Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Fireside Chat Moderator- Mariano-Florentino Cuellar

Now we move to a conversation about how artificial intelligence needs to be positioned in the global context. And we have very elite panelists for this session. Ms. Kristalina Georgieva, the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund. From macroeconomic stability to digital transformation, she’s been a leading voice on how AI will reshape the global economic order and what policymakers must do to ensure that its benefits are widely shared. Ms. Joanna Hill, the Deputy Director General of the World Trade Organization, bringing the trade perspective to a technology that is redrawing the boundaries of comparative advantage. Ms. Josephine Teo, the Minister of Digital Development and Information for Singapore, a nation that has become a global benchmark for how governments can integrate AI into public services.

And this conversation will be held in a few minutes. This will be moderated by Mr. Mariano Florentino Cuellar, President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. So we have a very elite… set of panelists who are going to join us on this panel discussion, which is titled AI Needs to be Positioned in the Global Context. May I please invite our panelists to please join us on stage? So over to you, Mr. Quayar.

Thank you very much and good afternoon, everybody. How are we doing AI summits? Let me try that again. Hello, Delhi. Thank you. Much better. It is not every day that we have the pleasure of having such a distinguished panel of international leaders. And I want to start by making three observations only as special observations for those of you who have chosen to be with us this afternoon. You could be anywhere in this complex, anywhere in the city, and you’re right here with us. The first is about the role of technology and science and global ties in making the world better. For those of you who are younger than me, which is most of you in the audience, you will live longer than my generation because of global ties, commerce, science and technology.

In 1950, when India was a young nation, global life expectancy was 47 years. Now it’s closer to 73 years. But at the same time, the second point is that the world that we are navigating today is fragmented. That set of global ties, diffusing science and technology, advancing global understanding and cooperation is a lot harder now than it was even five or 10 years ago. And everybody who’s been on this stage has been alluding to that in some way, that reality. The third point is that the use and development of AI will have an effect on those ties and on that prosperity in all likelihood. But there are divergences, different paths around AI. Some countries are using it more, some less.

Some countries play a certain role. Some very developed role in the tech stack and others less. To talk about these issues, I cannot imagine a better pan. It’s not every day, as I said, that we have the managing director of the IMF, the deputy director general of the World Trade Organization, and the minister for information and digital development from Singapore. So I’m going to start with a question for managing director Gorgieva. And the question is, all this discussion about artificial intelligence at the frontier, what do you see as the greatest possibilities and the greatest risks?

Thank you very much. Namaste. Namaste. AI is an incredibly transformative we know. And the question is, what does it do for the world economy? We did some research, and here is the answer. Based on what we know, AI can lift up global growth by all. Almost. a percentage point, we say 0 .8%. What does that mean? It would mean that the world would grow faster than it did before the COVID pandemic. And that is fantastic for creating more opportunities, more jobs. This is the magnitude that we see for India. And it would mean that India’s Vixit Bharat is achievable. It also means that the world risks to be even further diverse. The accordion of opportunities may open even more from countries that do well to those who fall behind.

Thank you very much. Actually, what we see is the potential for countries that go fast on digital infrastructure, on skills, on adoption of AI, that they can do twice as well as those that don’t. So what is our main reason to be here at the AI Summit in Delhi? To embrace India’s proposition of democratizing AI, making sure that experience in India can then be passed to other countries, especially countries in the developing world, to make diffusion, to make adoption of AI. The main priority and do it with focus on people, on improving the opportunities, the livelihoods of people. I am very optimistic about AI. I’m also not naive. It brings significant risks. First, it brings the risk of making countries and the world less fair.

Some have it and others don’t. Second, it brings the risk of displacement of jobs with no good thinking about how to help people find their place in the new AI economy. We calculated this risk as very high. We actually see the impact of AI on the labor market like a tsunami hitting it globally. 40 % of jobs will be affected by AI, some enhanced, others eliminated. Emerging markets, 40%, but in advanced economies, 60%. And that is happening over a relatively short period of time. And the third risk we at the IMF worry a lot about is financial stability risk. Could AI get loose and create havoc on financial markets? But on balance, my appeal to all of us is embrace the opportunities, be mindful of the risks, and manage them well.

And above all, make sure that the spirit here is that AI is for the well -being of everybody, everywhere. Thank you.

And what we’re going to do, we’re going to. I’m going to come right back to these questions in a minute, but I want to bring in the Deputy Director General of the World Trade Organization into the conversation. I want to ask you, picking up exactly where Managing Director Gheorgheva was going. the interest in democratizing the technology, having more countries be closer to the frontier. For more than a generation, as you know, we have been having arguments about trade globally and about whether trade helps reduce the gap in well -being between countries or actually pulls them apart even more. And given all that experience, I wonder what role you think the international trading system has in dealing with potential inequities and access to AI and the development of AI.

Thank you so much for the invitation. To be here, definitely we see that trade can help the diffusion of AI to those that most need it. And we also think that AI can help trade and can help lower income and middle income economies really progress through trade. Now, we do see that AI is really shifting what we think of as comparative advantage to those economies that are more strong in capital, data, and in computing power. and therefore the countries that are more labor intensive feel more at risk. At the same time, we also see important opportunities for these same countries. Of course, with all the caveats that we’ve been speaking about, the importance of investing in skills and regulations and in infrastructure, digital infrastructure are incredibly important.

Our research suggests that by the year 2040, trade growth could be almost growing by 40%. So we see really important opportunities for the middle and lower income economies. And trade is already working well in that way. Our trade agreements, the world trading system is set up so that goods trade and services trade can develop with AI. But there are some areas where they’re still too new and still too nuanced. And we still have to wait and see how that will develop and how the system has to accommodate.

Minister Teo, as that system evolves, and we deal with this, emerging, not even emerging anymore, emerged technology. we talk about how much it’s going to affect countries large and small. You are playing a critical role, and I know you’re playing a critical role because I see you at every single AI summit in the world. It’s amazing. But how are countries like Singapore in a position to navigate this tsunami, these changes? And what, in particular, what do you think we could learn from Singapore’s strategy, as I see it, of being at the forefront here on AI governance, the Model AI Governance Plan, for example, but also navigating a world that some people see as balkanized between China and the United States around the technology stack?

Thank you very much, Tino. That’s a lot of questions packed into one. I’ll do my best to address them. I think embedded in what you’re saying is that there is the risk of technology decoupling. And what does a small state do? In this kind of context? And how do we navigate the big power contestation? The way we think about it is that for Singapore, it’s very important for us to maintain this ability to operate as a trusted node. Trusted node means that, well, we can trust you with our technology. So your companies, your people can continue to access this, whatever is the most sophisticated, because they will not be abused and the risk of them being misused is also minimized.

The question, however, is how do we remain trusted? And I think the only way to do so is if we act in a consistent and principled way. And being consistent and principled is not a matter of size. And Singapore is not the only small state that has a good track record of holding this discipline. We are consistent in being. Pro -Singapore. And sometimes our choices may align with this country or that country. Sometimes they will align with many countries. Sometimes they only align with a few countries. But they always align with our own interests. In technology choice, for example, 5G, we are always operating on the basis of principles. Number one, that these are commercial decisions that have to be undertaken by the operators of the mobile networks.

And they have to decide on the basis of what works for them in terms of performance, in terms of security, in terms of resilience, keeping in mind what are all the rules that are in place in our context. So those are the broad directions in which we operate in. And it’s not easy, but it’s a path that has served us well.

And I note that among the many things that Singapore, I think, has contributed to the discussion of AI globally, in addition to being a trusted node and connecting different countries, there’s also the role Singapore and the region of Southeast Asia plays in all this because Southeast Asia is such a region of such diversity and importance globally. And I want to come back in a minute to the question of how we might imagine Southeast Asia evolving as almost a laboratory for some of the issues we’re talking about. But first, I want to go back to Kristalina, if I may, and ask you about, it was clear in your earlier remarks that you see enormous possibilities for AI.

But you also acknowledge candidly something that maybe not every speaker has acknowledged, which is along with that opportunity will probably come some disruption. Some real policy difficulties in some countries that are experiencing rapid change. The question then is how we might develop the right strategy so that the productivity gains that the world can experience would actually translate into shared prosperity. What do you think we can do on that score?

The first thing we ought to do is… to carefully observe what is actually happening and then project what are the implications for policymakers. At the Fund, we did a very interesting piece of research in the United States assessing how much AI is affecting already the labor market. And we found out that one in 10 jobs already requires additional skills. And for those who have these skills, the job pays better. Now, with money in their pocket, people then go and buy more local services. They go to restaurants, to entertainment. That creates demand for low -skilled jobs. And to our surprise, the total impact on employment in the aggregate is positive. One job with AI, 1 .3 jobs. 1 .3 jobs. in total employment.

But what does that mean? It means that a smaller segment of people get higher opportunities. A larger segment, yes, they can have jobs, but jobs that are on the lower end of the pay scale. And the most problematic is the fate of those squeezed in the middle. Their jobs don’t change. In relative terms, they pay less, and some of these jobs disappear. What concerns us the most is that jobs that disappear tend to be entry -level jobs. They are routine, and they are easily automated. So if you are in this place of the labor market that is easily automated, of course that creates a risk. Now, we are going to talk about the risk of the labor market.

We are going to talk about the risk of the labor market. We are going to talk about the risk of the labor market. We are going to talk about the risk of the labor market. We are going to talk about the risk of the labor market. We are going to talk about the risk of the labor market. We are going to talk about the risk of the labor market. once obviously we will continue to work with countries to understand what is happening and then how do we project it for policies for the future i would make three conclusions so far and of course we have to be agile in how we look at ai the first one is education has to be revamped for the for a new world people have to learn to learn not to learn specific skills so much and there has to be second there has to be support for those if they’re a big chunk in a particular local economy and this labor market is changing dramatically there has to be social protection social support so they don’t feel like what happened with the industrial world workers in the united states when their jobs were exported overseas and three it is very important that we look at the overall enabling environment.

Why in some places AI makes it faster and in others it doesn’t. And what we find is not very surprising. Some parts of the economy, some parts of society are naturally better positioned because they have digital infrastructure in place. They are already in the digital world because there is more demand for entrepreneurship. Somebody spoke about it and entrepreneurship is more dominant. And I think it is important for the world to be very attentive to what works, what doesn’t work and not sugarcoat the picture because if we do, we would end up where we ended up with globalization. People revolting against it despite all the benefits it brings because, yes, the world as a whole benefited but some communities were devastated.

and the world did not pay attention to these communities in a timely manner. So that is my conclusion so far. And I know that I am very mindful that we are going to learn much more. At the front, we are trying to see how our country is positioned. Some countries actually have more demand for AI skills than supply. Some countries have more supply of AI skills than demand, and some have neither. So we have to work on multiple fronts, and we have to work based on concrete assessment of conditions in countries and localities in countries. I want to finish with a message to the Indian friends here in the audience. You’re very fortunate that your country invested in public digital infrastructure.

So this country… Condition for AI? Check. You are very fortunate because your country is removing actively barriers to entrepreneurship. And on that count, we say check. And you are super fortunate to have youthful, energetic, innovative population that is embracing AI. So what do we say? Check. So all the very best. This is terrific. Perfect. Minister Teo. Can I agree with

the managing director more, if I

may be allowed to chime in? Yes, please. I think sometimes there is a desire, a

tendency to

want to think of ways of regulating AI in order to slow down its advance and perhaps to try and forestall the risk. I’m not underestimating the need. For example, in making… I’m not underestimating the need for AI in order to slow down its advance and perhaps to try and forestall the risk. I’m not underestimating the need for AI in order to slow down its advance and perhaps to try and forestall the risk. I’m not underestimating the need for AI in order to slow down its advance and perhaps to try and forestall the risk. I’m not underestimating the need for AI in order to slow down its advance and perhaps to try and forestall the risk.

I’m not underestimating the need for AI in order to slow down its advance and perhaps to try and forestall the risk. I’m not underestimating the need for AI in order to slow down its advance and perhaps to try and forestall the risk. I’m not underestimating the need for AI in order to slow down its advance and perhaps to try and forestall the risk. But to over -expect AI regulations to deliver on the other important issues, such as the potential for greater social inequality, I think it’s unrealistic. The way to deal with it is to look at what other methods there must be to strengthen social solidarity. For example, what provisions do we put in place to help people to move from one job to the next?

What provisions do we put in place to ensure that even people who don’t earn a lot have the prospect of owning their own homes, access to good health care, educating their children to a very high level? I think these are the other things, and you cannot run away from those conversations just by expecting regulations to solve the problem. So what I’m hearing you both say, in a

way, is that it would be a very silly thing if we tried to solve health care problems. just by regulating pharmaceuticals. That would be a very poor fit, right? At the same time, you recognize that, you know, certain products that are sold, it’s good for them to be safe. And in fact, safety, trust, security can make them even more easy to diffuse. But I think what a very important takeaway from both of you is that the entire spectrum of tools that a society has to build social cohesion are going to be important in the transition to a more AI -driven economy. And we shouldn’t ignore them, but we shouldn’t put just the focus on what we can do by making models built in a certain way.

And I’d love for you to chime in because trade has come up already, just even in the last like 47 seconds of a bunch of times. Actually, yes. We put out a report last

year that looks at this issue exactly in that way. We look at the opportunities that I talked about of AI in the future, not only for the advanced countries, but developing in the lower income. But we also look at the need for national policies for that to actually… happen and to help transition. And so we look at issues around competition policy, around labor force. around skills development, around education. And to do that, the world trading system cannot do it alone. We need to partner at our level with international organizations and at the national level with the appropriate authorities and the private sector in order to have that holistic approach. I would say lesson learned from past experiences, and we definitely want to apply those lessons to this new one.

So we have about four minutes left, and

I have a last question for you all. Well, imagine yourselves in the future looking back at the past, maybe 15 years in the future. And at that point, you’re being interviewed on the same stage here in India, and you’re saying it’s been a very good thing to see how well the world has handled its relationship with this emerging technology of AI, and it’s turned out very well because blank. And I want you to mention one thing that you think in particular would have been so critical to make that transition well. You’ve all mentioned a bunch of things, but I’m interested in the main, most important takeaway that you’d like to leave the audience with. For me, that one word is trust.

In

15 years, if we went and asked citizens in all the countries where AI is being deployed widely, do you trust this technology? If their answer is no, then I believe that we must have failed in some way. If they believe that this technology has been implemented in a way that didn’t rob them of a livelihood, that didn’t rob them of, you know, being totally misinformed about the world, didn’t rob them of, you know, being able to carry out their lives in a safe and secure manner, it didn’t destroy families. I think if they can still say that this is a technology that can work reasonably well if you put in place the safeguards, I think we would have come a long way.

Deputy Director? An appreciation for what the world

trading system

can and is delivering. You know, when I think about it, last year it turned 30 years that the WTO was born. And down the road at CERN, the World Wide Web was being created by scientists that wanted to collaborate. And that architecture, which is technology neutral, allowed for those developments of the digital economy to come through. And how much of that architecture can serve us for this new wave? And then concentrate on those areas that are still needing to be worked on by collaboration, by cooperation, and focus on those. You know, trading with trust, trading with safety, and then appreciating and using what we already have to deliver. Managing Director? Well, in 15 years, if my

life expectancy

has grown by another 50 years, I would say, great, we are successful. But on a serious note, I think, to me, the most important… factor, it goes a bit in the trust area, is the ethical foundation of AI. Whether we would manage to put AI on the foundation of force for good, or we leave space for AI to be force for evil. And that balance is not easy one. When I look at progress so far, we have done much more on the technical side of AI, and much less on building that strong ethical foundation, and putting guardrails that are not restricting innovation, but are protecting us from AI for bad. I still want my 50 years extra life.

One closing observation to just reinforce my appreciation

to the three of you and the work we do. So in the weeks immediately after the release of ChatGPT, which seems like 20 years ago, but it was not that long ago, there was talk about the need for an international atomic energy agency for AI or a new international agency or treaty. We don’t talk about that anymore. And I think in some ways it’s an appropriate and mature recognition that we already have a set of institutions and mechanisms in place to deal with a set of emerging challenges. I think it’s also a recognition that many individual countries have to do their part to create social cohesion and manage this change and this transformation effectively. But I would ask that this audience recognize that all three of our remarkable leaders here on the stage also reflect another reality, which is that even if sovereignty is important and even if individual countries have to have their own priorities, the challenge of how we best live with the technology we have created is truly a global one.

It’s not an individual country. It’s a country one. And the conversation we’re having today is an example of how we can learn from each other and find the right solutions. Thank you and namaste.