• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Montreal AI Ethics Institute

Montreal AI Ethics Institute

Democratizing AI ethics literacy

  • Articles
    • Public Policy
    • Privacy & Security
    • Human Rights
      • Ethics
      • JEDI (Justice, Equity, Diversity, Inclusion
    • Climate
    • Design
      • Emerging Technology
    • Application & Adoption
      • Health
      • Education
      • Government
        • Military
        • Public Works
      • Labour
    • Arts & Culture
      • Film & TV
      • Music
      • Pop Culture
      • Digital Art
  • Columns
    • AI Policy Corner
    • Recess
    • Tech Futures
  • The AI Ethics Brief
  • AI Literacy
    • Research Summaries
    • AI Ethics Living Dictionary
    • Learning Community
  • The State of AI Ethics Report
    • State of AI Ethics Report Volume 8 (2026): Call for Contributors
    • Volume 7 (November 2025)
    • Volume 6 (February 2022)
    • Volume 5 (July 2021)
    • Volume 4 (April 2021)
    • Volume 3 (Jan 2021)
    • Volume 2 (Oct 2020)
    • Volume 1 (June 2020)
  • About
    • Our Contributions Policy
    • Our Open Access Policy
    • Contact
    • Donate

Public Strategies for Artificial Intelligence: Which Value Drivers?

October 8, 2021

🔬 Research summary by Connor Wright, our Partnerships Manager.

[Original paper by Gianluigi Viscusi, Anca Rusu, and Marie-Valentine Florin]


Overview: Different nations are now catching on to the need of national AI strategies for the good of their futures. However, what really drives AI and whether this is in line with the current fundamental values at the heart of different nations is a different question.


Introduction

With the release of the UK Government’s AI strategy, the question of what is driving its design comes to mind. AI has long been touted as a sure way to improve public service delivery and administration efforts. However, questioning what kind of values are currently driving government initiatives has not been too visited. Are the private and public spheres motivated by different values? Does humanity itself enter into the AI conversation? Is AI being treated in too much of an instrumental maner? I will now explore these three questions in turn.

Key Insights

Do the private and public sectors differ?

With different end goals and different audiences, the private and public sectors can differ on many aspects of governance. However, “accountability, expertise, reliability, efficiency, and effectiveness” (p.g. 2) were found to be held in common between the two spheres. Other aspects like “professionalism”, “efficiency”, “openness” and “inclusion” have been common to both as well (p.g. 2). However, I believe what can differentiate the two are the interpretations of the values listed. Efficiency will differ from business to business, especially in terms of what is deemed as the threshold. Moreover, “inclusion” (p.g. 2) and who is subjected to it can vary widely in terms of extent, depth and what inclusion entails. Being included in the AI governance could range from participating in its design or just occasionally being informed on the changes being made to an AI. Most of the time, a lack of inclusion is witnessed.

A lack of focus on humanity

Principles such as “transparency”, “privacy” and “responsibility” are mentioned in AI governance strategies more so than “Human dignity” (pg. 4). AI is often touted in the media as the golden ticket towards greater ‘prosperity’ for humanity, but humanity’s role in this prosperity is often left untouched. To illustrate, there were fewer risks and challenges identified in the AI strategies of each country than there were values. So, what are these values contributing towards if governments do not articulate the problem? From my reading of the report, AI is far more accepted as a tool than as a socially designed and sensitive technology.

Instrumental normativity over social normativity

Phrases in the shape of privacy, efficiency and transparency often are preferred by governments instead of words such as democracy. One way to express this substitution is by acknowledging the tension between improving administrative features and simultaneously focusing on societal issues. Resultantly, the values held at the core of constitutions and manifestos are often sidelined when thinking about AI, like with the lack of reference to democracy. Questions then arise of whether values serve as sound guiding principles for AI at all, or are they another example of a tokenistic gesture.

Between the lines

What is crucial for me to consider is how what is valued varies so differently across different nations. As explained in one of our event summaries on AI in different national contexts, the cultural interpretation of different values can vary widely. However, fragmentation is not always a bad thing if each country adheres appropriately to their given interpretation.

The next topic of debate comes from how the fundamental values that the entities in the report expounded were not concurrent with the values shown in the AI strategies. Committing to AI values beyond simply writing them down is a known struggle within the space. For me, writing down the value and what problem this value, if championed correctly, helps to prevent is one way of contextualising and focussing efforts on the issue at hand. The more context and grounding in what AI is being deployed to do, the more the equally valuable social values we hold can appear.

Want quick summaries of the latest research & reporting in AI ethics delivered to your inbox? Subscribe to the AI Ethics Brief. We publish bi-weekly.

Primary Sidebar

SAIER Volume 8 (2026)

SAIER Volume 8 (2026) Call for Contributors

🔍 SEARCH

Spotlight

Vertically- and horizontally-placed chess boards and chess pieces

Tech Futures: At the Frontier of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt

Tech Futures: Introducing the Resist List

An abstract spiral of dark circles appears at the centre, resembling a tornado. Several vintage magazine covers and advertisements are being drawn toward the spiral. The artworks that have already been pulled into it are becoming distorted and replaced with clusters of numbers representing their numerical embeddings.

Tech Futures: Better Imagination for Better Tech Futures

This image is a collage with a colourful Japanese vintage landscape showing a mountain, hills, flowers and other plants and a small stream. There are 3 large black data servers placed in the bottom half of the image, with a cloud of black smoke emitting from them, partly obscuring the scenery.

Tech Futures: Crafting Participatory Tech Futures

A network diagram with lots of little emojis, organised in clusters.

Tech Futures: AI For and Against Knowledge

related posts

  • Compute Trends Across Three Eras of Machine Learning

    Compute Trends Across Three Eras of Machine Learning

  • Towards Algorithmic Fairness in Space-Time: Filling in Black Holes and Detecting Bias in the Presenc...

    Towards Algorithmic Fairness in Space-Time: Filling in Black Holes and Detecting Bias in the Presenc...

  • Dating Through the Filters

    Dating Through the Filters

  • Research Summary: Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples

    Research Summary: Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examples

  • Will an Artificial Intellichef be Cooking Your Next Meal at a Michelin Star Restaurant?

    Will an Artificial Intellichef be Cooking Your Next Meal at a Michelin Star Restaurant?

  • Responsible AI Licenses: social vehicles toward decentralized control of AI

    Responsible AI Licenses: social vehicles toward decentralized control of AI

  • Meet the inaugural cohort of the MAIEI Summer Research Internship!

    Meet the inaugural cohort of the MAIEI Summer Research Internship!

  • The undying sun hangs in the sky, as people gather around signal towers, working through their digital devices.

    Dreams and Realities in Modi's AI Impact Summit

  • ISED Launches AI Risk Management Guide Based on Voluntary Code

    ISED Launches AI Risk Management Guide Based on Voluntary Code

  • LLM-Deliberation: Evaluating LLMs with Interactive Multi-Agent Negotiation Games

    LLM-Deliberation: Evaluating LLMs with Interactive Multi-Agent Negotiation Games

Partners

  •  
    U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute Consortium (AISIC) at NIST

  • Partnership on AI

  • The LF AI & Data Foundation

  • The AI Alliance

Footer


Articles

Columns

AI Literacy

The State of AI Ethics Report


 

About Us


Founded in 2018, the Montreal AI Ethics Institute (MAIEI) is an international non-profit organization equipping citizens concerned about artificial intelligence and its impact on society to take action.

Contact

Donate


  • © 2025 MONTREAL AI ETHICS INSTITUTE.
  • This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
  • Learn more about our open access policy here.
  • Creative Commons License

    Save hours of work and stay on top of Responsible AI research and reporting with our bi-weekly email newsletter.