The essay reviews Matthijs Maas’s framework for global AI governance, highlighting the rapid, border‑less development of AI and the fragmented, non‑binding international responses. It argues that governance cannot rely on a single institutional blueprint but must account for the varied powers of states, international bodies, and private firms. The central challenge is shaping an evolving architecture amid actors with differing incentives and no shared plans.
By Simon Chesterman
arXiv:2606. 30656v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Artificial Intelligence (AI) has the potential to be transformative for development, but Africa is currently facing a fragmented and challenging "AI divide".
By Abayomi O. Agbeyangi, Jose M. Lukose
arXiv:2606. 12423v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into critical infrastructure including healthcare, finance, energy, and defense, offers transformative benefits but also conflicts with evolving regulatory and governance frameworks.
By Ayush Enkhtaivan, Chinazunwa Uwaoma
arXiv:2602. 00056v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large-scale data has fuelled the success of frontier artificial intelligence (AI) models over the past decade.
By Sophia N. Wilson, Sebastian Mair, Mophat Okinyi, Erik B. Dam, Janin Koch, Raghavendra Selvan
arXiv:2608. 13272v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A small number of firms based in two states produce the most capable frontier AI models.
By Alan Woodward, Andrew Rogoyski
arXiv:2606. 00047v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Frontier AI governance often centres on the model-level governance paradigm, which assumes that a model's capability profile is primarily a function of the compute and data used during training.
By Arthur Goemans, Dan Altman, Noemi Dreksler, Jonas Freund, Milan Gandhi, Zhengdong Wang, Sarah Cogan, Sebastien Krier, Demetra Brady, Lewis Ho, Allan Dafoe
arXiv:2608. 19278v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The most capable general-purpose AI (GPAI) models are mostly built in two jurisdictions, the United States and China, but the risks they carry land globally.
By Josephine Schwab, Nathan Naidoo, Ferruccio Barazzutti, Sheryn Lee, Caio Vieira Machado
arXiv:2607. 14782v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Grounded in human rights-based frameworks such as the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, the Global Index on Responsible AI (GIRAI) examines how countries translate responsible AI commitments into enforceable protections, institutional capacity, and redress mechanisms.
By Rachel Adams, Fola Adeleke, Ayantola Alayande, Selamawit Engida Abdella, Ana Florido, Nicol\'as Grossman, Leah Junck
arXiv:2606. 07245v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI sovereignty is the extent to which a nation independently controls its artificial intelligence (AI) technologies.
By Timothy Clancy, Asmeret Naugle
arXiv:2608. 14562v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI governance is shifting from voluntary ethics to enforceable, risk-based regulation, yet cross-jurisdictional divergence creates compliance uncertainty for operators of high-stakes AI.
By Aasish Kumar Sharma, Dimitar Koysev, Christopher Anich, Roshni Kumari Ojha, Julian Kunkel
arXiv:2609.05894v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: The exponentiation of Artificial intelligence (AI) in the recent past has entered a transformative era that has been driven by the growth in large lang...
By Victor Kebande
arXiv:2606. 26117v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: This paper introduces the Governance Inversion Hypothesis (GIH) to explain a growing paradox in artificial intelligence (AI) governance: under conditions of increasing regulatory expansion and technological complexity, organisations may become more formally governed while simultaneously experiencing a decline in operational control over AI systems.
By Victor Frimpong