Digital standards Archives | Page 2 of 395

CSIS says Chinese AI models are narrowing the gap with US systems

Chinese AI models are narrowing the gap with leading US systems, according to a new analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

CSIS said recent releases from Z.ai, Moonshot, DeepSeek and Alibaba-backed Qwen show that China’s rapid progress in AI was not limited to DeepSeek-R1, but reflects a broader pattern of fast technical catch-up.

The analysis points to Z.ai’s GLM-5.2 model, which performs close to the top US closed models in coding and agent-based tasks. It also highlights strong results from Moonshot’s Kimi, DeepSeek V4-Pro and Qwen3.7-Max across software engineering, reasoning and agent benchmarks.

CSIS argues that Chinese models are now only months, rather than years, behind US frontier systems in several practical areas.

The report identifies knowledge distillation, open-weight research communities and efficiency-driven engineering as key factors behind this progress. Chinese labs can learn quickly from stronger models, shared research practices and open-source ecosystems, while US chip export controls have pushed them towards more efficient training and inference strategies.

Cost is another important factor. CSIS said Chinese models are often cheaper to access than leading US closed systems because open-source releases can be hosted by many providers, increasing price competition and making them easier for developers and governments to adopt.

The analysis says US firms still retain major advantages in frontier capabilities, cloud platforms, enterprise products and user feedback loops. However, Chinese models are now capable, affordable and open enough to shape global AI competition.

CSIS argues that US policy should therefore focus not only on protecting technological advantage, but also on building global trust, lowering access costs and ensuring partners see the American AI stack as reliable.

Why does it matter?

The analysis shows that AI competition is not only about which country has the most powerful frontier model. Chinese open-weight models are spreading because they are increasingly capable, cheaper to run and easier to deploy through third-party hosts or local infrastructure. That could shape global adoption, especially for governments, startups and developers that cannot afford or do not want to depend entirely on US closed-model providers. For the US, the challenge is no longer only maintaining a technical lead, but also making its AI ecosystem trusted, affordable and reliable for international partners.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

UN opens Global Dialogue on AI Governance with call for inclusive and evidence-based cooperation

The United Nations opened its first Global Dialogue on AI Governance in Geneva, calling for inclusive, evidence-based and practical international cooperation to ensure that AI supports development while addressing risks related to safety, inequality, disinformation, children’s rights and human oversight.

The inaugural Global Dialogue on AI Governance is taking place on 6–7 July, alongside the AI for Good Global Summit and the WSIS Forum. Established in 2025, the dialogue is intended to provide a platform for governments and relevant stakeholders to discuss international cooperation, share good practices and support open, transparent and inclusive discussions on AI governance.

Opening the session, Ambassador Egriselda López of El Salvador, one of the dialogue’s co-chairs, described the meeting as the beginning of a broader process rather than a one-off event. She said Geneva should be seen not only as a place of arrival, but as a point of departure for continued work on AI governance.

López stressed that meaningful participation requires more than a seat in the room. Countries also need skills, infrastructure, financing, institutions and partnerships to shape and benefit from AI. Her co-chair, Ambassador Rein Tammsaar of Estonia, said AI is already affecting every country, regardless of its level of technological development, and that governance discussions must therefore include all regions, levels of development and relevant stakeholders.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned that AI is advancing at ‘runaway speed’ and is being deployed faster than institutions can manage. He said AI is already reshaping economies, labour markets, elections and security, while society is facing what he described as an experiment being run ‘without a plan’ and ‘without consent’.

Guterres identified three major risks highlighted by scientific evidence: the speed of AI deployment, the concentration of power in a small number of companies and countries, and the erosion of truth through AI-enabled misinformation. He warned that computing power, data and talent remain concentrated, leaving many countries, particularly developing ones, with limited influence over technologies that may shape their futures.

At the same time, Guterres emphasised AI’s potential to support development, including in healthcare, education and agriculture. If shared widely, he said, AI could help make expertise more accessible and become a ‘great equaliser’ of the twenty-first century.

The Secretary-General outlined four priorities for international action: common safety standards, clear red lines grounded in human rights, stronger capacity-building for developing countries and greater transparency about AI’s environmental footprint. He also called for an AI child safety pledge, a global fund and network for AI capacity-building, and an international legal ban on lethal autonomous weapons, which he referred to as ‘killer robots’.

Annalena Baerbock, President of the UN General Assembly, said AI is developing at a pace that does not allow governments the time they had with earlier technological revolutions. She argued that AI cannot be governed by a few actors alone and must be addressed through the UN with participation from all countries and stakeholders.

Baerbock also highlighted harmful uses of AI, including deepfakes and gendered abuse. She said such abuses disproportionately target women and girls and described them as part of a broader challenge to human rights. At the same time, she pointed to AI’s potential to support the Sustainable Development Goals, including through disaster warning, agriculture, health and education.

Doreen Bogdan-Martin, Secretary-General of the International Telecommunication Union, framed the opening as part of a wider ‘Geneva Digital Week’ that brings together the Global Dialogue on AI Governance, the work of the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI, the AI for Good Global Summit and the WSIS Forum. She contrasted the current pace of AI governance discussions with the early years of the internet, noting that the UN has moved more quickly to convene global dialogue on generative AI.

Khaled El-Enany of UNESCO focused on implementation, saying that a gap remains between principles and practice. He highlighted UNESCO’s 2021 Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence as a global standard for aligning AI with human rights, sustainability and inclusion. He said UNESCO is supporting more than 80 countries in strengthening legal frameworks, institutional capacities and accountability mechanisms, and noted that over 50,000 civil servants and judicial actors have benefited from UNESCO-supported AI training.

El-Enany also said UNESCO is launching a collective reflection on a new global normative instrument to safeguard children and young people in the age of AI and digital technologies.

Amandeep Singh Gill, UN Under-Secretary-General and Special Envoy for Digital and Emerging Technologies, underlined the scale of participation in the dialogue, noting representation from more than 170 countries alongside scientists, entrepreneurs, civil society, international organisations and technical communities. He said inclusion in AI governance cannot be treated as a one-off exercise, adding that without capacity, ‘dialogues are monologues and science is just abstract’.

Singh Gill situated the dialogue within a longer UN process that includes the High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation, the Roadmap for Digital Cooperation, the Global Digital Compact and the High-Level Advisory Body on AI. He said the process would continue with a second round in New York next year, expected to be held alongside the STI Forum.

The opening session showed broad agreement that AI governance should be inclusive, evidence-based, rights-oriented and supported by practical capacity-building. Speakers repeatedly stressed that AI’s potential benefits for development, education, health and agriculture must be matched by safeguards on safety, accountability, children’s rights, truth, environmental sustainability and human oversight.

Tammsaar closed the opening by saying the discussion had highlighted both AI’s opportunities and the need for stronger international cooperation to ensure that the technology contributes to sustainable development, inclusion and shared prosperity. The meeting then moved to the presentation of the preliminary report of the Independent International Scientific Panel on Artificial Intelligence.

Track all key moments from the Global Dialogue on AI Governance inaugural meeting on our dedicated page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

WSIS Forum 2026 explores how the IGF should evolve after gaining a permanent mandate

The future of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) took centre stage at the WSIS Forum 2026, where policymakers, former diplomats, technical experts and internet governance practitioners discussed how the forum should evolve following the UN’s decision to grant it a permanent mandate.

Speakers agreed that the challenge is no longer whether the IGF should continue, but how it can become more relevant, effective and responsive to emerging issues such as AI while preserving its multistakeholder character. The discussion focused on four broad priorities, such as strengthening government participation, improving intersessional work, deepening links with national and regional IGF initiatives (NRIs), and ensuring the forum has sufficient institutional capacity and sustainable funding.

Governments need a stronger role without changing the IGF’s character

A recurring theme was how to increase meaningful government participation without transforming the IGF into a traditional intergovernmental negotiation forum.

Anriette Esterhuysen, human rights defender and computer networking pioneer from South Africa, argued that governments must participate more actively, particularly to strengthen digital policymaking in developing countries, but warned against reducing their involvement to formal speeches by senior officials.

Instead, she said governments should engage openly on practical policy challenges that require collaboration with the wider internet governance community.

Former Latvian ambassador Janis Karklins echoed this view, arguing that governments would only dedicate time and resources to the IGF if it addressed issues directly relevant to their national priorities.

Planning for the upcoming IGF in Nairobi, he suggested, should take into account the policy needs of African governments to ensure the forum delivers practical value.

Jennifer Chung, Chair of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG), also stressed that the initiative should be understood as a ‘government dialogue with stakeholders’ rather than a separate government track, preserving the IGF’s long-standing multistakeholder model.

Meanwhile, IGF Programme and Technology Manager Chengetai Masango said discussions on the exact format remain ongoing, with organisers considering how the dialogue could build on existing high-level sessions rather than creating an entirely new structure.

Stronger outcomes through year-round collaboration

Participants also debated how the IGF could produce more tangible results while remaining a platform for dialogue rather than negotiations.

Konstantinos Komaitis opened the discussion by asking how the IGF could move beyond its reputation as a ‘talking shop’ without becoming another UN negotiating process.

Esterhuysen argued that achieving greater impact requires changing the way the IGF works rather than changing its mandate. She suggested more structured intersessional work, thematic synthesis and longer-term collaboration on priority issues instead of relying primarily on standalone workshops during the annual meeting.

Andrea Calderaro, Director of Cyber Diplomacy at the EU Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), similarly argued that the most valuable work happens between annual IGF meetings, with governments and stakeholders conducting national consultations and bringing those experiences into global discussions.

Masango defended dialogue as the forum’s core purpose, but agreed that stronger follow-up and more practical outputs are needed. He said previous initiatives, including voluntary commitments, had not always been sufficiently tracked or incorporated into future work.

National and regional IGFs seen as a growing strength

Speakers also highlighted the growing importance of national, regional and youth Internet Governance Forums, which now number more than 180 worldwide.

Esterhuysen welcomed their explicit recognition in the WSIS+20 outcome document, describing them as one of the IGF’s greatest successes.

Chung said the relationship between the global IGF and NRIs should evolve beyond annual event coordination towards continuous thematic collaboration and shared learning throughout the year.

She noted particularly strong growth among youth initiatives, especially in Africa and Asia, arguing that younger participants increasingly want meaningful involvement in shaping Internet governance discussions rather than symbolic participation.

Esterhuysen proposed a two-way model in which the global IGF identifies concrete policy questions, NRIs and intersessional groups examine them throughout the year, and the Secretariat synthesises the results into practical, non-negotiated policy options for governments and other stakeholders.

Permanent mandate brings new expectations

The discussion also touched on longer-term institutional questions, including funding and Secretariat capacity.

Although speakers acknowledged that financial sustainability remains an important challenge, they agreed that the immediate priority is preparing a successful IGF meeting in Nairobi while gradually implementing reforms in the years ahead.

Calderaro argued that the IGF should increasingly serve as a hub connecting the growing number of international digital governance processes rather than functioning only as an annual conference.

Esterhuysen also urged the forum to become more willing to address politically sensitive issues, including corporate accountability, arguing that its permanent mandate provides an opportunity to take on more substantive policy debates.

Closing the session, participants broadly agreed that the IGF’s future lies not in becoming a negotiating body, but in strengthening dialogue, improving policy-relevant outputs, deepening collaboration across national and regional initiatives, and ensuring governments, civil society, academia, the private sector and technical communities remain equally engaged as internet governance continues to evolve.

Track all key moments from the WSIS Forum 2026 on our dedicated WSIS page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Stronger health data governance seen as key to trusted AI and digital health at WSIS Forum 2026

Strong legislative frameworks for health data governance are becoming essential to ensure that AI and digital health technologies remain trustworthy, equitable and rights-based, speakers said during a session at the WSIS Forum 2026.

The discussion brought together representatives from governments, international organisations, civil society and the private sector, who agreed that while AI and digital technologies are transforming healthcare, governance frameworks have not always kept pace. Speakers repeatedly argued that stronger legislation, greater international coordination and broader stakeholder participation will be necessary to build public trust and enable responsible data sharing across borders.

The session formed part of the WSIS Forum 2026, held in Geneva from 6 to 10 July. Co-organised by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), UNESCO, UNDP and UNCTAD together with more than 50 UN organisations, the forum serves as one of the UN’s principal multistakeholder platforms for digital cooperation and sustainable development.

Trust begins with governance

Opening the discussion, Mathilde Forslund of Transform Health argued that health data has become the foundation of modern healthcare, powering everything from patient care and disease surveillance to AI innovation and health system planning.

However, she stressed that technological progress alone is insufficient.

‘Digital technologies and AI are transforming health systems rapidly, but these benefits will only be realised equitably and responsibly if governance keeps pace and public trust is maintained,’ she said.

Forslund argued that trusted governance requires legislation grounded in human rights, transparency and equity, alongside inclusive decision-making that informs citizens how their health data is collected, shared and protected. She also called for stronger national legal frameworks governing both health data and AI while encouraging greater regional and international alignment to prevent fragmented rules from undermining interoperability and cross-border cooperation.

Rather than starting from scratch, she noted that countries can already build on existing resources, including Transform Health’s Health Data Governance Principles, WHO guidance on AI, OECD recommendations and emerging regional initiatives such as the European Health Data Space (EHDS) and the Africa CDC’s work on continental health data governance.

National legislation provides legal certainty

Drawing on Zambia’s experience, Andrew Kashoka, Director of Information Technology at the Ministry of Health of Zambia, explained that governments increasingly recognise the need for legal certainty as digital health systems expand.

He argued that while policies and strategies provide direction, legislation ultimately establishes enforceable rights and obligations governing consent, privacy, accountability and access to health data.

‘Technology moves faster than policy and policy moves faster than legislation,’ Kashoka observed.

He described Zambia’s National Digital Health Strategy and the country’s participation in the WHO Global Initiative on Digital Health (GUIDE), noting that electronic health records, digital public infrastructure and AI all require strong legal foundations to maintain public confidence.

Kashoka also highlighted the Africa CDC’s continental health data governance framework, saying it provides African countries with shared principles that support legal interoperability, trusted cross-border collaboration, regional disease surveillance and responsible AI innovation.

Coordination, not policy, remains the biggest challenge

Several speakers suggested that governance challenges stem less from the absence of policies than from fragmented implementation.

Linda Bonyo, Founder of the Lawyers Hub and the Africa AI Policy Lab, argued that numerous organisations are already developing health data and AI governance initiatives, but often work independently with limited coordination.

She criticised the exclusion of parliaments and judicial institutions from governance discussions, arguing that legislators and courts play essential roles in creating and interpreting legal frameworks.

Bonyo also called for stronger institutional capacity, particularly among national data protection authorities that increasingly find themselves overseeing AI without sufficient technical expertise or financial resources.

She further highlighted practical barriers limiting African participation in international governance discussions, including visa restrictions and the high cost of attending Geneva-based meetings.

Summarising the challenge, Bonyo remarked that the problem is ‘not a policy problem… it’s implementation,’ urging countries to develop governance frameworks rooted in local realities rather than simply adopting foreign regulatory models.

Private sector and technical standards also matter

Representing the technical and private-sector perspective, Simão Ferraz de Campos Neto, Senior Counsellor at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), argued that clearer rules and common technical standards are essential if health data is to be shared safely without discouraging innovation.

He noted that organisations frequently hesitate to share data not because they oppose collaboration, but because legal uncertainty creates concerns about liability.

Campos Neto called for interoperable technical standards, machine-readable datasets and standardised data-sharing agreements that could make trusted health data exchange significantly easier.

He also cautioned against treating AI as a single technology requiring uniform regulation.

Instead, he advocated proportionate, risk-based regulation that reflects the diversity of AI applications, while avoiding excessive regulatory burdens that could slow innovation.

Momentum builds towards global action

Closing the discussion, Jamal Alshanfari, Ambassador and Head of Oman Health office in Geneva, pointed to growing political momentum following discussions at the World Health Assembly, where member states expressed broad support for developing stronger global health data governance arrangements.

He identified four priorities for the next phase of work. The phases are expanding international consensus, strengthening national legislation and institutional capacity, providing practical implementation guidance, and ensuring that governments, civil society, academia, industry and end users all participate in shaping future frameworks.

Alshanfari also reminded participants that governance discussions should ultimately focus on those most affected by digital health technologies.

‘Everybody forgets about the end user,’ he said, stressing that trust depends on governance frameworks serving citizens as much as institutions.

In her closing remarks, Forslund said the discussion demonstrated encouraging progress across national, regional and global initiatives, while acknowledging that implementation remains the greatest challenge. She pointed to the upcoming World Health Assembly as an important opportunity to advance work on a possible global resolution on health data governance.

The session concluded with broad agreement that trusted AI in healthcare will depend not only on technological innovation but also on stronger legislation, greater international coordination, practical implementation, and governance frameworks that place citizens’ rights and public trust at their centre.

Track all key moments from the WSIS Forum 2026 on our dedicated WSIS page.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

UN Global Dialogue opens debate on AI risks and governance

The first UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance has opened in Geneva, bringing governments, technology companies, researchers and civil society together to discuss international cooperation on AI.

The Dialogue was established through the Global Digital Compact to provide an inclusive UN forum for sharing experiences, identifying governance gaps and discussing how AI can be developed and used safely.

The meeting follows the release of the first preliminary report by the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI. The report provides an evidence-based assessment of AI’s opportunities, risks and societal impacts for UN member states.

The Panel warned that AI capabilities are advancing faster than scientific understanding and that many governments’ ability to respond is lagging. It said AI could support economic growth, public services and scientific discovery, but that the risk of serious or catastrophic harm cannot yet be ruled out.

Participants also highlighted the widening AI divide. Advanced economies and major technology companies hold most of the infrastructure, data, investment and expertise needed to build and govern advanced AI systems, while many developing countries risk remaining dependent on external models and platforms.

The Dialogue is intended to support more open and inclusive discussion on AI governance, including safety, accountability, access, capacity-building and international coordination.

It takes place in Geneva on 6 and 7 July alongside the AI for Good Global Summit and WSIS Forum.

Why does it matter?

The Geneva Dialogue is important because it gives all UN member states a place to discuss AI governance, not only countries and companies with the most advanced AI systems. The scientific panel’s report also raises the stakes by linking rapid AI progress to governance gaps, misuse risks and the possibility of serious harm. The AI divide is equally significant: countries without infrastructure, expertise and local control over AI systems may struggle to shape rules, protect their interests and benefit from AI-driven development.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our chatbot!

Hong Kong launches AI privacy sandbox for schools

Hong Kong’s Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data and the Digital Policy Office have launched an AI privacy sandbox to support responsible AI adoption in schools.

The Safeguarding Personal Data AI Sandbox will provide a collaborative platform for schools exploring AI solutions while managing the risks to personal data protection.

The first phase will run for six months and select 15 school applicants. It is open to publicly funded primary and secondary schools, with applications accepted until 30 October 2026.

Selected schools will receive guidance from the Privacy Commissioner’s office on compliance with the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance.

They will also receive support from the Digital Policy Office on Hong Kong’s Generative Artificial Intelligence Technical and Application Guideline.

Cyberport, Hong Kong, and the Hong Kong Productivity Council will provide technical advice.

A briefing session for interested schools is scheduled for 28 August 2026.

Why does it matter?

Schools are increasingly exploring AI tools, but their use of student data creates specific privacy, safety and governance risks. Hong Kong’s sandbox offers a practical way to test AI adoption in education while giving schools regulatory and technical support. The initiative also shows how governments can move beyond broad AI principles by creating sector-specific support mechanisms for institutions that may lack in-house expertise.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

UNESCO study examines digital platform influence on news in South-East Europe

A new UNESCO-supported study has found that digital platforms are increasingly shaping how news reaches audiences across South-East Europe and Türkiye, creating new opportunities for journalism while increasing publishers’ dependence on platform algorithms.

Published by the South-East European Network for Professionalization of Media (SEENPM), the study examines how social media platforms, search engines and recommendation systems influence news distribution and how governments across the region regulate digital media.

The UNESCO-supported study surveyed 71 media organisations across Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia and Türkiye. It found that digital platforms have become essential gateways to news for digital-native audiences while helping local and public-interest media reach wider audiences.

At the same time, newsrooms are increasingly adapting headlines, publishing schedules and visual content to satisfy platform algorithms, despite often lacking the technical expertise and financial resources needed to keep pace with constantly changing platform rules.

Researchers also documented numerous cases in which journalistic content was removed, downgraded, demonetised or restricted because automated moderation systems failed to understand local languages, cultural context or the public-interest value of reporting.

Many media organisations also reported limited communication with platform operators and ineffective appeal mechanisms, making it difficult to challenge moderation decisions or changes in algorithmic visibility.

The report recommends stronger transparency and accountability requirements for digital platforms, better appeal mechanisms, greater recognition of verified journalistic content, and increased support for media literacy and self-regulation.

UNESCO said the findings will contribute to the EU-funded project ‘Building Trust in Media in South-East Europe: Support to Journalism as a Public Good’, which seeks to promote rights-based digital platform governance while strengthening independent journalism across the region.

Why does it matter?

The study highlights how platform governance is becoming a defining factor in the future of journalism. While digital platforms enable publishers to reach larger audiences, they also shape news visibility through algorithms and automated moderation systems that can significantly affect traffic, revenue and public access to reliable information.

The findings also reinforce calls for more transparent and accountable platform governance. Better moderation processes, effective appeals and greater recognition of public-interest journalism could help ensure that automated systems support rather than inadvertently undermine media pluralism, local journalism and freedom of expression.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Germany releases open-source AI platform to accelerate digital public administration

Germany’s Federal Ministry for Digital Affairs and Public Sector Modernization (BMDS) has released the source code of its SPARK API as an open-source project, aiming to accelerate AI adoption across public administration.

The modular platform allows government organisations to integrate AI into existing administrative systems without redesigning their underlying infrastructure, enabling faster and more flexible digital public services.

Built on a modular architecture, the SPARK API enables public authorities in Germany to add AI components to existing administrative processes across different legal and operational contexts. Unlike the broader SPARK Workflow platform, which orchestrates end-to-end administrative procedures, the API focuses on extending existing systems with reusable AI capabilities. The ministry said this approach should simplify integration and encourage wider adoption across government.

To support further development, BMDS organised an open hackathon involving more than 40 participants selected from over 210 applicants from government, industry and academia.

Teams developed AI applications for analysing unstructured documents, linking administrative records with geospatial data and strengthening cybersecurity. Participants also tested large language models against prompt injection attacks and evaluated guardrails designed to protect confidentiality, integrity and system availability.

The ministry described the hackathon as the beginning of a broader collaborative development process. Additional workshops and community initiatives are planned after the summer to improve the platform, expand its AI modules and encourage reuse across Germany’s public sector.

By releasing the SPARK API as open source, BMDS aims to improve transparency, encourage collaboration and accelerate digital transformation across public administration.

Why does it matter?

Germany’s decision reflects a broader shift towards treating AI as shared digital infrastructure for government rather than a collection of isolated projects. Open-source, modular platforms can help public institutions integrate AI more quickly, reduce duplication, improve interoperability and give agencies greater control over how AI systems are deployed and audited.

The initiative also highlights a growing preference among governments for transparent and reusable AI tools instead of relying solely on proprietary platforms. By making the code publicly available, Germany is encouraging collaboration across public institutions, academia and industry while supporting a more open approach to public-sector AI innovation.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

UN-backed panel warns AI is outpacing global governance

A United Nations-backed scientific panel has warned that AI capabilities are advancing faster than governments’ ability to evaluate and govern them, raising concerns that oversight is failing to keep pace with increasingly powerful systems.

The Independent International Scientific Panel on AI, comprising 40 experts, found that AI systems are making rapid progress across key benchmarks. However, it warned that existing evaluation methods are becoming less reliable as models approach near-perfect performance or adapt to testing conditions.

Despite these advances, the report stresses that benefits in areas such as education and scientific research are not guaranteed. Outcomes depend heavily on institutional safeguards, teacher preparedness and whether AI systems are designed to support learning rather than replace critical thinking.

The panel also warns of structural risks, including the concentration of AI development among a small number of companies and countries, uneven language coverage and limited independent evaluation capacity across much of the world. According to the report, these imbalances could shape both access to AI and the ability to manage its risks.

Why does it matter?

The report highlights a growing mismatch between the pace of AI development and governments’ ability to evaluate, regulate and oversee increasingly capable systems. As AI evolves more quickly than existing governance mechanisms, policymakers risk responding to problems only after technologies have been widely deployed.

It also underscores that AI governance is becoming a question of global capacity as much as regulation. Countries with limited technical expertise, evaluation infrastructure or access to advanced AI systems may struggle to assess risks, enforce safeguards or influence international standards, potentially widening existing technological and economic divides.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our chatbot!

ITU showcases AI tools to strengthen digital trust

The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) has highlighted a new generation of AI researchers developing practical tools to strengthen digital trust, improve content authenticity and combat misinformation.

Ahead of the AI for Good Global Summit in Geneva, the Young Researcher Associate Programme is showcasing projects designed to improve multimedia authenticity, helping people identify manipulated content while supporting creativity and innovation in the age of generative AI.

The initiative operates under the AI and Multimedia Authenticity Standards Collaboration, established in 2024 by the World Standards Cooperation, which brings together the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the ITU.

The programme brings together early-career researchers from universities around the world to develop solutions addressing content authenticity, provenance and digital rights as AI-generated media becomes increasingly common online.

Three flagship projects illustrate the programme’s multidisciplinary approach. STOP&SCAN promotes critical thinking through a five-step framework that encourages people to assess the source, content and context of digital information before sharing it.

AMITO provides an AI-powered multimedia integrity toolkit through Telegram and WhatsApp, analysing suspicious images and videos while explaining its findings in plain language rather than simply labelling content as authentic or fake.

Meanwhile, the Policy-as-Code project maps AI-related regulations across jurisdictions, helping creators, businesses and policymakers understand how AI-generated content is regulated while laying the foundations for machine-readable compliance mechanisms.

The researchers will present their work at the AI for Good Global Summit on 9 July, demonstrating how technical innovation, behavioural science and regulatory frameworks can work together to build more trustworthy digital ecosystems. According to the ITU, strengthening digital trust requires collaboration across generations, disciplines and countries.

According to ITU, designing digital trust requires collaboration across generations, disciplines and countries to ensure AI strengthens rather than undermines confidence in online information.

Why does it matter?

As generative AI makes it easier to create convincing synthetic media, verifying the authenticity and provenance of digital content is becoming increasingly important for governments, businesses and the public. Technical tools alone are unlikely to solve the problem, making user education, common standards and transparent governance equally important.

The initiative also highlights the growing role of international standards organisations in shaping AI governance. By combining authenticity technologies, regulatory mapping and practical educational tools, the ITU and its partners are helping develop a shared foundation for trusted digital ecosystems that can operate across platforms and national borders.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!