High-level AI Standards panel

Summary

This discussion centered on the launch of the AI Standards Exchange Database and the role of international standards in AI governance, featuring representatives from major standards organizations and the United Nations. The panel was moderated by Dr. Bilel Jamoussi from ITU and included speakers from the UN, ISO, IEC, IEEE, ITU, and the UK government. The newly launched database represents a collaborative effort between ITU, ISO, IEC, IEEE, and other partners to create a one-stop gateway for accessing over 700 AI standards and technical reports from global standards organizations.

The panelists emphasized that effective AI standardization requires unprecedented collaboration among international standards bodies to address the rapidly evolving nature of AI technology. Amandeep Singh Gill from the UN stressed the need for more agile, responsive standards development processes and a shift from purely technical approaches to multidisciplinary, socio-technical paradigms. Dr. Sung Hwan Cho from ISO highlighted the importance of human-centered AI standards that address not only technical aspects but also ethical, societal, and environmental impacts. The speakers agreed that inclusivity and capacity building for developing countries are crucial to ensure no one is left behind in AI governance.

Philippe Metzger from IEC outlined four key principles for effective collaboration: translate principles into practical implementation, structure approaches for clarity, include diverse stakeholders, and connect various organizations beyond just standards bodies. The discussion concluded with strong support for the database as a valuable tool for coordination and transparency, while acknowledging that real success will be measured by practical outcomes and impact in addressing AI governance challenges globally.

Keypoints

## Major Discussion Points:

– **Launch of AI Standards Exchange Database**: The primary focus was introducing a new collaborative database providing one-stop access to over 700 AI standards and technical reports from global standards organizations (ITU, ISO, IEC, IEEE, and others), created in response to the Global Digital Compact.

– **Need for Enhanced Collaboration Among Standards Bodies**: Panelists emphasized the critical importance of international standards organizations working together more cohesively to address AI’s rapid evolution, reduce overlap, and provide clarity for governments and industry stakeholders.

– **Human-Centered and Socio-Technical Approach to AI Standards**: Discussion highlighted the necessity of moving beyond purely technical standards to include ethical, societal, environmental, and economic considerations in AI governance and standardization.

– **Inclusivity and Capacity Building**: Strong emphasis on ensuring developing countries participate in AI standards development, with mentions of programs to bridge the digital divide and ensure “no one is left behind” in the AI governance ecosystem.

– **Upcoming Seoul AI Standards Summit**: Promotion of the December 2-3, 2025 International AI Standards Summit in Seoul as a key opportunity for multi-stakeholder collaboration and advancing global AI governance through practical standards implementation.

## Overall Purpose:

The discussion aimed to officially launch the AI Standards Exchange Database while establishing a framework for enhanced international cooperation in AI standardization. The session sought to demonstrate how major standards organizations can work together to provide coherent, accessible, and human-centered AI governance tools for global stakeholders.

## Overall Tone:

The discussion maintained a consistently collaborative and optimistic tone throughout. It was formal yet enthusiastic, with speakers expressing genuine excitement about the database launch and future cooperation opportunities. The tone was professional and diplomatic, reflecting the international nature of the panel, while conveying urgency about the need for coordinated action in AI standardization. There was no notable shift in tone – it remained constructive and forward-looking from beginning to end.

Speakers

– **LJ Rich**: Session host/moderator (role inferred from context)

– **Bilel Jamoussi**: Deputy Director, TSP, and Chief Study Groups and Policy Dep, ITU; Session moderator

– **Amandeep Singh Gill**: Under-Secretary-General and Special Envoy for Digital and Emerging Technologies, United Nations

– **Seizo Onoe**: Director of TSP, ITU

– **Sung Hwan Cho**: President, ISO

– **Philippe Metzger**: Secretary-General and CEO, IEC

– **Kathleen A. Kramer**: President and CEO of the IEEE

– **Paul Gaskell**: Deputy Director, Digital Trade, Internet Governance and Digital Standards, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), UK

Additional speakers:

– **Vijay**: Technical support person (mentioned briefly for database demonstration)

# AI Standards Exchange Database Launch: International Collaboration for AI Governance

## Executive Summary

This session, moderated by Dr. Bilel Jamoussi from ITU, marked the official launch of the AI Standards Exchange Database and featured senior representatives from major global standards organisations and the United Nations discussing international cooperation in AI standardisation. The newly launched database provides one-stop access to over 700 AI standards and technical reports from global standards organisations, representing a collaborative effort between ITU, ISO, IEC, IEEE, and other partners.

The discussion highlighted the need for enhanced collaboration among standards organisations to address AI’s complexity and rapid evolution. Speakers emphasised moving beyond purely technical approaches to embrace human-centred, socio-technical paradigms that consider ethical, societal, environmental, and economic implications. The session concluded with strong support for future coordination mechanisms, including the International AI Standards Summit scheduled for December 2nd and 3rd in Seoul.

## The AI Standards Exchange Database Launch

Dr. Jamoussi presented the AI Standards Exchange Database as a comprehensive platform providing gateway access to over 700 AI standards and technical reports from global organisations. The database features sophisticated functionality with publications classified by industry verticals and keyword search capabilities with filtering options.

During the live demonstration, Dr. Jamoussi showcased the database’s user interface, highlighting its ability to search across multiple standards development organisations simultaneously. The platform includes standards from ITU, ISO, IEC, IEEE, and other partners, addressing the critical need for transparency and easy access for policymakers, regulators, and developers.

The database’s governance structure involves a steering committee with participation from all major standards development organisations, ensuring ongoing momentum and shared responsibility. Dr. Jamoussi noted that capacity building initiatives for the database are planned for 2026, supporting global participation in AI standards development.

## Key Participants and Their Perspectives

**Amandeep Singh Gill** (UN Under-Secretary-General and Special Envoy for Digital and Emerging Technologies) challenged existing paradigms, arguing that “our typical standards development cycle is not fit for purpose for what AI needs.” He emphasised the necessity of moving from purely technical approaches to “more of a joined-up, multidisciplinary approach” embracing socio-technical paradigms. Gill referenced the Global Digital Compact published in September, specifically articles 58, 59, and 60, plus WTSA 24 Resolution 101, as providing frameworks for international cooperation.

**Dr. Sung Hwan Cho** (ISO President) championed human-centred AI standards, stating that “AI governance is not just about technology stuff” and emphasising the need to consider “not only technical aspects, but also societal challenges.” He highlighted ISO’s commitment to inclusivity, noting that one-third of ISO SC42 membership comes from developing countries. Dr. Cho announced the International AI Standards Summit for December 2nd and 3rd in Seoul, bringing together “leaders across sectors.”

**Philippe Metzger** (IEC Secretary-General and CEO) outlined a practical framework for collaboration based on four key elements: translate principles into implementation, structure approaches for clarity, include diverse stakeholders, and connect various organisations. He emphasised that “capacity building and quality digital infrastructure support are essential for global participation” and that standards organisations will be “measured against real outcomes and the real impact that our standards make.”

**Kathleen A. Kramer** (IEEE President and CEO) noted that effective collaboration “requires intentional, systematic collaboration with an eye towards what’s accepted and what’s technically real.” She emphasised IEEE’s multi-stakeholder model with 500,000 members across 190 countries and highlighted that “open and consensus-driven standards enable digital cooperation, trust, and innovation across borders.”

**Seizo Onoe** (ITU TSP Director) highlighted that “single organisations cannot cover all technological areas,” making complementary collaboration essential. He emphasised ITU’s productive relationships with other standards bodies through existing partnership frameworks.

**Paul Gaskell** (Deputy Director, Digital Trade, Internet Governance and Digital Standards, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology) provided governmental perspective, emphasising that standards serve as “key tools alongside regulation for creating frameworks for emerging technologies.” He highlighted the UK’s evidence-based approach through their AI standards hub and mentioned the upcoming publication of the UK’s digital standards strategy.

## Collaboration Framework and Mechanisms

The discussion revealed strong consensus on the need for enhanced collaboration among standards development organisations. This cooperation builds on existing frameworks, particularly the World Standards Corporation partnership and the Standardization Program Coordination Group (SPCG), which provide established mechanisms for coordination.

Philippe Metzger’s four-element framework provided concrete structure for collaboration:

1. **Translate**: Converting principles into practical implementation for real-world governance

2. **Structure**: Organising approaches for clarity and coherence

3. **Include**: Engaging diverse stakeholders beyond traditional technical communities

4. **Connect**: Linking various organisations and initiatives

The speakers recognised that AI’s complexity exceeds any single organisation’s capacity to address comprehensively. As Seizo Onoe noted, complementary collaboration is essential because individual organisations cannot cover all technological areas effectively.

## Human-Centred and Socio-Technical Approaches

A significant theme was the imperative to move beyond purely technical considerations in AI standards development. Dr. Cho articulated this shift, arguing that AI standards “should consider not only technical aspects, but also societal challenges” including “ethical, societal, environmental, and economic impact.”

Amandeep Singh Gill reinforced this perspective by advocating for multidisciplinary approaches that embrace socio-technical paradigms. This approach requires standards organisations to engage with disciplines and stakeholders beyond their traditional technical communities, including ethicists, social scientists, policymakers, and civil society representatives.

Philippe Metzger emphasised the practical implications, noting that standards must translate high-level principles into concrete technical specifications that can be implemented and assessed in real-world contexts.

## Inclusivity and Global Participation

The discussion revealed strong commitment to ensuring global participation in AI standards development. Dr. Cho highlighted ISO’s concrete commitment, noting that one-third of ISO SC42 membership comes from developing countries “to ensure no one is left behind.”

Philippe Metzger emphasised that meaningful participation requires more than formal membership, stating that “capacity building and quality digital infrastructure support are essential for global participation.” This recognition acknowledges that developing countries need technical support, training, and infrastructure development to contribute effectively.

Kathleen Kramer highlighted IEEE’s approach with 500,000 members across 190 countries, demonstrating how broad participation can be achieved while maintaining technical rigour through consensus-based processes.

## Addressing Standards Proliferation and Coherence

The proliferation of AI standards presents both opportunities and challenges. While the database catalogues over 700 standards, speakers recognised the risk of confusion among governments and industries due to potential overlap or standards that may not be fit for purpose.

Dr. Jamoussi noted that the database addresses this challenge by providing transparency and easy access, allowing stakeholders to navigate the complex landscape of AI standards more effectively. The platform’s search and filtering capabilities help users identify relevant standards for their specific needs.

Paul Gaskell highlighted how the UK’s AI standards hub demonstrates the practical value of coordinated approaches, noting that the database complements national initiatives by avoiding duplication and leveraging existing resources.

## Future Initiatives and Coordination

The International AI Standards Summit scheduled for December 2nd and 3rd in Seoul represents a key opportunity for advancing multi-stakeholder collaboration. Dr. Cho positioned the summit as bringing together leaders across sectors to advance global AI governance through practical standards implementation.

Amandeep Singh Gill emphasised the need to “broaden ecosystem connections to AI governance discussions and international scientific panels,” ensuring that standards development connects with broader governance initiatives and scientific research.

The steering committee structure for the database provides an ongoing mechanism for coordination among standards organisations, ensuring continued collaborative momentum beyond the initial launch.

## Technical Developments and Specific Initiatives

Dr. Jamoussi highlighted specific technical developments, including AI and multimedia authenticity standards collaboration reports and a white paper on multimedia authenticity with policy guidance. These initiatives demonstrate how standards organisations are addressing specific technical challenges while considering broader policy implications.

The database’s technical features, including industry vertical classifications and advanced search capabilities, reflect sophisticated understanding of user needs across different sectors and applications.

## Challenges and Future Considerations

Despite the collaborative spirit, several challenges remain. The specific mechanisms for reducing overlap and ensuring coherence among proliferating AI standards require ongoing development. While the database provides visibility, coordination mechanisms for preventing duplication need additional work.

The challenge of making standards development cycles more agile and responsive to AI’s rapid evolution while maintaining quality and consensus remains largely unaddressed. This tension between speed and thoroughness represents a fundamental challenge for standards organisations.

Integration of conformity assessment processes for AI standards was mentioned but requires significant additional development to ensure standards can be effectively implemented and verified in practice.

## Conclusion

The launch of the AI Standards Exchange Database represents a significant milestone in international cooperation on AI standards, providing a concrete foundation for ongoing collaboration among major standards organisations. The consensus on human-centred approaches and the need for socio-technical paradigms signals an important evolution in standards development philosophy.

The commitment to inclusivity, practical implementation, and real-world impact demonstrates mature understanding of standards’ role in AI governance. The upcoming Seoul summit and ongoing coordination mechanisms provide pathways for translating the collaborative vision into practical action.

Success will ultimately be measured not by the number of standards produced but by their effectiveness in ensuring AI development and deployment serve human needs while fostering innovation and economic development. The database launch and collaborative frameworks established provide essential infrastructure for achieving these goals.

LJ Rich: This exchange unfolds across several focus sessions on the importance of AI across different industry verticals. The idea is that everybody can learn from what everybody else is doing. So it’s very exciting. Our next session is the high-level panel on the role of international standards in AI. So please join me in inviting on stage the moderator of the session, Dr. Bilel Jamoussi, Deputy Director, TSP, and Chief Study Groups and Policy Dep, ITU. Please come onto the stage.

Bilel Jamoussi: Good morning. Good morning.

LJ Rich: I would now like to call on stage the speakers for the session, Mr. Amandeep Singh Gill, Under-Secretary-General and Special Envoy for Digital and Emerging Technologies, United Nations, Mr. Seizo Onoe-san, Director of TSP, ITU, Mr. Sung Hwan Cho, President, ISO, Mr. Philip Metzger, Secretary-General and CEO, IEC, Ms. Kathleen A. Kramer, President and CEO of the IEEE, and Mr. Paul Gaskell, Deputy Director, Digital Trade, Internet Governance and Digital Standards, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. That’s DSIT from the UK. Over to you, Bilel, to moderate the session. Thank you.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you very much, LJ. Welcome to our panelists. I have to be careful here not to fall. So AI Standards Exchange Database in collaboration with IEC, ISO, ITU in partnership with IEEE ITF and the AI Standards Hub. This is something we’re going to be launching today, something new and exciting to really meet the call to action that we had in the Global Digital Compact that was published last year. We’re very pleased to have with us Mr. Amandeep, the United Nations Special Envoy for Technology. So we’re going to start with a slide. If I can have the slides on the screen, please. I’m going to do a very short presentation to introduce the AI Standards Exchange Database. The objective is to have a one-stop gateway access to broad spectrum of AI standards and reports from global standard-setting bodies. There are today more than 700 AI standards and technical reports from standards development organizations meeting the call to the Global Digital Compact, particularly Article 58 and 59 and 60, as well as the WTSA 24 Resolution 101 on artificial intelligence. The main components of AI Standards Database include, of course, AI standards, news, networking, and standards-based capacity building, which will be coming in 2026. The AI Standards Database includes publications classified by industry verticals on human AI activity applications, usage, and use cases. They track AI standards that are in force and under development, and permits keyword search and drill-down filtering for search refinement. The governance aspects of the database is happening and taking place in collaboration with the SDOs, the standard development organizations that are providing and inputting their content into the database. We will have a steering committee formed by all the SDOs that will continue this momentum. Of course, ladies and gentlemen, this was a real fast-track operation that we did since the GDC publication, I think in September last year, and then in October last year at WTSA, we started working together on putting this database together, what we call the International AI Standards Exchange Database. One more click. There is the QR code that you can scan, and you’ll have access. The database is now live, and we’re going to try to have one example. I think Vijay is going to show the database on the screen. You can show the … Yes, there it is. Once you scan that QR code, you’ll have access to this website that shows the AI standards that are already uploaded by the various standards development organizations, IEC, ISO, ITU, the IEEE, the ITF, and other partners that will be coming on board. Here, if you can show an example, perhaps, of a search for AI for health, for instance, you can look at the filters, international standards, the human AI activity, and then you click on that, and you’ll be able to see the standards that are published. If you click on, let’s say, the IEEE standards, we see that there are three standards related to AI for health. And then, of course, you can click on the standard and have access to it. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the collective product of the standards development organizations. If you’d like to applaud, this is the time to do that for this major achievement. With that, thank you very much, and really thanks to all the experts from all the standards development organizations that made this happen. Now I would like to move to our panel discussion, and we have a few questions, actually two questions that will be asked to all panelists. The first one, in a rapidly evolving AI standards landscape, how can standardization bodies work together to provide clarity and coherence for governments, industry, and the public, and what mechanisms can help all stakeholders? We’ll start with Amandeep.

Amandeep Singh Gill: Thank you. Thank you, Bilal, and congratulations on the launch of the database. Now, this question is about collaboration, it’s about networking, it’s about meeting the needs of the moment. First of those needs is the ability to respond in time and speedily to the shifting demand for AI standards. For example, our typical standards development cycle is not fit for purpose for what AI needs, so how can we be more agile, more responsive? That can only happen if we work together, because different standards development organizations have their strengths, so we need to work together more tightly, more cohesively, also with the national and regional standards development organizations. The second aspect of this question is about clarity, transparency, what’s going on in the standards development landscape. Governments, industries are often confused with the proliferation of standards, and some of them may be overlapping, some of them may not be fit for purpose. I’m not saying they are, but may not be, so we need a way in which we come together regularly to discuss them, to discuss the implementation, incorporate the feedback, reduce overlap, and catalyze a more productive, harmonious standards development community around AI that embraces the socio-technical paradigm of standards development, moves from a purely technical approach to more of a joined-up, multidisciplinary approach. Thank you.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you very much, Amandeep. I would like now to move to Dr. Cho, President of ISO.

Sung Hwan Cho: Thank you. I think I fully agree with what Mr. Amandeep told us. I think the coordinated approach, coordinated effort and strong partnership is the key to bringing coherence and clarity for governments, industry, and the private sector. In this sense, ISO and IEC have been collaborating with each other to develop AI standards in our technical committee SC42. As you may well know, it is addressing many different aspects of AI technology development in a holistic way. And we should not stop there, and as Global Data Compact clearly stated that we need to increase coordination among international standardization organization to come up with coherent, interoperable, trustworthy AI. That’s why we also launched some time ago Standardization Program Coordination Group and the World Standards Corporation, which is working on technical activities of mutual interest of three organizations. And also, because AI’s impact is so global, so cross sectors, overarchingly influential, we need to have world global benchmark, what is the best practice, and how we set the common language and common platform. And OECD AI Council recommended governments to promote multi-stakeholder consensus-based global technical standards, and international standards we are developing together can suit for that purpose, right. So, but this is not the whole story. As Doreen mentioned yesterday, in order to come up with the responsible AI governance, there are three key elements. Inclusion, clarity, I mean, the standards and the capacity. So, diversion and diversity, inclusion and diversity is at the core of international standards goal. For ISO, which is reflected in our third strategic goal, all voices heard. So, we have to ensure no one is left behind, so that all voices heard strategic goal, make sure that no one is left behind. And even SC42, out of more than 60 participants, one third, more than one third of that membership is from developing countries. So, in order to narrow the gap of digital divide, we need to have a capacity building for developing countries. So, ISO has been offering many initiatives and projects under the umbrella of action plan for developing countries. And SC42 can leverage the diverse verticals of international standards which ISO has been creating. So, it can talk to healthcare informatics, financial services, and many more expertise sectors. Before I conclude my remarks, I like to emphasize there is other aspect in AI governance, there should be. AI governance is not just about technology stuff. As you mentioned, it’s more about societal challenges, right? When you develop AI technology, we often focus on technical aspect of this technology, yeah? Data structure, infrastructure, energy demand, algorithm software, hallucination, performance, efficiency, while overlooking ethical, societal, environmental, and economic impact of this AI. So, the transformation which AI will bring into our future is so immense, so humongous, so overarching, we need to consider human-centered AI ecosystem. That is the key message from me to you during my remarks. AI international standards should consider not only technical aspects, but also societal challenges. AI standards should cover technology, but also it should cover how AI benefits humanity for all in the end. So, I conclude my remarks with that. Thank you.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you very much, Dr. Cho. Certainly, collaboration, inclusivity, and human-centered standards. Thank you for that. Onoe-san. Thank you. I think it’s on, yes.

Seizo Onoe: Thank you. Okay. Okay. Actually, the ITU has productive relationship with many standard bodies. So, we need strong communications and collaboration, and we have deep experience in this regard. Together, the ITU, ISO, and IEC are known as World Standards Corporation, WSC. So, this partnership is key to comprehensive standards development for AI. AI has created even stronger connections among standards bodies, and AI is evolving very fast. That’s why we have created a new collaboration framework or initiatives. We want to ensure that our standards keep space with this evolution. Our AI and multimedia authenticity standards collaboration has just published its first two reports, one mapping on standards landscape, and the other on consideration for policy makers and regulators. Our International AI Standards Summit took place in New Delhi last year, and I saw Dr. Cho mention about this year’s summit in Korea in December. Of course, our new AI standards exchange database is also designed to support cohesive standards development and application.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you, Onohe-san. So, collaboration with teeth. You mentioned a number of publications that came from these three SDOs, ISO and IEC. You mentioned the white paper on multimedia authenticity and the policy guidance that was led by ISO, also a paper published today. So, we collaborate and we publish together, and of course, the database is another broader collaboration with ISO, IEC, IEEE, and others. So, which will bring us to Kathleen, the president of IEEE. Kathleen, please.

Kathleen A. Kramer: So, at IEEE, we believe that in standards to advance technology, but we see standards as far more than technical tools. When they’re open and consensus driven, then they can be enablers of digital cooperation and trust and innovation and of practical progress towards the most important goals. The roadmap for digital cooperation reminds us that we must work across sectors, borders, and disciplines to shape a safe and inclusive digital future. IEEE shares this commitment. It’s in our DNA. We are together a global and expert community of over 500,000 members in 190 countries. Our standards development is a model that we use for our own technical communities across the organization, and it’s key to this is that it’s a multi-stakeholder model and that it is responsive and dynamic, not static. So, we develop and support standards that reflect an open collaboration of expertise and experience, ensuring relevance and impact in real-world contexts. So, my key point to conclude is that only through intentional, structured collaboration can standards development organizations contribute to an AI standards ecosystem that supports open, safe, and trustworthy AI across borders.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you very much, Kathleen, and as a proud senior member of the IEEE, and I’m proud that you are a senior member. Thank you, thank you. It’s really, we have a great collaboration together, especially with the Standards Association of the IEEE that is a sector member of all three sectors of the ITU, which allows us to have this interlinking of our standards development. So, thank you for that strong partnership. Mr. Philippe Metzger, Secretary General of IEC. Please, Philippe.

Philippe Metzger: Merci, Bilel, and thanks very much to the ITU and for the invitation. We’re really impressed by the size of this event, becoming bigger and bigger. I remember last year we saw the audience circling around the conference center downtown and you had to move up here. I’m not sure where you’re going next, but congratulations on that success. Now, to your question, Bilel, essentially on two points. How do we provide clarity and coherence as SDOs and how or what kind of mechanisms should we apply? I would emphasize four elements which seem key to me. The first is translate, the second is structure, the third is include, and the fourth is connect. And what I mean by that, if I start with the translation aspect, I mean standards that we all do as SDOs ultimately translate principles into practical implementation. And if we collaborate in doing so, I think we can promote and enable that translation much better. We, you know, have a real need of translating that in the field of AI into actual governance. And if we look in how we collaborate today, and it has been mentioned I think by some of the speakers already, if I look at the IEC working together with ISO in a joint technical committee, I mean all our AI transversal horizontal standards are done jointly with ISO. We have the SPCG in the world standards collaboration with ITU and ISO as well. And I think these are cases in point why the collaboration aspect is so important for the translation, because otherwise we won’t have the impact. The second point is the structured approach. I think it’s important that we do this in a structured way to ultimately ensure clarity and coherence. And without clarity and coherence, we won’t be able to create trustworthy AI. So I think there’s a clear link there throughout. And to do the trustworthy AI governance, we do things and need to do more things such as capacity building, which I think all of us do in one way or the other. We also need to support in a targeted way quality infrastructure, which is increasingly becoming a quality digital infrastructure for all the populations around the world. So that’s why doing this in a structured way is key to have the maximum impact on the ground, if you will. With regard to the inclusion, the third element I’ve mentioned includes. It was interesting, I had a chat this morning with journalists about where we’re coming from, where we’re heading to, what our current opportunities and challenges are. And I think one thing that I emphasized we cannot afford, certainly as I see, is to break things. And so we have to remain true to our DNA, which is one of inclusiveness. We have one member, one vote principle in the organization. We are consensus-based when it comes to all our approaches, the work we do in the governance and technical fields. And so I think that is absolutely critical to create also a platform where we have a broad participation and equal voices for everybody. I think it has been mentioned already by some of my pre-speakers. And then the last point, connecting, and I mean connecting the dots, what I mean by that is that we we’re not just collaborating amongst ourselves of SDOs. We more and more need to collaborate with other organizations, international organizations, with governments, with industry, of course, and stakeholder and user communities very broadly. Because otherwise we will not really understand which dots need to be connected. And I think it’s with that in mind, in that spirit, that we are going to organize together in Seoul, in Korea, in December, our International AI Standards Summit precisely to leverage as many stakeholders and organizations as possible beyond SDOs. And that’s also the reason why we have asked our members to designate, in a sense, their own national delegation so that they can include the relevant stakeholders that they see. We don’t necessarily see them from Geneva. So I think that’s why the connecting the dots is so important and leveraging the insights that the members have at the national or even local level. And I think that ultimately will allow us to make sure that AI governance becomes actually actionable through standards. And that’s what we can essentially contribute to.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you very much, Philippe. So let me check if I got it right. Translate, structure, include, connect. Great, thank you. Now we heard from the UN, from the standards development organizations. Would love to have a view of one of our member states from the UK. Government perspective, Paul, please.

Paul Gaskell: Thank you, Bilel. So, I mean, as a government, we recognize that digital standards really matter. So we’re talking about AI standards today, but that’s also across other technologies, cybersecurity, internet, quantum, semiconductors, future telecoms, etc. But we very much see standards as a key tool alongside regulation legislation for creating frameworks for emerging technologies. Standards are global, industry-led, pro-innovation. They give clear guidance to business, reassurance to consumers, and therefore underpin the rollout and confidence for consumers and everyone to use standards globally. Digital standards also feature in our new UK industrial strategy, and we’ll be publishing a UK strategy on digital standards later this year. In answer to your question, we need, as other speakers have said, an open, inclusive, multi-stakeholder ecosystem of standards development organizations. We need to engage industry, tech community, governments, regulators, civil society. We must represent those diverse interests, and we must make sure that that ecosystem supports innovation. Standards bodies should never become a blocker. I agree with others that there must be clarity and coherence across this ecosystem, not duplication or fragmentation. We need mechanisms for SDOs to coordinate globally. We therefore need strategic engagement and information between them, and also with wider international and national stakeholders. For the UK, we’re addressing this challenge. We have our own AI standards hub, which is a partnership between our Alan Turing Institute, our British Standards Institution, and our National Physical Laboratory to bring together the UK community in this space, and we held a global summit on AI standards in March this year in London. I suspect that many people in this audience may have attended that as well. We were delighted to have attendees from over 40 countries. So, the UK, we’re really keen to work with the ITU, ISO, IEC on the standards exchange. I think there’s a lot of work that we can do together. Thank you.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you very much, Paul, and thank you for mentioning the Turing Institute AI standards hub, which is one of our partners in the standards exchange database, and it was a very fruitful conversation we’ve been having to ensure we don’t duplicate. We leverage what already exists and bring all of this data in a common portal for the world to consult the international AI standards. So, ladies and gentlemen, that brings us to the second question, and I’m reminded we only have about five minutes or so, so we’re going to have to do this in a sort of a rapid fire. Would the shared AI standards database be useful tool to support coordination, transparency, and informed policymaking, and how might standard bodies collaborate to make this a reality? We’d like to start. Amandeep, please.

Amandeep Singh Gill: I don’t know if I’m going to answer this question directly or not, but I just want to double down on what Philippe was saying, that you need to broaden this ecosystem, and centralization will not help because it’s an emerging field, and we don’t know all the directions yet, and we also need to take this broader approach because we need to look at the purpose of standards, which is to support governance, which is to support innovation, as Paul was saying. So, bringing in these connections to the AI governance discussion, to the work of the International Independent Scientific Panel, the Policy Dialogue on AI within the United Nations, those would be important directions for the future. And really looking forward to the Sol Summit, which in many ways can be a kick-off opportunity for some of these new directions. Thank you.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you, Mandeep. Dr. Cho?

Sung Hwan Cho: Yeah, thank you, Bilel. I think we are very delighted to see finally the standards database will be introduced to the world. It will bring us many, many more advantages because it provides a single point of access for all the AI-related standards, right? So it is transparent and traceable. So policymakers, regulators, companies, and developers will benefit through easy access and transparency of this database, and up-to-date of state-of-the-art technology. So I’d like to mention how we make all these things possible in the future. I retouched what Onoe-san and Philip mentioned, the 2025 International AI Standards Summit, which will be held in Seoul, December. This special AI Standards Summit is an exclusive place for leaders across sectors to get together to discuss about how we make international standards for AI technology will be a practical tool for business and also serve as a bridge to connect different regulatory frameworks. So we have a very high expectation we will draw some tangible outcome out of this summit to building, establishing global AI governance for the future of our world. So I’d like to invite all of you to the summit and we can have a very intense and fruitful discussion there. Thank you.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you very much, Dr. Cho. So ladies and gentlemen, please mark your calendar, 2nd and 3rd of December, Seoul, South Korea. Thank you. Onoe-san.

Seizo Onoe: Yes. Your question is about whether the database is useful or not. Of course, yes. We need to continue the effort to make it useful. And actually, today, technological areas are very wide. So a single organization cannot cover all areas. So we have many organization standards bodies. So such standards bodies must be complementary. So the database shows a full picture of the standards of the all areas. So for the standard bodies, it is very useful to coordination between standard bodies. Also for the standard developer, they can find useful standards from that database.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you, Onoe-san. So the practical use of the database for the end user, but also the developer of technology to know what’s available and use it. Kathleen.

Kathleen A. Kramer: So I think we all share an enthusiasm for the potential of what could be. But it’s a bit like world peace that we’re all in favor of it. But how are we going to get there? And it certainly requires intentional, systematic collaboration with an eye towards what’s accepted and what’s technically real. And so I’ll point to our IEEE’s history with user-centered design. And even the very first initial draft had 300 co-collaborators just to get to that point. And then as we proceeded, I think now we’re up to about 2,000. And it takes that kind of deliberate, systematic, open collaboration that does include all the stakeholders in order to have something that stands the test of time and can respond to emerging technologies in the timeframe that’s needed. So that you can look at something from 2017 and say that it is applicable for today. Or in this case, from 2025, December 2nd, and see that it’s applicable.

Bilel Jamoussi: Yeah. No, thank you, Kathleen, for mentioning the thousands of collaborators who are developing this standard. We are providing them with a platform as standards development organizations. But it’s really the hard labor of thousands and thousands of hours of experts to really bring those standards to fruition. Philippe?

Paul Gaskell: Yeah, I think you said five minutes, but that’s probably for everybody, so I’ll try to keep it very short. And I think a lot has been said. First of all, just leveraging what Onoa-San just said, this database, of course, is a very valuable step. But it’s just that. And I’m not at all trying to diminish our common work here. But we are ultimately going to be measured against real outcomes and the real impact that our standards make. So this is a stepping stone we want to leverage. But based on that, I think, as we’ve said, we have to drill down on, especially also on the socio-technical and socio-economic dimensions. We see how big the interest is from other organizations. We had great discussions this week with a number of them who are also going to be certainly in Seoul at the standards summit. I think that’s very much going to be the spirit. But ultimately, as they say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. And so we will really be measured against those real outcomes. And I just would like to say, maybe give kudos to two sort of activities that we see developing. The first is capacity building. I mean, for instance, ISO is doing great work in doing capacity building between its members, the national standards bodies, and the governments. And we see fantastic examples at the national level. And it’s not just because I’m sitting next to Paul that I’m saying this. But I think that the UK AI standards hub is a great already achievement. Of course, it’s a work in progress. It’s an ambition as well. And I think if we can’t just replicate it like this, at least we should take inspiration and other countries take inspiration. How you can leverage, mobilize the know-how at the national level through that channel precisely to broaden up and to have a better, a deeper scope as well. Because again, it comes down to the real cases where our standards will be used. So I think that’s ultimately the test. Thank you.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you, Philippe. Paul.

Paul Gaskell: Thank you. And thank you, Philippe, for kindly referencing the UK hub. So the question that was asked was, would a shared AI standards database be useful? Yes, it would. And we have evidence as well that it works. So our UK AI standards hub has an AI standards observatory, which has a database. Now, there’s plenty of work to do in this area, lots to do. So there’s lots of room for the standards exchange and the UK to work very closely together. We’re very, very keen to do so. But feedback from users from our AI observatory already shows us that it is effective and helpful increasing awareness and understanding of AI standards across the whole community. So we have an evidence base there. And as I said, we’re really keen to look forward to working with ISO, IAU, ITU in this area in future. Thank you.

Bilel Jamoussi: Thank you very much, Paul. This brings us to the end of our panel. Certainly as a standards community, we, I think, stepped up to the plate and the challenge from the GDC to provide an international AI standards exchange with concrete deliverables of a database with very strong collaboration among the international standards organizations with a spectrum that is open to other collaborators to come and join us in the database. Of course, Korea’s summit at the end of this year in December 2nd and 3rd to continue the momentum on international AI standards collaboration with a human-centered and a governance approach to standards. Of course, conformity assessment, you didn’t mention it, Philippe, but certainly an area that IEC is leading and that we are looking forward to working together on. So with that, ladies and gentlemen, I’d like you to help me thank our panelists.

Agreement points

Need for Enhanced Collaboration Among Standards Organizations

Speakers

– Amandeep Singh Gill
– Sung Hwan Cho
– Seizo Onoe
– Kathleen A. Kramer
– Philippe Metzger
– Paul Gaskell

Arguments

Standards development organizations must work together more tightly to be agile and responsive to AI’s rapid evolution

Coordinated approach and strong partnerships are key to bringing coherence for governments and industry

ITU has productive relationships with standards bodies through World Standards Corporation partnership

Open and consensus-driven standards enable digital cooperation, trust, and innovation across borders

Four key elements for collaboration: translate, structure, include, and connect

Open, inclusive, multi-stakeholder ecosystem prevents duplication and fragmentation

Summary

All speakers unanimously agreed that enhanced collaboration among standards development organizations is essential for effective AI governance. They emphasized the need for coordinated approaches, strong partnerships, and multi-stakeholder engagement to address AI’s rapid evolution and complexity.

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards

Human-Centered and Socio-Technical Approach to AI Standards

Speakers

– Amandeep Singh Gill
– Sung Hwan Cho
– Philippe Metzger

Arguments

Need to move from purely technical approach to multidisciplinary, socio-technical paradigm

AI standards should consider not only technical aspects but also societal, ethical, environmental, and economic impacts

Standards must translate principles into practical implementation for real-world governance

Summary

These speakers shared a strong consensus that AI standards must go beyond technical considerations to encompass broader societal, ethical, and governance dimensions. They advocated for a human-centered approach that addresses the full spectrum of AI’s impact on society.

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards | Sociocultural | Human rights principles | Legal and regulatory | Data governance

Inclusivity and Capacity Building in Standards Development

Speakers

– Sung Hwan Cho
– Kathleen A. Kramer
– Philippe Metzger

Arguments

One-third of ISO SC42 membership comes from developing countries to ensure no one is left behind

IEEE’s multi-stakeholder model ensures broad participation with 500,000 members in 190 countries

Consensus-based approach with one member, one vote principle maintains inclusiveness

Capacity building and quality digital infrastructure support are essential for global participation

Summary

These speakers emphasized the critical importance of inclusive participation in standards development, with specific focus on ensuring developing countries and diverse stakeholders have meaningful representation and access to capacity building resources.

Topics

Development | Capacity development | Digital access | Infrastructure | Digital standards

Practical Implementation and Real-World Impact

Speakers

– Seizo Onoe
– Kathleen A. Kramer
– Philippe Metzger
– Paul Gaskell

Arguments

Single organizations cannot cover all technological areas, so complementary collaboration is necessary

Success requires systematic collaboration with thousands of contributors for standards that stand the test of time

Real outcomes and impact will be the ultimate measure of standards effectiveness

Standards serve as key tools alongside regulation for creating frameworks for emerging technologies

UK AI standards hub demonstrates evidence-based effectiveness in increasing awareness and understanding

Summary

These speakers agreed that the ultimate value of AI standards lies in their practical implementation and real-world impact. They emphasized the need for systematic collaboration, evidence-based approaches, and measurable outcomes rather than just theoretical frameworks.

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards | Legal and regulatory | Economic

Similar viewpoints

All three speakers strongly supported the value of centralized databases for AI standards, emphasizing their role in providing transparency, accessibility, and practical utility for various stakeholders including policymakers, regulators, and developers.

Speakers

– Bilel Jamoussi
– Sung Hwan Cho
– Paul Gaskell

Arguments

Database provides one-stop gateway access to over 700 AI standards from global organizations

Database provides transparency and easy access for policymakers, regulators, and developers

UK AI standards hub demonstrates evidence-based effectiveness in increasing awareness and understanding

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards

Both speakers emphasized the importance of connecting AI standards development to broader governance discussions and international coordination mechanisms, viewing the Seoul summit as a key opportunity for cross-sector collaboration.

Speakers

– Amandeep Singh Gill
– Sung Hwan Cho

Arguments

Need to broaden ecosystem connections to AI governance discussions and international scientific panels

International AI Standards Summit in Seoul (December 2-3) will bring together leaders across sectors

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards | Legal and regulatory | Data governance

Unexpected consensus

Socio-Technical Paradigm Shift

Speakers

– Amandeep Singh Gill
– Sung Hwan Cho
– Philippe Metzger

Arguments

Need to move from purely technical approach to multidisciplinary, socio-technical paradigm

AI standards should consider not only technical aspects but also societal, ethical, environmental, and economic impacts

Standards must translate principles into practical implementation for real-world governance

Explanation

It was unexpected to see such strong consensus among representatives from different organizations (UN, ISO, IEC) on moving beyond traditional technical standards to embrace broader societal considerations. This represents a significant paradigm shift in how standards organizations view their role in AI governance.

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards | Sociocultural | Human rights principles | Legal and regulatory

Emphasis on Developing Country Participation

Speakers

– Sung Hwan Cho
– Philippe Metzger

Arguments

One-third of ISO SC42 membership comes from developing countries to ensure no one is left behind

Capacity building and quality digital infrastructure support are essential for global participation

Explanation

The strong emphasis on developing country participation and capacity building from standards organization leaders was unexpected, showing a commitment to global inclusivity that goes beyond traditional technical standardization approaches.

Topics

Development | Capacity development | Digital access

Overall assessment

Summary

The speakers demonstrated remarkably high consensus across multiple dimensions: the need for enhanced collaboration among standards organizations, the importance of human-centered and socio-technical approaches, the critical role of inclusivity and capacity building, and the focus on practical implementation and real-world impact. There was universal agreement on the value of the AI Standards Exchange Database and strong support for future coordination mechanisms.

Consensus level

Very high consensus with no significant disagreements identified. This strong alignment suggests a mature understanding among international standards organizations about the challenges and opportunities in AI governance. The implications are highly positive for coordinated global action on AI standards, with clear pathways for implementation through established mechanisms like the World Standards Corporation partnership and upcoming initiatives like the Seoul summit. The consensus on moving beyond purely technical approaches to embrace socio-technical paradigms represents a significant evolution in standards development philosophy.

Different viewpoints

Unexpected differences

Overall assessment

Summary

The discussion revealed remarkably high consensus among speakers with no direct disagreements identified. All speakers aligned on key principles including the need for collaboration, inclusivity, human-centered approaches, and practical implementation of AI standards.

Disagreement level

Very low disagreement level with only subtle differences in emphasis and approach rather than fundamental conflicts. The main variations were in implementation strategies and priorities rather than core objectives. This high level of consensus suggests strong alignment within the international standards community on AI governance principles, which could facilitate effective collaboration but might also indicate insufficient diversity of perspectives in the discussion.

Partial agreements

Similar viewpoints

All three speakers strongly supported the value of centralized databases for AI standards, emphasizing their role in providing transparency, accessibility, and practical utility for various stakeholders including policymakers, regulators, and developers.

Speakers

– Bilel Jamoussi
– Sung Hwan Cho
– Paul Gaskell

Arguments

Database provides one-stop gateway access to over 700 AI standards from global organizations

Database provides transparency and easy access for policymakers, regulators, and developers

UK AI standards hub demonstrates evidence-based effectiveness in increasing awareness and understanding

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards

Both speakers emphasized the importance of connecting AI standards development to broader governance discussions and international coordination mechanisms, viewing the Seoul summit as a key opportunity for cross-sector collaboration.

Speakers

– Amandeep Singh Gill
– Sung Hwan Cho

Arguments

Need to broaden ecosystem connections to AI governance discussions and international scientific panels

International AI Standards Summit in Seoul (December 2-3) will bring together leaders across sectors

Topics

Infrastructure | Digital standards | Legal and regulatory | Data governance

Key takeaways

Launch of the AI Standards Exchange Database providing one-stop access to over 700 AI standards from global organizations, representing a major collaborative achievement between ITU, ISO, IEC, IEEE, and other partners

Strong consensus that enhanced collaboration among standards development organizations is essential to address AI’s rapid evolution and provide clarity for governments, industry, and the public

Agreement that AI standards must adopt a human-centered, socio-technical approach that considers not just technical aspects but also societal, ethical, environmental, and economic impacts

Recognition that inclusivity and capacity building are fundamental, with emphasis on ensuring developing countries participate meaningfully in standards development

Acknowledgment that standards serve as key governance tools alongside regulation for emerging technologies, requiring open, consensus-driven, multi-stakeholder approaches

Understanding that single organizations cannot cover all technological areas, making complementary collaboration between standards bodies necessary

Agreement that real-world impact and practical implementation will be the ultimate measure of standards effectiveness

Resolutions and action items

AI Standards Exchange Database officially launched and made live with QR code access provided to participants

Steering committee to be formed by all participating standards development organizations to continue database momentum and governance

International AI Standards Summit scheduled for December 2-3, 2025 in Seoul, South Korea to bring together leaders across sectors

UK committed to working closely with ITU, ISO, IEC on the standards exchange database to avoid duplication and leverage existing resources

Standards development organizations agreed to continue collaborative framework through World Standards Corporation partnership

Capacity building initiatives to be expanded, particularly for developing countries participation in AI standards development

Unresolved issues

Specific mechanisms for reducing overlap and ensuring coherence among the proliferation of AI standards remain to be fully defined

How to make standards development cycles more agile and responsive to AI’s rapid evolution while maintaining quality and consensus

Detailed implementation of conformity assessment processes for AI standards

Specific funding and resource allocation for capacity building initiatives in developing countries

How to effectively measure and evaluate the real-world impact and outcomes of AI standards

Integration mechanisms between AI standards and broader AI governance discussions at international level

Suggested compromises

Broadening the ecosystem beyond traditional standards development organizations to include governments, regulators, civil society, and other stakeholders while maintaining technical rigor

Balancing the need for speed and agility in standards development with the requirement for inclusive, consensus-based processes

Leveraging existing national and regional initiatives (like UK AI Standards Hub) as models while allowing for local adaptation rather than direct replication

Combining technical standards development with socio-economic considerations through multidisciplinary approaches

Using the database as a stepping stone toward broader coordination while recognizing it’s just the beginning of needed collaboration

Our typical standards development cycle is not fit for purpose for what AI needs, so how can we be more agile, more responsive? That can only happen if we work together, because different standards development organizations have their strengths… we need to move from a purely technical approach to more of a joined-up, multidisciplinary approach.

Speaker

Amandeep Singh Gill

Reason

This comment fundamentally challenges the existing paradigm of standards development by identifying a critical mismatch between traditional timelines and AI’s rapid evolution. It introduces the concept of ‘socio-technical paradigm’ which shifts the conversation from purely technical considerations to broader societal implications.

Impact

This comment set the tone for the entire discussion by establishing that collaboration isn’t just beneficial but essential for survival in the AI standards landscape. It influenced subsequent speakers to emphasize partnership and multidisciplinary approaches, with Dr. Cho later echoing the need to consider ‘not only technical aspects, but also societal challenges.’

AI governance is not just about technology stuff… When you develop AI technology, we often focus on technical aspect of this technology… while overlooking ethical, societal, environmental, and economic impact of this AI… AI international standards should consider not only technical aspects, but also societal challenges.

Speaker

Sung Hwan Cho

Reason

This comment represents a paradigm shift from viewing standards as purely technical documents to seeing them as tools for addressing broader human and societal challenges. It challenges the traditional engineering-focused approach to standards development.

Impact

This comment deepened the conversation by expanding the scope of what AI standards should encompass. It influenced the discussion to move beyond technical coordination to consider human-centered design and societal impact, with subsequent speakers like Philippe Metzger emphasizing the need to ‘translate principles into practical implementation’ and connect with broader stakeholder communities.

We develop and support standards that reflect an open collaboration of expertise and experience, ensuring relevance and impact in real-world contexts… only through intentional, structured collaboration can standards development organizations contribute to an AI standards ecosystem that supports open, safe, and trustworthy AI across borders.

Speaker

Kathleen A. Kramer

Reason

This comment introduces the critical concept of ‘intentional, structured collaboration’ as opposed to ad-hoc cooperation. It emphasizes that collaboration must be purposeful and systematic to be effective, challenging the assumption that simply working together is sufficient.

Impact

This comment elevated the discussion from general calls for collaboration to specific requirements for how that collaboration should be structured. It influenced Philippe Metzger’s subsequent detailed framework of ‘translate, structure, include, connect,’ showing how the conversation evolved toward more concrete implementation strategies.

I don’t know if I’m going to answer this question directly or not, but I just want to double down on what Philippe was saying, that you need to broaden this ecosystem, and centralization will not help because it’s an emerging field, and we don’t know all the directions yet.

Speaker

Amandeep Singh Gill

Reason

This comment challenges a potential assumption that centralization and standardization are always beneficial. It introduces the counterintuitive idea that in emerging fields like AI, too much centralization could actually hinder innovation and adaptation.

Impact

This comment introduced a tension in the discussion between the need for coordination and the risk of premature standardization. It shifted the conversation toward considering how to balance structure with flexibility, influencing the final discussions about keeping the ecosystem open and adaptive.

It’s a bit like world peace that we’re all in favor of it. But how are we going to get there? And it certainly requires intentional, systematic collaboration with an eye towards what’s accepted and what’s technically real.

Speaker

Kathleen A. Kramer

Reason

This comment uses a powerful analogy to highlight the gap between aspirational goals and practical implementation. It challenges the group to move beyond general agreement to concrete action plans.

Impact

This comment served as a reality check that grounded the discussion in practical considerations. It influenced Philippe Metzger’s closing remarks about being ‘measured against real outcomes and the real impact that our standards make,’ shifting the conversation toward accountability and measurable results.

Overall assessment

These key comments fundamentally transformed what could have been a routine discussion about technical coordination into a deeper examination of how standards development must evolve for the AI era. The conversation progressed through three distinct phases: first, establishing that traditional approaches are inadequate (Gill’s opening); second, expanding the scope to include societal considerations (Cho’s human-centered approach); and third, demanding concrete, structured implementation (Kramer’s systematic collaboration framework). The most impactful insight was the recognition that AI standards require a fundamentally different approach – one that is faster, more inclusive, multidisciplinary, and adaptive. The discussion evolved from technical coordination to governance philosophy, ultimately challenging participants to rethink not just what they standardize, but how they approach the entire standards development process in an era of rapid technological change.

How can standardization bodies make their typical standards development cycle more agile and responsive to meet AI’s rapidly evolving needs?

Speaker

Amandeep Singh Gill

Explanation

Current standards development cycles are not fit for purpose for AI needs, requiring more speed and agility in response to shifting demands

How can standards development organizations reduce overlap and ensure standards are fit for purpose in the proliferating AI standards landscape?

Speaker

Amandeep Singh Gill

Explanation

There’s confusion among governments and industries due to proliferation of standards, some potentially overlapping or not fit for purpose

How can AI standards development move from a purely technical approach to a more joined-up, multidisciplinary socio-technical paradigm?

Speaker

Amandeep Singh Gill

Explanation

Need to embrace a socio-technical paradigm that goes beyond technical aspects to include societal considerations

How can capacity building for developing countries be enhanced to narrow the digital divide in AI standards?

Speaker

Sung Hwan Cho

Explanation

Essential to ensure no one is left behind and that all voices are heard in AI governance, particularly from developing countries

How can AI standards better address ethical, societal, environmental, and economic impacts rather than focusing solely on technical aspects?

Speaker

Sung Hwan Cho

Explanation

AI governance should consider human-centered AI ecosystem and how AI benefits humanity, not just technical performance

How can the real-world impact and outcomes of AI standards be measured and ensured?

Speaker

Philippe Metzger

Explanation

Standards organizations will ultimately be measured against real outcomes and impact, requiring focus on practical implementation

How can national-level AI standards initiatives be replicated or adapted in other countries?

Speaker

Philippe Metzger

Explanation

Need to leverage and mobilize know-how at national level, taking inspiration from successful models like the UK AI standards hub

How can conformity assessment be developed and implemented for AI standards?

Speaker

Bilel Jamoussi

Explanation

Conformity assessment was mentioned as an area that IEC is leading and requires further collaboration