Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Amb Thomas Schneider

20 Feb 2026 12:00h - 13:00h

Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Amb Thomas Schneider

Session at a glanceSummary, keypoints, and speakers overview

Summary

Thomas Schneider opened the session by thanking the Indian government and the global audience for gathering at the AI Impact Summit in Delhi, emphasizing that the event’s focus on “people, progress, planet” reflects a shared ambition for inclusive AI development [1-3]. He reiterated that AI must be harnessed to deliver economic and societal benefits for everyone while safeguarding human dignity and the environment [4-6]. Switzerland announced it will host the next AI Summit in Geneva in 2027, noting the strong enthusiasm of Swiss and international stakeholders who are already contributing ideas for the agenda [8-10].


Schneider stressed that Switzerland’s motivation is not to stage a show but to make a substantive contribution to ensuring AI’s transformative power-comparable to the printing press or the combustion engine-raises global quality of life rather than diminishes it [12-14]. He outlined a plan to build on existing governance mechanisms such as the UN Internet Governance Forum, AI for Good Summit, ITU-UNESCO forums, OECD, and prior AI summits, thereby avoiding duplication and leveraging proven platforms [20-21]. Drawing an analogy with the two-century evolution of engine regulation, he argued that a complex mix of technical, legal, and societal norms-already evident in transport and manufacturing-must be developed for AI [27-34].


The speaker highlighted the Vilnius Convention on Artificial Intelligence, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law as a principle-based framework that can be adapted globally, offering flexibility for diverse legal traditions while promoting interoperable standards [46-49]. Concluding, Schneider called for broad collaboration, positioning Switzerland as a facilitator that will bridge stakeholders from all regions to create pragmatic, trustworthy structures that enable AI to support peace, prosperity and human dignity, and expressed anticipation for the Geneva summit in 2027 [55-58].


Keypoints

Major discussion points


Inclusive, human-centred AI for the benefit of all peoples and the planet – The speaker stresses that AI must be developed “so that everyone in the world can benefit” while respecting human dignity, autonomy and the environment [4-6][14-15].


Switzerland’s facilitating role and the 2027 Geneva AI Summit – Switzerland will host the next summit, intends to “build on” existing platforms (UN-IGF, AI for Good, OECD, etc.) rather than reinvent them, and will act as a neutral facilitator that brings together diverse stakeholders [8-10][20-23][55-56].


A multi-layered governance approach modeled on the regulation of engines – The talk draws an analogy to the historic governance of combustion engines, arguing that AI will require a “set of thousands of technical, legal, and also non-written societal norms” and a mix of binding and non-binding instruments [27-34][41-45].


The Vilnius Convention as a cornerstone and the need for additional norms – The newly-negotiated Vilnius Convention on AI, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law is highlighted as a “principle-based framework” that can be adapted globally, while acknowledging that many more sector-specific norms will be required [46-52].


Call for global, especially under-resourced, participation and gap-filling before the summit – The speaker pledges to help “less resourced communities” navigate the complex governance ecosystem and to use the time until Geneva to identify and close gaps in global and regional AI governance [23][42-53][55-56].


Overall purpose / goal


The address aims to set the agenda for the forthcoming AI Impact Summit in Geneva (2027), positioning Switzerland as a collaborative host that will coordinate existing international forums, advance a human-rights-based governance framework (exemplified by the Vilnius Convention), and mobilize worldwide stakeholders-including those from the global north, south, east and west-to co-create pragmatic, interoperable norms that ensure AI’s benefits are shared equitably and its risks are mitigated.


Tone of the discussion


The tone is consistently respectful, optimistic, and constructive. The speaker repeatedly expresses gratitude, enthusiasm, and a willingness to listen (“we are very keen to hear your ideas” [15]), while emphasizing partnership and collective problem-solving. There is no noticeable shift toward negativity or confrontation; the discourse remains collaborative from start to finish.


Speakers

Thomas Schneider


Areas of expertise: Global technology governance, artificial intelligence policy, internet governance, human rights and democracy in AI.


Roles and titles:


– Ambassador and Director of International Relations at Ofcom Switzerland[S3]


– Vice-Chair of the Council of Europe’s Committee on Artificial Intelligence[S3]


– Former Chair of ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (2014-2017)[S1]


Additional speakers:


(None identified in the transcript)


Full session reportComprehensive analysis and detailed insights

Thomas Schneider opened the plenary by thanking the Indian government and the global audience for convening the AI Impact Summit in Delhi, and he framed the event’s three-fold focus on “people, progress, planet” as a shared ambition for inclusive AI development [1-3]. He emphasized that the promise of artificial intelligence must be harnessed so that everyone, regardless of geography, can share in economic and societal progress while safeguarding human dignity, personal autonomy and the health of the planet [4-6].


He then announced that Switzerland will host the next AI Impact Summit in Geneva in 2027. Schneider highlighted the strong enthusiasm already evident among Swiss stakeholders and the positive reactions from international partners, noting that many governments and civil-society actors have begun submitting ideas for the agenda [8-11]. The Swiss motivation for organising the next summit is “not to make a show”, but to make a substantive contribution to the global good-use of AI [12-14].


Drawing on history, he compared AI’s transformative capacity to inventions such as the printing press, radio, television, the internet and the combustion engine, arguing that-like those technologies-AI should raise rather than lower the quality of life for all peoples [13-14]. He also used an industry-regulation analogy, pointing out that, unlike the highly harmonised global airline sector, car regulations remain fragmented, underscoring that AI governance will likely exhibit similar variations across domains [60].


Schneider said the Geneva summit will carry a “Swiss flavour”, meaning it will be grounded in Switzerland’s tradition of constructive, neutral facilitation and will build on, rather than duplicate, existing multistakeholder mechanisms [18-23]. He listed the platforms that will be leveraged, including the UN Internet Governance Forum, the AI for Good Summit, the ITU-UNESCO Global Forum on Ethics of AI, OECD initiatives, the Global Partnership on AI (GPI) and other regional bodies [20-22][61].


To ensure that less-resourced communities can participate, he pledged continued support through long-standing partners such as the Diplo Foundation and the Geneva Internet Platform, enabling these groups to navigate the complex governance ecosystem and have their voices heard [23][55-56].


Schneider then described a layered governance architecture, noting that societies have never relied on a single institution to regulate transformative technologies. He illustrated this with the evolution of engine regulation, where “thousands of technical, legal and non-written societal norms” now coexist to manage transport, manufacturing and energy [27-34][41-45]. Accordingly, Switzerland is analysing existing AI governance instruments, identifying gaps, and drafting both technical norms and binding or non-binding legal instruments [42-46].


Central to these efforts is the Vilnius Convention on Artificial Intelligence, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law, which he chaired negotiations for among 55 countries. The convention provides a principle-based, flexible framework that can be adopted globally while allowing states to embed the principles within their own legal traditions, thereby promoting interoperable rather than identical regulations [46-51][49-50].


Schneider acknowledged that the Vilnius Convention alone will not be sufficient; additional sector-specific binding and non-binding instruments will be needed to ensure coherence across the AI governance landscape [52-53]. He called for the period leading up to the 2027 summit to be used for systematic gap-identification, the development of pragmatic norms, and the coordination of existing initiatives so that AI can continue to drive innovation while legitimate concerns are addressed [53-54].


Emphasising Switzerland’s role as a neutral facilitator, he said the Swiss team will act as bridge-builders, identifying areas of shared vision among stakeholders from the global north, south, east and west, and translating those consensuses into workable steps [55-56]. He reiterated the importance of inclusive participation, noting that the summit will strive to create “trustworthy cooperation” that respects dignity, promotes peace, prosperity and security, and ultimately allows AI to serve humanity and the planet [57-58].


In closing, Schneider expressed confidence that the collaborative approach-grounded in historical lessons, anchored by the Vilnius Convention, and reinforced by existing multistakeholder platforms-will enable the Geneva AI Impact Summit to produce concrete, interoperable outcomes. He thanked the audience for their support and looked forward to meeting the global community again in Geneva in 2027 [58-59].


Session transcriptComplete transcript of the session
Thomas Schneider

So, dear friends and colleagues from India and from all around the world, it is an honor and pleasure to be here with you in Delhi at this pivotal moment for global AI governance. And first, of course, I want to express my gratitude to the government of India for bringing together a diverse and distinguished group of leaders, innovators, researchers, civil society representatives from all around the world. Switzerland very much welcomes and supports the focus of the AI Impact Summit, which is well presented in the three sutras, people, progress, planet, as we all have learned in the past weeks and months. And we fully agree that we need to develop and use AI in a way that everyone in the world can benefit from the potential that AI offers.

This includes economic and societal social progress for everyone. At the same time, of course, we need to make sure that we are able to develop and use AI in a way that everyone in the world can benefit from the that we respect human dignity and autonomy, as well as our planet, which is the basis for all life that we know, at least so far. We haven’t found other life elsewhere. So we are honored and very proud to be hosting the next AI Summit in Geneva in 2027. It is overwhelming to see already now and feel the momentum and the enthusiasm that we sense on national level among all Swiss stakeholders, as well as the very positive reactions from our partners from all around the world, who are all eager and willing to cooperate with us and contribute to the summit in Geneva.

Already now, we are approached by many governmental and other stakeholders that share their ideas with us about what the Geneva Summit and the road leading up to it should focus on and what it should achieve. And let me assure you that this is very welcome and helpful to us. The Swiss motivation for organizing the next summit is to, not to make a show, it is to substantially and meaningfully contribute to achieving the goal that mankind and the world want to achieve. it is to substantially and meaningfully contribute to achieving the goal that mankind uses the unprecedented potential of AI to achieve the goal that mankind uses for good and not for bad. This potential of AI, which may be at least as transformative as the invention of the printing press, radio, television and the internet, as well as the invention of the combustion and other engines together, this potential must be used to raise and not lower the quality of life of all people in the world and not just a few.

AI must strengthen and not weaken the dignity and autonomy of all people in the global north, south, east and west or whatever we call the region where we live and help us all to live together in peace and prosperity. So we are very keen to hear your ideas about what we could and should do together to achieve this goal. Of course, we do have some ideas on our own, but we have not decided yet about the focus of the Geneva Summit. We will discuss it with you together, shape it together. Of course, there will be a Swiss flavor to the Geneva Summit, which is based on the way we work and what we understand, our role in the international community.

We will try to be constructive. Thank you. creative and innovative and try to find pragmatic and fair solutions through bringing together all stakeholders in their respective roles and with their respective experience and at the same time we will try not to reinvent the wheel and duplicate processes and instruments that already exist and that work but rather we will try to build on them because we do already have a number of dialogue platforms for AI governance and for sharing good practices such as the UN Internet Governance Forum and its national and regional initiatives, the AI for Good Summit and the Global Forum on Ethics of AI organized by ITU, UNESCO and many other UN related processes and forum.

We have other forum like the OECD, GPI and other international and regional organizations and of course we will build on the outcomes of the previous summit in the UK, Korea, Japan, sorry Paris, Japan will follow at some point in time, UK, Korea, Paris and of course here in Delhi and we should not forget There are many academic and other networks that provide expertise and solutions. So we will do our best to bring them all together. And with the help of our longstanding partners from the Diplo Foundation and the Geneva Internet Platform, we will also try to facilitate the orientation in this complex governance ecosystem, in particular for less resourced communities, so that also they know better about what is going on where and where we need to raise our voice so that they are actually heard.

At the same time, we consider the transformative power of AI to be too big, broad and context -specific so that no one single institution and no single instrument will allow us to seize all opportunities and will solve all problems. So we will have to learn to live with a certain complexity of the governance of this transformation. But also, this is not a completely new situation. If we look at how we have governed the transformative power of combustion and other engines in the past 200 years, there are some lessons that we can also apply to AI. While today we are developing AI to automate cognitive labor, we have developed engines to automate physical labor. We have put engines in vehicles or machines to move goods or people from one place to another.

And we have put engines in machines to produce food or other goods automatically. And we do not expect one single institution or instrument to govern all of this. But we have developed a set of thousands of technical, legal, and also non -written societal norms that guide us in the use of these machines. We have regulated also the infrastructure that these machines use. We are setting requirements and liabilities for the people that develop, handle, and steer these machines. And we have developed instruments to protect people that are affected by the impact of these machines. And we are seeing different levels of harmonizations when it comes to regulating machines and engines. As an example, of course, we know that the airline industry is much more harmonized because it’s global than the way we regulate cars.

Cars driving in our streets on one side or the other side, where there’s more diversity possible. So after 200 years, we are still continuing to adapt the governance framework for engine driven machines, depending on the context of use. And we need to do exactly the same with AI. We need to develop appropriate technical, legal and societal frameworks and norms that allow us to develop and use AI for good in many different ways. And this work has already begun. We have analyzed our existing governance frameworks, have started to identify and fill the gaps. We have started to work on technical norms for AI systems. We have started to work on binding and non -binding legal instruments. And of course, in this regard, I’d like to particularly highlight the Vilnius Convention on Artificial Intelligence, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law, for which I had the honor to lead the negotiations among 55 countries from all over the world at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg.

This provides for a principle based framework, not just for Europe, but for all countries. It provides for a principle based framework, not just for Europe, but for all countries on our planet that value human rights, democracy and the rule of law. so that our societies and economies can use AI to innovate, while at the same time we uphold our respect to human dignity and autonomy, also in the context of AI. The principles set out by the Vilnius Convention are simple and clear, but the Convention leaves enough leeway to participating states in order to allow to embed these principles in their existing legal and regulatory institutions and traditions. This will allow many countries to become parties to this global convention and to make sure that their governance frameworks may, although not become identical, but at least interoperable.

This Convention, which we hope will be ratified and enter into force very soon, will become one important instrument to make sure that AI is used for the good and not the bad. But of course, there will have to be many more binding and non -binding norms and more sector -specific norms and instruments to complement it, which hopefully will be… at least coherent in their logic and spirit. So we will use the time until the Geneva Summit next year to continue to identify gaps in global and regional governance of AI and achieve our shared objectives so that AI is used for innovation, while at the same time legitimate concerns and risks are appropriately addressed. Switzerland will be the host of the next summit, but we know that we will not be able to achieve anything on our own.

So we look forward to collaborating with all of you, with all countries and all stakeholders from the global north, south, east and west, and we will first try to identify areas where there’s a willingness and a shared vision to make progress together and then work with all of you on pragmatic and workable steps towards this vision. We will only be the facilitators trying to build bridges and build a climate of open and respectful and constructive dialogue, trying to offer pragmatic structures for trustworthy cooperation so that we can all use the potential AI, to say it again, to live together in peace, prosperity and security. Dignity. Dignity. The Swiss Summit team and I personally are looking forward to collaborating with all of you in the coming months, and we look forward to seeing you all in Geneva in 2027.

Thank you for your support and attention.

Related ResourcesKnowledge base sources related to the discussion topics (15)
Factual NotesClaims verified against the Diplo knowledge base (6)
Confirmedhigh

“Thomas Schneider opened the plenary by thanking the Indian government and the global audience for convening the AI Impact Summit in Delhi, and he framed the event’s three‑fold focus on “people, progress, planet” as a shared ambition for inclusive AI development.”

The knowledge base records Schneider’s opening remarks thanking India and highlighting the three sutras – people, progress and planet – as core principles of the summit [S5] and [S4].

Confirmedmedium

“He emphasized that the promise of artificial intelligence must be harnessed so that everyone, regardless of geography, can share in economic and societal progress while safeguarding human dignity, personal autonomy and the health of the planet.”

Sources note that AI is seen as a tool for equitable development and that its benefits should be broadly distributed across humanity, aligning with Schneider’s statement [S45] and [S10].

Confirmedhigh

“He announced that Switzerland will host the next AI Impact Summit in Geneva in 2027.”

Both the S4 and S46 entries confirm that Schneider announced Switzerland as the host of the 2027 summit in Geneva.

Confirmedmedium

“He used an industry‑regulation analogy, pointing out that, unlike the highly harmonised global airline sector, car regulations remain fragmented, underscoring that AI governance will likely exhibit similar variations across domains.”

The parallel with fragmented engine (car) regulation versus more unified sectors is documented in the knowledge base discussion of AI governance analogies [S13].

Confirmedmedium

“Schneider said the Geneva summit will carry a “Swiss flavour”, meaning it will be grounded in Switzerland’s tradition of constructive, neutral facilitation and will build on, rather than duplicate, existing multistakeholder mechanisms.”

S7 describes Switzerland’s approach of leveraging existing policy architectures and multistakeholder mechanisms rather than creating new institutions, matching the “Swiss flavour” description.

Confirmedmedium

“Schneider then described a layered governance architecture, noting that societies have never relied on a single institution to regulate transformative technologies, illustrated with the evolution of engine regulation where “thousands of technical, legal and non‑written societal norms” now coexist.”

The knowledge base explicitly draws the same analogy between AI governance and the multifaceted regulation of engines, emphasizing the need for layered, diverse norms [S13].

External Sources (54)
S1
Thomas Schneider — From 2014 to 2017, Schneider was the chair of ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) and in this role negotiated …
S2
Future-proofing global tech governance: a bottom-up approach | IGF 2023 Open Forum #44 — Cedric Sabbah:Sedgwick, Shomael? Hi. Hi. Yeah? You guys hear me? Yes, we can hear you. Awesome. Is now a good time to st…
S3
Day 0 Event #61 Accelerating progress for unified digital cooperation — – Thomas Schneider: Ambassador and Director of International Relations at Ofcom Switzerland, Vice Chair of the Council o…
S4
Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Amb Thomas Schneider — “And we fully agree that we need to develop and use AI in a way that everyone in the world can benefit from the potentia…
S5
Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Amb Thomas Schneider — Schneider argues that AI development should be inclusive and beneficial for all people worldwide, not just a select few….
S6
Main Topic 3 – Keynote — Marija Pejčinović Burić:Deputy Secretary General Lamanauskas, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen. It is a great …
S7
Unpacking the High-Level Panel’s Report on Digital Cooperation: Geneva policy experts propose action plan — Referring to the contributions, Amb. Thomas Schneider, Head of International Relations, Swiss Federal Office of Communic…
S8
WS #98 Towards a global, risk-adaptive AI governance framework — Thomas Schneider: Thank you very much. And actually, yeah, it’s good that somebody, one of the sessions actually trie…
S9
WS #288 An AI Policy Research Roadmap for Evidence-Based AI Policy — Joanna Bryson: Hi, yeah, sure. Thanks very much and sorry not to be in Oslo. I wanted to come specifically to your quest…
S10
AI Impact Summit 2026: Global Ministerial Discussions on Inclusive AI Development — I don’t remember when it was discussed in the past, but this conversation are opening up the floor for bringing the valu…
S11
Open Forum #75 Shaping Global AI Governance Through Multistakeholder Action — **Ernst Noorman**, Cyber Ambassador for the Netherlands and co-chair of the FOC Task Force on AI and Human Rights, share…
S12
Democratizing AI: Open foundations and shared resources for global impact — ## Introduction and Switzerland’s Strategic Position Bernard Maissen: Yes, thank you. Hello, everybody, dear panelists….
S13
State of play of major global AI Governance processes — The speaker advocates for a nuanced perspective on AI governance, drawing a parallel with the multifaceted regulation of…
S14
Multistakeholder Partnerships for Thriving AI Ecosystems — “And I would say it’s not an innovation gap, it’s a power gap.”[19]. “So all those things need framework and need govern…
S15
AI Governance Dialogue: Steering the future of AI — Doreen Bogdan Martin: Thank you. And we now have a chance together to reflect on AI governance with someone who has a un…
S16
A Global Human Rights Approach to Responsible AI Governance | IGF 2023 WS #288 — Another observation relates to the capacity and resources of civil society, especially in marginalized groups and global…
S17
Interdisciplinary approaches — AI-related issues are being discussed in various international spaces. In addition to the EU, OECD, and UNESCO, organisa…
S18
Secure Finance Risk-Based AI Policy for the Banking Sector — The moderator emphasizes that AI governance should not be viewed through a completely different lens but should be integ…
S19
WS #97 Interoperability of AI Governance: Scope and Mechanism — Mauricio Gibson: People hear me? Yes. Thank you all for having me. It’s a pleasure to be here. I’m going to build on w…
S20
What is it about AI that we need to regulate? — The Role of International Institutions in Setting Norms for Advanced TechnologiesThe discussions across IGF 2025 session…
S21
Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Amb Thomas Schneider — The Vilnius Convention approach of providing principle-based framework while allowing countries flexibility to embed pri…
S22
Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Amb Thomas Schneider — “It provides for a principle based framework, not just for Europe, but for all countries on our planet that value human …
S23
Comprehensive Report: UN General Assembly High-Level Meeting on the 20-Year Review of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Outcomes — responsibilities. We must ensure that artificial intelligence is developed and used in ways that respect human dignity, …
S24
AI Impact Summit 2026: Global Ministerial Discussions on Inclusive AI Development — Ante este panorama, los países del sur global debemos priorizar estrategias y normativas para un uso ético y responsable…
S25
Planetary Limits of AI: Governance for Just Digitalisation? | IGF 2023 Open Forum #37 — In conclusion, the extended analysis highlights the need for a balanced approach to digitalization and climate change. E…
S26
WS #288 An AI Policy Research Roadmap for Evidence-Based AI Policy — Virginia Dignam: Thank you very much, Isadora. No pressure, I see. You want me to say all kinds of things. I hope that i…
S27
Closing remarks – Charting the path forward — Bouverot emphasizes that AI governance must address environmental concerns by incorporating sustainability measures. Thi…
S28
Navigating the Double-Edged Sword: ICT’s and AI’s Impact on Energy Consumption, GHG Emissions, and Environmental Sustainability — It is argued that understanding the environmental consequences can catalyse more efficient methods for reducing and mana…
S29
Open Forum #27 Make Your AI Greener a Workshop on Sustainable AI Solutions — Legal and regulatory | Sustainable development | Development Reports consistently identify governance of artificial int…
S30
Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Amb Thomas Schneider — Schneider argues that AI development should be inclusive and beneficial for all people worldwide, not just a select few….
S31
WS #270 Understanding digital exclusion in AI era — The speaker advocates for a human-centered approach in AI design to ensure inclusivity and accessibility. This approach …
S32
Open Forum #33 Building an International AI Cooperation Ecosystem — Ethical Considerations and Inclusivity Human rights principles | Children rights | Privacy and data protection Pelayo …
S33
Open Forum #75 Shaping Global AI Governance Through Multistakeholder Action — **Ernst Noorman**, Cyber Ambassador for the Netherlands and co-chair of the FOC Task Force on AI and Human Rights, share…
S34
Planetary Limits of AI: Governance for Just Digitalisation? | IGF 2023 Open Forum #37 — It is crucial for these countries to take responsibility and work towards mitigating their impact on the environment. Ad…
S35
Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Amb Thomas Schneider — Already now, we are approached by many governmental and other stakeholders that share their ideas with us about what the…
S36
Leaders’ Plenary | Global Vision for AI Impact and Governance Morning Session Part 1 — Thank you for inviting me to this important summit. It is an honor to be here in India at this pivotal moment for global…
S37
State of play of major global AI Governance processes — The speaker advocates for a nuanced perspective on AI governance, drawing a parallel with the multifaceted regulation of…
S38
WS #98 Towards a global, risk-adaptive AI governance framework — Thomas Schneider: Thank you very much. And actually, yeah, it’s good that somebody, one of the sessions actually trie…
S39
From principles to practice: Governing advanced AI in action — Discussion of different governance approaches being implemented across regions and stakeholder groups Governance Approa…
S40
Comprehensive Report: European Approaches to AI Regulation and Governance — International Cooperation and Standards The Council of Europe Convention establishes general principles similar to Huma…
S41
Multistakeholder Partnerships for Thriving AI Ecosystems — “And I would say it’s not an innovation gap, it’s a power gap.”[19]. “So all those things need framework and need govern…
S42
Open Forum #71 Advancing Rights-Respecting AI Governance and Digital Inclusion through G7 and G20 — **Implementation Gaps**: Questions from participants highlighted the challenge of connecting high-level policy discussio…
S43
Setting the Rules_ Global AI Standards for Growth and Governance — Esther Tetruashvily responded by describing OpenAI’s efforts to evaluate model performance across various languages and …
S44
UN Tech Envoy: AI report to bridge AI governance gaps — Last week, the United Nations (UN) established a 39-memberHigh-Level Advisory Bodyto address global concerns regarding t…
S45
High Level Dialogue with the Secretary-General — He mentions the potential of artificial intelligence as a tool for development if used equitably.
S46
Leaders’ Plenary | Global Vision for AI Impact and Governance Morning Session Part 1 — The World Meteorological Organization harnesses AI for climate prediction. The International Labor Organization explores…
S47
Ad Hoc Consultation: Monday 5th February, Morning session — Switzerland has been actively engaged in discussions regarding the adoption of an international resolution, expressing a…
S48
Building Trusted AI at Scale Cities Startups & Digital Sovereignty – Keynote Matthew Prince Cloudflare — Prince uses the historical example of the printing press to illustrate how transformative technologies succeed when they…
S49
Secure Finance Risk-Based AI Policy for the Banking Sector — Economic Advisor Sanjeev Sanyal fundamentally challenged prevailing approaches to AI regulation, arguing that traditiona…
S50
One-Person Enterprise — Richard Socher argues that AI will lead to the creation of entirely new job categories that we currently cannot predict….
S51
Impact the Future – Compassion AI | IGF 2023 Town Hall #63 — The analysis highlights the role of technology in historical transformations. Throughout history, technology has played …
S52
Steering the future of AI — Legal and regulatory | Cybersecurity Thompson challenges LeCun’s aviation safety analogy by highlighting that the aviat…
S53
Keynotes — O’Flaherty acknowledges that the regulatory work is not finished and that current regulatory models will likely be insuf…
S54
Laying the foundations for AI governance — – **Industry perspective on regulation**: Companies, particularly startups, actually want regulation but need clarity an…
Speakers Analysis
Detailed breakdown of each speaker’s arguments and positions
T
Thomas Schneider
12 arguments184 words per minute1721 words558 seconds
Argument 1
Universal benefit and respect for human dignity, autonomy, and the planet (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider stresses that AI should be developed and deployed so that all people worldwide can share its benefits, while safeguarding human dignity, personal autonomy, and the health of the planet. He links economic and societal progress to these ethical imperatives.
EVIDENCE
He states that AI must be used in a way that everyone in the world can benefit, emphasizing economic and societal progress for all [4-5], and adds that this must be done while respecting human dignity, autonomy, and the planet as the basis for life [6].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
Schneider stresses that AI should be developed for the benefit of everyone worldwide while upholding human dignity, personal autonomy and environmental protection, as highlighted in his keynote remarks [S4][S5].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
Inclusive and Ethical AI Development
Argument 2
AI’s transformative power likened to historic inventions, must raise global quality of life (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider compares AI’s potential impact to that of the printing press, radio, television, the internet, and combustion engines, arguing that AI should be harnessed to improve the quality of life for all humanity rather than exacerbate inequalities.
EVIDENCE
He describes AI as potentially as transformative as the invention of the printing press, radio, television, the internet, and combustion engines, and insists that this potential must raise, not lower, global quality of life [13].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
He compares AI’s potential impact to the printing press, radio, television, the internet and combustion engines, arguing that this transformative power must raise, not lower, global quality of life [S4][S5].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
Inclusive and Ethical AI Development
Argument 3
Hosting the Geneva Summit to make a substantive contribution, not a showcase (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider explains that Switzerland’s motivation for organizing the 2027 Geneva AI Summit is to make a meaningful, substantive contribution to global AI governance rather than simply staging a high‑profile event.
EVIDENCE
He explicitly says the Swiss motivation is “not to make a show, it is to substantially and meaningfully contribute” to the goal of using AI for good [12], and notes that Switzerland will host the next summit in Geneva in 2027 [8].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
Schneider explicitly states that Switzerland’s motivation for the 2027 Geneva AI Summit is to make a substantive, meaningful contribution rather than a mere showcase [S4].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
Switzerland’s Role and the Geneva AI Summit 2027
Argument 4
“Swiss flavor” emphasizing constructive, pragmatic, fair solutions built on existing initiatives (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider promises that the Geneva Summit will carry a distinct Swiss approach characterized by constructive, pragmatic, and fair problem‑solving, leveraging and extending existing multistakeholder platforms rather than reinventing them.
EVIDENCE
He mentions a “Swiss flavor” based on constructive work, and outlines a plan to be creative, innovative, pragmatic and fair while building on existing platforms such as the UN IGF, AI for Good, ITU, UNESCO, OECD, etc. [18-20].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
He promises a distinct “Swiss flavour” characterised by constructive, pragmatic and fair problem-solving, building on existing multistakeholder platforms [S5][S4].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
Switzerland’s Role and the Geneva AI Summit 2027
Argument 5
Build on UN IGF, AI for Good, ITU, UNESCO, OECD and other platforms; avoid duplicating efforts (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider argues that the upcoming summit should integrate and reinforce the many existing AI governance forums and initiatives, avoiding duplication and leveraging the work already done by these bodies.
EVIDENCE
He lists the UN Internet Governance Forum, AI for Good Summit, ITU, UNESCO, OECD, GPI and other international and regional organizations, emphasizing that the summit will build on their outcomes rather than reinvent the wheel [20].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
Schneider argues that the summit should integrate and reinforce existing initiatives such as the UN IGF, AI for Good, ITU, UNESCO and OECD, avoiding duplication of effort [S5][S4].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
Leveraging Existing Governance Ecosystems
Argument 6
Support less‑resourced communities through partners like the Diplo Foundation and Geneva Internet Platform (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider highlights the need to help under‑resourced stakeholders navigate the complex AI governance landscape by partnering with organizations that can provide orientation and amplify their voices.
EVIDENCE
He notes that, together with the Diplo Foundation and the Geneva Internet Platform, Switzerland will facilitate orientation for less-resourced communities so they can understand where to raise their voice and be heard [23].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
He highlights partnerships with the Diplo Foundation and the Geneva Internet Platform to help under-resourced stakeholders navigate AI governance and have their voices heard [S5].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
Leveraging Existing Governance Ecosystems
Argument 7
No single institution can govern AI; require technical, legal, and societal norms akin to engine regulation (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider contends that AI’s breadth and context‑specificity mean that governance must be multi‑layered, involving technical standards, legal rules, and societal norms, similar to how societies have regulated combustion engines over the past two centuries.
EVIDENCE
He explains that the transformative power of AI is too broad for a single institution, drawing parallels with the historical governance of engines and describing the development of thousands of technical, legal, and societal norms that guide machine use [24-32].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
Schneider draws a parallel with the historical regulation of combustion engines, noting that AI’s breadth requires a multi-layered governance system of technical, legal and societal norms rather than a single institution [S4][S5].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
Need for Multi‑Layered Governance Frameworks
Argument 8
Develop binding, non‑binding, and sector‑specific instruments ensuring interoperability (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider calls for a suite of governance tools—including binding treaties, non‑binding standards, and sector‑specific rules—that are interoperable across jurisdictions, allowing diverse legal traditions to work together.
EVIDENCE
He mentions work on technical norms, binding and non-binding legal instruments, and the need for many more sector-specific norms that remain coherent in logic and spirit, emphasizing interoperability [45-52].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
Need for Multi‑Layered Governance Frameworks
Argument 9
Provides a principle‑based, flexible framework for AI, human rights, democracy, and rule of law (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider presents the Vilnius Convention as a principle‑based instrument that offers a flexible, rights‑focused framework applicable beyond Europe, guiding AI development in line with human rights, democracy, and the rule of law.
EVIDENCE
He highlights the Vilnius Convention on AI, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law, noting its principle-based nature and its relevance for all countries that value these values [46-48].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
He cites the Vilnius Convention as a principle-based, flexible instrument that can guide AI development in line with human rights, democracy and the rule of law [S4][S5].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
The Vilnius Convention as a Foundational Instrument
Argument 10
Enables global adoption while allowing states to embed principles within their own legal traditions (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider explains that the Convention’s flexibility lets states incorporate its principles into existing legal and regulatory frameworks, fostering broad participation and interoperable governance without demanding identical laws.
EVIDENCE
He states that the Convention leaves enough leeway for participating states to embed principles in their own institutions, allowing many countries to become parties and achieve interoperable frameworks, and that it is expected to be ratified soon [49-51].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
Schneider explains that the Convention’s design leaves sufficient leeway for states to incorporate its principles into their own legal and regulatory frameworks, facilitating broad participation [S4].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
The Vilnius Convention as a Foundational Instrument
Argument 11
Identify shared vision areas, pursue pragmatic steps, act as facilitators and bridge‑builders (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider proposes that Switzerland will work with all stakeholders to pinpoint common goals, take practical actions, and serve as a neutral facilitator that builds bridges among diverse actors.
EVIDENCE
He says Switzerland will look for willingness and shared vision, then work on pragmatic steps, acting as facilitators to build bridges and a climate of respectful dialogue [55-56].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
He states that Switzerland will act as a neutral facilitator, building bridges and fostering respectful, constructive dialogue among diverse stakeholders [S5].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
Collaborative Path Forward to the Summit
Argument 12
Use the interim period to close governance gaps, ensuring AI drives innovation while mitigating risks (Thomas Schneider)
EXPLANATION
Schneider urges that the time before the 2027 summit be used to identify and fill gaps in global and regional AI governance, so that AI can foster innovation while addressing legitimate concerns and risks.
EVIDENCE
He notes that the period until the Geneva Summit will be used to continue identifying gaps in AI governance and to ensure AI is used for innovation while appropriately addressing risks [53].
EXTERNAL EVIDENCE (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
Schneider urges using the time before the 2027 summit to identify and fill AI governance gaps, aligning with calls for a risk-adaptive governance framework and an improved policy architecture built on existing mechanisms [S8][S7].
MAJOR DISCUSSION POINT
Collaborative Path Forward to the Summit
Agreements
Agreement Points
AI should be developed and used so that everyone worldwide benefits while respecting human dignity, autonomy and the planet
Speakers: Thomas Schneider
Universal benefit and respect for human dignity, autonomy, and the planet (Thomas Schneider) AI’s transformative power likened to historic inventions, must raise global quality of life (Thomas Schneider) Support less‑resourced communities through partners like the Diplo Foundation and Geneva Internet Platform (Thomas Schneider) Use the interim period to close governance gaps, ensuring AI drives innovation while mitigating risks (Thomas Schneider)
Schneider repeatedly stresses that AI must be inclusive, ethically grounded and environmentally conscious, linking economic and societal progress to respect for human rights and the planet, and calling for concrete actions before the 2027 summit [4-6][13][23][53].
POLICY CONTEXT (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
This vision echoes the UN General Assembly’s call for AI that respects human dignity, ethical principles and the rule of law, as highlighted in the WSIS 20-year review outcomes [S23], and aligns with recent calls to embed sustainability and planetary health considerations into AI governance [S25][S27][S28].
Governance of AI requires a multi‑layered, pragmatic approach that builds on existing multistakeholder platforms and avoids duplication
Speakers: Thomas Schneider
“Swiss flavor” emphasizing constructive, pragmatic, fair solutions built on existing initiatives (Thomas Schneider) Build on UN IGF, AI for Good, ITU, UNESCO, OECD and other platforms; avoid duplicating efforts (Thomas Schneider) No single institution can govern AI; require technical, legal, and societal norms akin to engine regulation (Thomas Schneider) Develop binding, non‑binding, and sector‑specific instruments ensuring interoperability (Thomas Schneider)
Schneider outlines a Swiss-flavoured, constructive agenda that leverages the UN IGF, AI for Good, ITU, UNESCO, OECD and other bodies, argues that AI governance must be multi-layered like historic engine regulation, and calls for a suite of interoperable binding and non-binding instruments [18-20][24-32][45-52].
POLICY CONTEXT (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
The recommendation mirrors the risk-based, embedded-layer approach advocated for AI in the banking sector, which stresses building on existing regulatory infrastructure rather than creating parallel regimes [S18], and reflects broader calls for interoperable, multi-stakeholder AI governance discussed at IGF sessions [S19][S20].
The Vilnius Convention provides a principle‑based, flexible framework that can be adopted globally while allowing states to embed its principles in their own legal traditions
Speakers: Thomas Schneider
Provides a principle‑based, flexible framework for AI, human rights, democracy, and rule of law (Thomas Schneider) Enables global adoption while allowing states to embed principles within their own legal traditions (Thomas Schneider)
Schneider presents the Vilnius Convention as a rights-focused, principle-based instrument applicable beyond Europe, offering flexibility for national implementation and promoting interoperable governance [46-48][49-51].
POLICY CONTEXT (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
Ambassador Thomas Schneider explicitly described the Vilnius Convention as a principle-based, flexible framework that enables countries to integrate its norms into national law while upholding human rights and the rule of law [S21][S22].
Switzerland will act as a neutral facilitator, identifying shared visions and taking pragmatic steps toward the 2027 Geneva AI Summit
Speakers: Thomas Schneider
Hosting the Geneva Summit to make a substantive contribution, not a showcase (Thomas Schneider) Identify shared vision areas, pursue pragmatic steps, act as facilitators and bridge‑builders (Thomas Schneider) Use the interim period to close governance gaps, ensuring AI drives innovation while mitigating risks (Thomas Schneider)
Schneider emphasizes that Switzerland’s role is to facilitate collaboration, not to stage a show, by pinpointing common goals, building bridges among stakeholders and using the time before the summit to fill governance gaps [8][12][55-56][53].
Similar Viewpoints
Both arguments stress that AI’s historic‑scale impact must be harnessed to improve quality of life for all, linking technological progress with ethical imperatives [4-6][13].
Speakers: Thomas Schneider, Thomas Schneider
Universal benefit and respect for human dignity, autonomy, and the planet (Thomas Schneider) AI’s transformative power likened to historic inventions, must raise global quality of life (Thomas Schneider)
Both highlight a pragmatic, constructive approach that leverages existing multistakeholder platforms rather than creating new parallel structures [18-20].
Speakers: Thomas Schneider, Thomas Schneider
“Swiss flavor” emphasizing constructive, pragmatic, fair solutions built on existing initiatives (Thomas Schneider) Build on UN IGF, AI for Good, ITU, UNESCO, OECD and other platforms; avoid duplicating efforts (Thomas Schneider)
Both argue for a layered governance architecture combining technical standards, legal rules and sector‑specific norms to achieve interoperable outcomes [24-32][45-52].
Speakers: Thomas Schneider, Thomas Schneider
No single institution can govern AI; require technical, legal, and societal norms akin to engine regulation (Thomas Schneider) Develop binding, non‑binding, and sector‑specific instruments ensuring interoperability (Thomas Schneider)
Both present the Vilnius Convention as a flexible, principle‑based instrument that can be adopted worldwide while respecting national legal diversity [46-48][49-51].
Speakers: Thomas Schneider, Thomas Schneider
Provides a principle‑based, flexible framework for AI, human rights, democracy, and rule of law (Thomas Schneider) Enables global adoption while allowing states to embed principles within their own legal traditions (Thomas Schneider)
Unexpected Consensus
Linking AI governance directly to environmental protection and planetary health
Speakers: Thomas Schneider
Universal benefit and respect for human dignity, autonomy, and the planet (Thomas Schneider) AI’s transformative power likened to historic inventions, must raise global quality of life (Thomas Schneider)
While AI discussions often focus on ethics and socio-economic impacts, Schneider explicitly integrates the planet as a foundational element for AI’s beneficial use, an uncommon convergence of AI governance and environmental stewardship [4-6][13].
POLICY CONTEXT (KNOWLEDGE BASE)
Multiple recent reports stress the need to couple AI policy with climate and sustainability goals, noting that AI governance must incorporate environmental safeguards to meet planetary limits [S25][S27][S28][S29].
Overall Assessment

Thomas Schneider consistently advocates for an inclusive, rights‑based, and environmentally conscious AI ecosystem, proposes a multi‑layered governance model that builds on existing multistakeholder platforms, highlights the Vilnius Convention as a flexible global instrument, and positions Switzerland as a neutral facilitator for the 2027 Geneva Summit.

High internal consensus – all arguments are mutually reinforcing, indicating a coherent strategic vision that can facilitate broad stakeholder alignment and practical progress on AI governance.

Differences
Different Viewpoints
Unexpected Differences
Overall Assessment

The transcript contains remarks only from Thomas Schneider; no other speakers are present, and all listed arguments are attributed to him. Consequently, there are no identifiable points of contention, no partial agreements, and no unexpected disagreements within the provided material. The discussion reflects a single, coherent perspective on AI governance, inclusive benefit, multi‑layered norms, and the upcoming Geneva Summit.

None – the absence of multiple speakers means the dialogue is unanimous in its goals and approaches, suggesting smooth consensus building for the topics addressed.

Takeaways
Key takeaways
AI development must be inclusive, benefiting all people while respecting human dignity, autonomy, and the planet. Switzerland will host the Geneva AI Summit in 2027, aiming for substantive contributions rather than a showcase, with a distinct “Swiss flavor” of constructive, pragmatic, and fair solutions. Existing governance ecosystems (UN IGF, AI for Good, ITU, UNESCO, OECD, etc.) should be leveraged to avoid duplication and to support less‑resourced communities via partners like the Diplo Foundation and Geneva Internet Platform. AI governance requires multi‑layered, sector‑specific frameworks—technical, legal, and societal norms—similar to the historical regulation of engine‑driven machines. The Vilnius Convention on AI, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law provides a flexible, principle‑based foundation that can be adapted by diverse legal systems and promote interoperability. The interim period before the Geneva Summit will be used to identify governance gaps, build consensus on shared vision areas, and develop pragmatic steps toward trustworthy cooperation.
Resolutions and action items
Switzerland will coordinate with global stakeholders to shape the agenda and focus of the 2027 Geneva AI Summit. The Swiss team will map existing AI governance initiatives and ensure the summit builds on them rather than duplicating efforts. Partner organizations (Diplo Foundation, Geneva Internet Platform) will be engaged to facilitate participation of less‑resourced communities. A process will be launched to identify gaps in global and regional AI governance frameworks and propose concrete normative instruments. Stakeholders are invited to submit ideas and proposals for the summit’s thematic priorities and practical work‑streams.
Unresolved issues
Specific thematic focus and concrete work‑program for the Geneva Summit have not been decided. How to operationalize interoperability between the Vilnius Convention and other existing or future AI norms remains open. Mechanisms for ensuring meaningful participation and voice of less‑resourced communities are not yet defined. Details on funding, resource allocation, and timeline for gap‑analysis activities were not addressed. The balance between binding and non‑binding instruments, and sector‑specific regulations, needs further clarification.
Suggested compromises
Adopt a “build‑on‑existing” approach: use current platforms and norms instead of creating entirely new structures. Apply the flexible, principle‑based framework of the Vilnius Convention, allowing states leeway to integrate principles within their own legal traditions. Focus on pragmatic, fair solutions that respect diverse regional contexts while aiming for overall coherence in spirit and logic.
Thought Provoking Comments
AI may be as transformative as the invention of the printing press, radio, television, the internet, and the combustion engine, and like those technologies we must develop appropriate technical, legal, and societal frameworks and norms to guide its use.
The historical analogy frames AI not as a novel anomaly but as part of a continuum of transformative technologies, prompting participants to think about governance lessons from past industrial revolutions rather than inventing entirely new solutions.
This analogy shifted the conversation from abstract AI concerns to concrete, familiar governance challenges, opening space for discussion about leveraging existing regulatory experiences (e.g., engine regulation) and setting the stage for later references to harmonisation and sector‑specific norms.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
We will not expect one single institution or instrument to govern AI; instead we must learn to live with a certain complexity of the governance of this transformation, just as we have done with engines over the past 200 years.
By explicitly rejecting the notion of a monolithic governing body, the comment challenges any simplistic, top‑down approaches and underscores the need for a multi‑layered, distributed governance ecosystem.
This statement acted as a turning point, steering the dialogue toward the importance of coordination among existing platforms (UN IGF, AI for Good, OECD, etc.) and encouraging participants to think about how to interlink rather than replace current mechanisms.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
The Vilnius Convention on Artificial Intelligence, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law provides a principle‑based framework that is flexible enough for states to embed the principles in their own legal traditions, aiming for interoperable rather than identical regulations.
Introducing a concrete, near‑term instrument (the Vilnius Convention) moves the discussion from high‑level ideals to actionable policy, while the emphasis on interoperability respects diversity of legal systems.
This comment redirected the conversation toward concrete next steps—ratification, implementation, and complementarity with other binding and non‑binding norms—prompting participants to consider how their own jurisdictions could adopt the convention and what gaps remain.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
We will work with longstanding partners like the Diplo Foundation and the Geneva Internet Platform to facilitate orientation in this complex governance ecosystem, especially for less‑resourced communities, so that they know where to raise their voice and are actually heard.
Highlighting the inclusion of under‑represented stakeholders brings equity to the forefront and challenges any assumption that governance will be dominated by well‑resourced actors.
This comment broadened the scope of the discussion to include capacity‑building and outreach, prompting participants to think about mechanisms for inclusive participation and potentially influencing agenda items for the upcoming Geneva Summit.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
We will try not to reinvent the wheel or duplicate processes that already exist and work, but rather build on them—leveraging platforms such as the UN Internet Governance Forum, AI for Good Summit, ITU, UNESCO, OECD, and existing academic networks.
The call for building on existing structures rather than creating parallel ones introduces a pragmatic, efficiency‑driven perspective that challenges any impulse to start from scratch.
This statement reinforced the earlier theme of complexity management and guided the conversation toward mapping current initiatives, identifying overlaps, and defining how the Geneva Summit can act as a coordinating hub rather than a redundant forum.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
Overall Assessment

Thomas Schneider’s remarks shaped the discussion by moving it from a generic, aspirational framing of AI governance to a nuanced, historically informed, and pragmatically grounded roadmap. His analogies to past technological revolutions, rejection of a single‑institution solution, introduction of the Vilnius Convention, emphasis on inclusivity for less‑resourced actors, and commitment to building on existing platforms collectively redirected participants toward concrete, collaborative actions for the 2027 Geneva Summit. These pivotal comments created turning points that deepened the analysis, broadened stakeholder considerations, and set a clear agenda for future coordination.

Follow-up Questions
What should be the focus and objectives of the Geneva AI Summit in 2027?
Defining the summit’s agenda is essential to ensure that the gathering addresses the most pressing AI governance challenges and delivers tangible outcomes.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
Which specific gaps exist in current global and regional AI governance frameworks that need to be addressed before the Geneva Summit?
Identifying these gaps will guide targeted work, prevent duplication, and help prioritize actions for the next year.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
How can less‑resourced communities be better oriented within the complex AI governance ecosystem and have their voices heard?
Ensuring inclusive participation is crucial for legitimacy, equity, and for capturing diverse perspectives on AI impacts.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
What sector‑specific norms and instruments are required to complement the Vilnius Convention and ensure coherent AI governance?
Sector‑focused rules are needed to translate high‑level principles into practical, enforceable standards across industries.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
What mechanisms can ensure interoperability of national AI governance frameworks while respecting diverse legal traditions?
Interoperability enables cross‑border cooperation and reduces regulatory friction without imposing a one‑size‑fits‑all model.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
What are the most effective ways to build on existing platforms (UN IGF, AI for Good, GPI, OECD, etc.) without duplicating efforts?
Leveraging existing initiatives maximizes resources and avoids fragmentation of the governance ecosystem.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
What lessons from the governance of combustion engines and other transformative technologies can be applied to AI governance?
Historical analogues can provide proven governance structures and highlight pitfalls to avoid in the AI context.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
What steps are needed to achieve ratification and entry into force of the Vilnius Convention on AI, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law?
The Convention is a cornerstone principle‑based framework; its swift adoption is vital for global normative alignment.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
How can we develop and harmonize technical norms for AI systems across different regions and sectors?
Technical standards are foundational for safety, trustworthiness, and cross‑jurisdictional compatibility of AI technologies.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
What metrics or indicators should be used to assess whether AI is strengthening or weakening human dignity, autonomy, and planetary health?
Clear measurement tools are needed to monitor AI’s societal and environmental impact and to guide policy adjustments.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider
What pragmatic, workable steps can be taken in the next year to move toward the shared vision before the 2027 summit?
Identifying short‑term actions maintains momentum, builds trust among stakeholders, and demonstrates progress toward long‑term goals.
Speaker: Thomas Schneider

Disclaimer: This is not an official session record. DiploAI generates these resources from audiovisual recordings, and they are presented as-is, including potential errors. Due to logistical challenges, such as discrepancies in audio/video or transcripts, names may be misspelled. We strive for accuracy to the best of our ability.