026 event, Rathi said financial services will be central to making the UK a world-leading AI economy. He said the sector can provide the capital, infrastructure, and trust needed for AI to scale across the wider economy.
Rathi said more than 80% of financial services firms are already using or adopting AI, shifting the policy focus from adoption to large-scale deployment. He said AI is challenging the assumptions on which markets and regulation were built, making it necessary to preserve trust, competition, and resilience as technology moves faster than existing frameworks can keep pace.
The FCA chief identified two major scaling opportunities. The first is agentic AI, which Rathi said could evolve beyond summarisation and task automation into systems capable of coordinating workflows and executing transactions.
In retail markets, Rathi said agentic systems could support smarter bill management, personalised investment strategies, and reduced friction. In wholesale markets, they could support liquidity management, trading workflows, and other market functions.
Rathi stressed that accountability for regulated activities and their outcomes must remain clearly assigned, regardless of the degree of automation. He said investors may be reluctant to delegate important decisions to systems they do not understand, making human oversight and consumer confidence essential.
Rathi also identified tokenisation as a second major trend shaping financial markets. Rathi said tokenisation could lower costs, reduce risk, and unlock new services by creating more automated and programmable infrastructure for agentic finance.
He noted that banks are already piloting tokenized deposits and said the FCA had approved Baillie Gifford, alongside Bank of New York Mellon, to launch the UK’s first natively tokenised authorised fund.
Rathi said rapid AI progress raises fundamental questions for regulation. He argued that legislation alone cannot keep pace with technological change, requiring the FCA to evolve from a traditional rule-maker into a regulator focused on continuous supervision, stewardship and resilience.
The FCA is exploring agentic AI as a ‘first responder’ to speed up wholesale market monitoring. Rathi said the regulator could use its technology, large datasets, and supervisory judgement to tackle market abuse faster.
He said traditional rule-making will still be needed in some areas, but will not work everywhere. The FCA’s role will increasingly involve both stewardship and supervision, helping firms and markets navigate technological change and acting before legislation catches up.
Rathi also said AI will change competition in financial services. He said AI can lower barriers to entry and allow challengers to grow quickly, while some incumbents may fall behind.
The FCA chief said the regulator’s role is not to protect incumbents, but to ensure competition works in consumers’ and the economy’s interests. He said the FCA expects to use system-wide powers more frequently as part of its regular toolkit.
Operational resilience was another major theme of the speech. Rathi said financial services increasingly depend on cloud providers, model providers, data providers, and other parts of the AI stack, creating both opportunities and risks for systemic resilience, market integrity, and financial crime.
He said fraud increasingly sits at the intersection of financial services, technology, and telecoms. UK Finance’s Annual Fraud Report suggests the UK lost almost £1.3 billion through payment fraud last year, with two-thirds of authorised fraud cases linked to social media sites and messaging platforms.
Rathi said frontier AI could further magnify risks. Faster and more capable models could help firms identify vulnerabilities and strengthen defences, but could also help attackers move more quickly.
Boards and leadership teams must understand these risks, he said. Firms need to map and govern dependencies on model providers and other third parties, as the Critical Third Parties regime becomes more important.
Rathi said resilience will increasingly become a national security and system-wide challenge. He said no single firm, regulator or sector will be able to see all risks, making better information sharing essential.
The FCA is supporting AI adoption through tools including its Supercharged Sandbox, AI Lab, and the AI Consortium with the Bank of England. Rathi said these initiatives are intended to help firms build, test, and scale AI safely in UK financial services.
He said the FCA will publish more work soon, including the Mills Review on how AI could reshape retail financial services and later guidance on good and poor AI practice.
Rathi concluded that the key question is no longer whether AI will reshape financial services, but whether the UK can become the preferred location for developing and deploying AI safely, responsibly and at commercial scale. He said regulation must support innovation while keeping markets competitive, resilient, and fit for technological change.
Why does it matter?
The speech signals a broader shift in financial regulation from static rule-making towards continuous supervision in response to rapidly evolving AI technologies. As agentic AI, tokenisation and frontier models become more deeply embedded in financial services, regulators are increasingly focusing on governance, operational resilience, competition and accountability rather than relying solely on traditional legislative approaches.
It also illustrates how AI is becoming a strategic issue for financial stability and economic competitiveness. By combining regulatory sandboxes, supervisory innovation and collaboration with industry, the FCA aims to encourage responsible AI adoption while managing emerging risks related to fraud, third-party dependencies, cybersecurity and market integrity. The UK’s approach may influence how other financial regulators adapt to AI-driven transformation.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The system ranked 31st in the TOP500 list of the world’s most powerful supercomputers and 23rd in the Green500 list of energy-efficient systems. According to GRNET, DAEDALUS recorded a measured performance of 85.69 petaflops, making it the most powerful computing system ever ranked in Greece.
DAEDALUS is based on Hewlett Packard Enterprise architecture and uses NVIDIA GH200 accelerators. It also uses direct liquid cooling, combining high computing performance with energy efficiency.
The supercomputer and its data centre are located at the Lavrio Technological and Cultural Park of the National Technical University of Athens, inside the former Power Station building.
Once fully operational, DAEDALUS is expected to support researchers, universities, industry and public authorities working on demanding computational tasks. These include AI, cybersecurity, personalised healthcare, climate research, public administration and large-scale data analytics.
The system will also serve as the computational core of PHAROS, Greece’s national AI Factory under the European AI Factories initiative. Through PHAROS, Greece aims to expand access to AI infrastructure and support the development of AI applications across research, business and the public sector.
The project forms part of Greece’s wider digital transformation agenda and contributes to European efforts to strengthen technological capacity, AI infrastructure and digital sovereignty through high-performance computing.
Why does it matter?
DAEDALUS gives Greece strategic computing capacity for AI research, scientific modelling and public-sector digital transformation. Its role in PHAROS also links national supercomputing infrastructure to the EU’s AI Factories initiative, which aims to give researchers and companies access to advanced computing resources for AI development. The Green500 ranking matters as well, because Europe’s AI infrastructure push increasingly depends not only on raw performance, but also on energy efficiency and sustainable data-centre design.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Africa’s place in an evolving digital governance landscape
As AI, cybersecurity, and digital technologies become increasingly central to international policymaking, African countries are seeking to strengthen their role in shaping global digital governance. Questions of representation, digital sovereignty, capacity development, and regional coordination are becoming more prominent as governments prepare for negotiations on AI governance, cybersecurity, telecommunications, and internet governance.
These issues formed the focus of a recent Diplo webinar on Cyber Diplomacy in Africa: Regional, National and Continental Initiatives, moderated by Mwende Njiraini, African Initiative Coordinator at Diplo and Chair of the ITU-T Study Group 17 Regional Group for Africa on security. The discussion brought together policymakers, diplomats, academics, and regional organisations to examine how African interests can be more effectively represented in international digital governance processes.
Although the discussion focused on Africa, many of the issues raised, including AI governance, digital sovereignty, capacity development, and multistakeholder cooperation, reflect broader challenges facing digital governance worldwide.
From cyber diplomacy to diplomacy in the AI era
Opening the discussion, Kurbalija suggested that the distinction between cyber diplomacy, digital diplomacy, and technology diplomacy is becoming less significant as digital technologies permeate virtually every area of international relations. Rather than focusing on terminology, he argued that the central question is how countries, communities, and citizens represent their interests in an increasingly digital world.
‘Cyber diplomacy, digital diplomacy, or AI diplomacy is ultimately diplomacy. It is about representing interests, negotiating, and finding common solutions.’, he said.
According to Kurbalija, technological developments are no longer confined to specialised policy discussions. AI, cybersecurity, digital infrastructure, and data governance increasingly influence trade, security, education, healthcare, humanitarian action, and economic development, making digital issues part of mainstream diplomacy.
This evolution also raises questions about whether Africa is sufficiently represented in international discussions shaping the future of digital technologies.
Image via Magnific
Kurbalija noted that African diplomats are becoming more active in negotiations related to AI, cybersecurity, and internet governance, but argued that stronger participation will be necessary to ensure that the continent’s priorities are reflected in emerging international frameworks.
Rather than approaching these meetings individually, Kurbalija encouraged participants to prepare coordinated positions that reflect African priorities across different policy areas.
Regional coordination remains a work in progress
A recurring theme throughout the discussion was the gap between continental ambitions and national implementation.
However, she questioned whether these processes consistently translate into practical outcomes across the continent.
To illustrate this point, Getao presented the results of a live audience poll measuring familiarity with African digital governance initiatives. While approximately half of the participants recognised the AU Convention on Cyber Security and Personal Data Protection (the Malabo Convention), significantly fewer were familiar with other continental initiatives, including the AU Digital Transformation Strategy and the African Union’s position on international law in cyberspace.
The findings suggested that awareness of Africa’s existing digital governance architecture remains uneven, even among participants engaged in digital policy discussions.
Ambassador Bitange Ndemo argued that implementation presents an even greater challenge than awareness. He observed that agreements adopted at the African Union level often take considerable time to influence national policymaking, with countries frequently developing their own legal and regulatory approaches rather than building on common continental frameworks.
Using the Malabo Convention as an example, Ndemo suggested that many governments introduced separate data protection legislation without fully integrating broader continental approaches. According to him, one contributing factor is reliance on external funding for many regional digital initiatives.
‘If we continue depending on external partners to finance our priorities, ownership becomes more difficult’, Ndemo added.
Ndemo argued that stronger African investment in digital governance initiatives would improve both implementation and long-term sustainability.
Getao echoed this concern, noting that important achievements at the continental level do not always ‘percolate’ effectively to national implementation.
Building common African positions
Despite these challenges, speakers highlighted several examples of growing regional coordination.
Meriem Slimani described how the African Telecommunications Union (ATU) has worked to strengthen cooperation among member states in preparing common African positions for international telecommunications negotiations.
When she joined the organisation in 2015, Slimani recalled, many countries submitted proposals independently at international meetings, often without consulting neighbouring states.
ATU responded by creating a coordination platform through which member countries discuss priorities, identify common interests, exchange experiences, and gradually develop shared positions before major international conferences.
‘Our objective has been to ensure that Africa speaks with one voice where common interests exist.’
Image via Magnific
According to Slimani, this collaborative approach has become particularly important in preparation for major meetings of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), where coordinated regional positions can strengthen Africa’s influence during negotiations.
While acknowledging that implementation challenges remain, he argued that progress has been more visible in some sectors than others.
In particular, COMESA has advanced several practical digital trade initiatives, including electronic trade documentation, digital logistics systems, electronic certificates of origin, and simplified digital trade procedures designed to facilitate cross-border commerce.
Governance issues such as cybersecurity and cybercrime, however, have generally progressed more slowly because they often involve more politically sensitive discussions and require broader legal coordination among participating states.
Chinemhute suggested that smaller regional organisations can sometimes move more quickly than continental institutions because they involve fewer actors and more focused policy priorities.
Looking ahead
While speakers approached Africa’s digital future from different institutional and regional perspectives, several common priorities emerged throughout the discussion. These included strengthening Africa’s participation in global digital governance processes, improving coordination among national, regional, and continental initiatives, investing in capacity development, and ensuring that digital policies reflect local realities and priorities.
The discussion also highlighted that digital governance extends beyond technology. Questions of AI, cybersecurity, connectivity, language, education, and financing were presented as interconnected challenges that require cooperation among governments, regional organisations, academia, the private sector, and civil society.
Image via Magnific
As international discussions on AI and digital governance continue through forums such as the AI for Good Global Summit, the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS)+20 process, and the Internet Governance Forum (IGF), speakers stressed that African participation will be most effective when supported by coordinated regional positions and sustained investment in local expertise and digital capabilities.
Ultimately, the webinar underscored that Africa’s role in shaping the future of digital governance will depend not only on engagement in international negotiations but also on translating continental ambitions into practical national implementation and ensuring that African perspectives contribute to global debates on AI, cybersecurity, and digital development.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Li made the remarks during the opening plenary of the 17th Annual Meeting of the New Champions, also known as Summer Davos, in Dalian.
According to the Chinese government’s account of the speech, Li said China would work with other parties to strengthen institutional frameworks and rules, improve regulatory effectiveness and address potential AI risks.
He said AI has significantly improved innovation efficiency, but warned that risks linked to technological loss of control and ethical failures are becoming more pronounced.
Li said governance needs to keep pace with AI development, warning that the consequences could be severe if regulatory systems fail to keep to with the pace of technological change.
The remarks underline China’s continued effort to position itself as a participant in international AI governance debates, while also linking AI regulation to broader questions of innovation, economic development and global cooperation.
Why does it matter?
Li’s remarks show that AI governance remains part of China’s wider diplomatic and economic positioning. As frontier AI advances, governments are treating safety, ethics and regulatory coordination as strategic issues alongside competition over models, compute and industrial capacity. The speech does not introduce a new Chinese AI policy, but it reinforces Beijing’s message that global AI governance should involve international coordination rather than being shaped only by a few countries or companies.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The government argues that access to large-scale computing infrastructure is becoming essential for researchers, universities, startups and businesses seeking to develop advanced AI systems and remain competitive in an increasingly AI-driven economy.
The investment builds on Spain’s existing role within Europe’s supercomputing ecosystem. The country already hosts AI factories at the Barcelona Supercomputing Center and the Galician Supercomputing Center, while the MareNostrum 5 supercomputer has supported projects ranging from genomic research to climate and digital twin initiatives.
The funding also aims to strengthen Spain’s position in quantum technologies, an area increasingly viewed as strategically important for Europe’s long-term technological autonomy.
The announcement reflects a wider European push to expand sovereign computing capabilities as demand for AI training infrastructure grows worldwide.
By seeking to host an AI gigafactory, Spain hopes to attract investment, support innovation, strengthen domestic technological capabilities and position itself as a central player in Europe’s next-generation AI ecosystem.
Why does it matter?
Access to large-scale computing infrastructure is becoming a strategic prerequisite for advanced AI development. Training frontier AI models, running large-scale simulations and supporting scientific research require computing resources that are increasingly concentrated among a small number of global technology providers. Spain’s investment seeks to strengthen both national and European capacity in this critical area.
The announcement also reflects the EU’s broader push for technological sovereignty. By expanding domestic AI and supercomputing infrastructure, Europe aims to reduce dependence on foreign computing resources, support innovation ecosystems and ensure that advanced technologies are developed within frameworks aligned with European values, regulations and industrial priorities. The competition to host AI gigafactories is therefore as much about economic competitiveness and strategic autonomy as it is about computing power.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
As AI reshapes economies, societies, and governance systems worldwide, Geneva is increasingly emerging as one of the most important global centres for discussions on the future of digital technologies.
In a recent interview, Diplo Executive Director Jovan Kurbalija described Geneva as a place where multiple dimensions of AI governance intersect. From technical standards and international trade to human rights, humanitarian action, and diplomacy, the city hosts institutions and processes that shape how digital technologies are developed, governed, and used worldwide.
According to Kurbalija, a significant share of global discussions on AI and digital governance takes place within a relatively small area surrounding Geneva’s international district. The concentration of international organisations, diplomatic missions, standards-setting bodies, and expert communities has positioned the city as a unique meeting point for addressing the opportunities and challenges associated with AI.
A hub for global digital governance
Geneva’s importance in digital governance stems largely from the presence of international organisations whose work directly affects the digital ecosystem.
Among them is the World Trade Organization (WTO), which plays a role in shaping the global rules governing trade, supply chains, e-commerce, and the international movement of goods and services that underpin the digital economy. Decisions and discussions within the WTO influence the broader environment in which digital technologies are produced, exchanged, and deployed.
Another key institution is the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the UN specialised agency for information and communication technologies. ITU has long served as a forum for international cooperation on telecommunications and digital technologies, and today plays an increasingly prominent role in discussions related to AI and digital governance.
Although often invisible to users, technical standards play a fundamental role in ensuring interoperability, connectivity, and trust in digital systems. As AI technologies become more integrated into everyday life, standards are expected to play an increasingly important role in areas such as safety, transparency, and accountability.
From Frankenstein to AI: Geneva’s intellectual legacy
Kurbalija also highlighted a less visible but equally important dimension of Geneva’s role in AI governance, its intellectual and historical heritage.
He referred to what Diplo describes as the EspriTech de Genève, the intersection between technological developments and ideas that have emerged from thinkers associated with Geneva throughout history.
One of the most notable examples is Mary Shelley, who wrote Frankenstein near Lake Geneva in 1816. Often regarded as one of the earliest works of science fiction, the novel explores the relationship between creators and their creations, raising questions about responsibility, unintended consequences, and the limits of human control.
More than two centuries later, similar questions continue to shape contemporary debates on AI governance. Discussions surrounding increasingly capable AI systems frequently return to concerns about human oversight, accountability, and the potential consequences of technologies that may act in ways not fully anticipated by their creators.
Kurbalija also pointed to the work of Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges, whose reflections on knowledge, information, and human cognition continue to resonate in an era characterised by large-scale data processing and machine-generated content.
The intellectual traditions associated with Geneva provide a broader context for understanding contemporary AI debates, linking present-day governance questions to longer-standing discussions about technology, knowledge, and humanity.
Geneva as a centre for AI diplomacy
Beyond its historical and institutional significance, Geneva has become an increasingly active venue for international discussions on AI governance.
The city hosts a growing number of meetings, conferences, and policy dialogues dedicated to the governance of AI and other emerging technologies. Among the most prominent is the annual AI for Good Summit, organised by ITU in partnership with other UN agencies and stakeholders. The event brings together governments, international organisations, researchers, private sector representatives, and civil society to explore the societal implications of AI and identify opportunities for international cooperation.
Geneva also hosts a range of other initiatives focused on AI governance, including policy dialogues, expert consultations, and multistakeholder discussions addressing issues such as human rights, health, humanitarian action, sustainable development, trade, and technical standards.
Image via freepik
According to Kurbalija, AI is now on the agenda of many international organisations based in Geneva. Whether addressing healthcare, humanitarian assistance, trade, education, telecommunications, or development, institutions increasingly examine how AI affects their respective mandates and policy objectives.
This growing presence reflects the recognition that AI is not solely a technological issue. Instead, it spans multiple policy domains, requiring coordination among technical experts, policymakers, diplomats, regulators, and affected communities.
Reducing ‘lost in translation’ in AI governance
As AI discussions become more widespread, one challenge frequently identified by policymakers and international organisations is the gap between technological developments and policy understanding.
Kurbalija argues that many stakeholders remain ‘lost in translation’ when trying to understand the implications of AI. Technical terminology, rapidly evolving technologies, and complex governance debates often create barriers for diplomats, policymakers, and officials who are expected to make decisions about AI despite not having technical backgrounds.
To address this challenge, Diplo combines research, capacity development, and practical experimentation.
The organisation conducts research on both the historical roots of AI-related thinking and contemporary governance challenges. At the same time, it develops tools and educational programmes designed to help policymakers better understand the technology and its implications.
A central component of this effort is Diplo’s AI Apprenticeship programme.
Rather than teaching AI solely through theory, the programme encourages participants to learn by building AI applications themselves. Diplomats and officials from different countries work directly with AI tools, gaining practical experience with concepts such as neural networks, large language models (LLMs), and AI systems development.
According to Kurbalija, direct engagement with AI technologies allows participants to move beyond abstract discussions and develop a more practical understanding of how these systems function and where their limitations lie.
Where technology meets humanity
Kurbalija described Geneva as a place where several distinct but interconnected forces converge.
The first is the technological dimension, represented by organisations working on telecommunications, standards, digital infrastructure, and emerging technologies.
The second is the historical and intellectual dimension, reflected in the ideas of thinkers associated with Geneva and the broader region, whose work continues to inform contemporary discussions about technology and society.
Image via Freepik
The third is the diplomatic dimension. Geneva remains one of the world’s most active centres of multilateral diplomacy, hosting permanent missions and representatives from nearly every country. Discussions in Geneva frequently shape global approaches to issues ranging from trade and humanitarian affairs to digital governance and AI.
The fourth is what Kurbalija describes as the human dimension. Many Geneva-based institutions focus on protecting and advancing human welfare through work on human rights, humanitarian action, health, labour, migration, and development.
Together, these dimensions create an environment in which technological innovation can be discussed alongside its social, ethical, economic, and political implications.
Looking ahead
As governments, international organisations, and societies continue to grapple with the opportunities and risks associated with AI, Geneva’s role as a centre for digital governance is likely to become increasingly significant.
The city’s unique combination of technical expertise, standards-setting institutions, diplomatic networks, and human-centred governance traditions provides a platform for addressing complex questions that no single actor or sector can solve alone.
For Kurbalija, this convergence of technology, diplomacy, and humanity represents one of Geneva’s defining characteristics. In a period marked by rapid technological change and growing uncertainty, the city continues to serve as a place where different perspectives can meet to shape the future of AI governance.
As debates around AI evolve, Geneva is likely to remain one of the key venues where those discussions are translated into international cooperation, governance frameworks, and practical solutions with global impact.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
The UK government has announced two new AI research labs led by University College London and the University of Oxford, backed by up to £60 million in funding and access to large-scale computing power.
The labs will work on next-generation AI systems that are cheaper to run, more reliable and easier for businesses, researchers and public services to use. Funding will be provided through UK Research and Innovation’s Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council over six years.
The announcement expands the government’s original plan from one AI lab to two, increasing planned funding from £40 million to up to £60 million. The labs will also receive access to computing resources valued at tens of millions of pounds.
The Science of Fundamental AI Research Lab, or SOFAIR, will be led by Professor David Barber at UCL, with researchers from Cambridge, Oxford and Edinburgh. It will focus on open-source AI technologies that can run on widely available hardware, aiming to reduce dependence on a small number of model providers.
The British Open-ended Learning and Discovery Lab, known as BOLD, will be led by Associate Professor Jakob Foerster at Oxford, in collaboration with UCL and Imperial College London. It will explore AI systems that can learn more efficiently, adapt to new situations and operate in physical environments.
Each lab will receive £2 million to recruit at least 10 doctoral students, supporting the UK’s AI talent pipeline. The labs will also work with existing UK AI research organisations, including the Alan Turing Institute and UKRI’s AI research hubs.
The funding forms part of UKRI’s wider AI strategy, a £1.6 billion plan to strengthen the UK’s AI research and innovation capacity over the next four years.
Why does it matter?
The investment shows the UK trying to compete in AI through fundamental research, open-source methods and efficient systems rather than only through larger datasets and more computing. By funding labs focused on reliability, lower-cost deployment and widely available hardware, the government is trying to make advanced AI more usable beyond large technology companies. The policy also links AI research to national capability, resilience and a domestic talent pipeline.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
As economies undergo digital and green transitions, education authorities face growing pressure to ensure training programmes remain aligned with evolving workforce needs.
The report finds that AI is already being used across parts of the vocational education ecosystem to analyse labour market trends, identify emerging skills gaps, map competencies and support curriculum development.
Countries, including the Netherlands, Switzerland, Estonia and Germany, have launched pilot initiatives using AI tools to accelerate and improve qualification design and revision processes.
AI is also being explored as a mechanism for supporting modular learning pathways and micro-credentials in sectors experiencing rapid technological change.
Despite growing interest, the OECD stresses that AI adoption remains uneven and largely experimental. Most systems continue to rely on traditional governance structures involving employers, industry representatives, educators and public authorities.
The report also warns that broader AI adoption could introduce new risks for vocational education systems. Concerns include biased outputs, poor data quality, reduced transparency, cybersecurity vulnerabilities and the possibility of weakening collaborative decision-making.
To address these challenges, the OECD argues that AI deployment must remain human-centred and operate within robust governance frameworks. Maintaining accountability, ensuring stakeholder participation and protecting data integrity will be critical as governments increasingly integrate AI into education and workforce development policies.
Why does it matter?
Vocational education systems play a critical role in preparing workers for changing labour markets. As digitalisation, automation and the green transition reshape skills demand, governments are looking for ways to update qualifications and training programmes more quickly. The OECD report suggests that AI could help education systems identify emerging workforce needs, improve labour market intelligence and make curriculum development more responsive.
At the same time, the report highlights that technological innovation alone is unlikely to solve skills challenges. The effectiveness of AI in vocational education will depend on strong governance, reliable data, stakeholder participation and human oversight. How governments balance efficiency gains with transparency, accountability and trust could shape the future of workforce development and lifelong learning policies.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!
Norway is introducing new national guidance that significantly restricts the use of generative AI in primary education as part of a broader effort to strengthen foundational learning outcomes. From the upcoming school year, pupils in grades 1–7 will generally not be permitted to use generative AI tools in their schoolwork.
The approach reflects concerns over declining foundational skills, with international assessments indicating a drop in reading and numeracy levels among Norwegian students. Policymakers have linked the decision to evidence suggesting that early and uncritical reliance on generative AI could interfere with the development of essential literacy, numeracy and problem-solving skills.
In secondary education, AI will be introduced gradually, with schools expected to ensure that teachers have the necessary skills and training before students begin using the technology. Full integration is expected at the upper secondary level, where AI is seen as part of preparation for further education and the labour market.
Authorities emphasised that AI may still be used in specific circumstances, particularly to support students with individual learning needs or those requiring tailored educational assistance. The policy will be reviewed and adjusted over time, with a focus on strengthening teacher training and ensuring responsible use of the technology across the education system.
Why does it matter?
The decision reflects a growing international debate over the role of generative AI in education. While AI tools can support learning, creativity and personalised instruction, educators and policymakers are increasingly concerned that early dependence on such technologies could weaken the development of core skills that students need before they can use AI critically and effectively.
Norway’s approach also highlights a broader shift towards phased AI adoption in schools. Rather than focusing solely on access to technology, the policy places teacher competence, pedagogical goals and student development at the centre of implementation. The outcome may influence similar discussions in other countries seeking to balance digital innovation with educational quality and learning outcomes.
Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our chatbot!
