This lightening talk analyses the evolving landscape of national AI policies in sub-Saharan Africa, the influence of transnational actors on these policies, and the parallels that can be drawn with the 'Brussels effect' of the GDPR and DSA. We explore how we can improve African digital governance for the Internet We Want. Big Data and what effective models of multi-stakeholder governance would look like in this context. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) are reshaping how governance is conceived, negotiated and deployed. In Africa, expectations are mounting around the potential of AI/ML systems to make polities more efficient, accountable and resilient vis-à-vis developmental challenges and anticipated environmental shocks. Although currently at an experimental stage, most AI-driven initiatives are catalyzing the attention of national governments, institutional donors and corporate actors. But while national agendas and policy strategies are being laid out, there is still a lack of clarity on how to prevent or minimize the negative externalities that a growing literature on AI/ML is highlighting. Scholarly concerns span from function creep, or the repurposing of citizen technologies and data for commercial or security aims, to the risk of reproducing pre-existing biases into predictive models, to an over-reliance of the public sector on corporate, and often foreign, players. In lightening talk, we present our research findings from surveys, interviews, and focus groups, which explores the multi-stakeholder governance of AI in Africa, focusing on the mutual shaping of politics and digital technologies in Kenya, Ghana, South Africa, Rwanda, and Ethiopia. We will discuss the Internet We Want from an African perspective, exploring how policymakers, the private sector and international donors influence the trajectories of AI agendas and the role of local normative and governance frameworks in shaping their implementation. 1) How will you facilitate interaction between onsite and online speakers and attendees? One organizer is entirely responsible for managing the online forum. This ensures that we cater the session to the needs of those attending online as well as in person. We will ensure that this organizer moderates the chat and acts as a conduit between those online and in person. The online moderator will monitor the chat, field questions, and provide feedback from online participants to the presenters. 2) How will you design the session to ensure the best possible experience for online and onsite participants? Our session will involve sharing a PowerPoint that highlights our research findings. As a result, there will be a visual for both the online and in-person participants to follow along to. This will ensure that the data is relayed across our audiences. Moreover, we will run a hybrid Q&A to ensure that the voices of those online and in-person are given equal weight. We also assume that the live stream of the IGF will be available to those attending online. If not, we have the capacity to have our online moderator set up a livestream for the video, as they will be joining in person. 3) Please note any complementary online tools/platforms you plan to use to increase participation and interaction during the session. We will use the tools suggested by the IGF. We have run hybrid sessions successfully on Zoom, Teams, and Google Meets so we are confident in our ability to successfully use the online tools/platforms provided by the IGF. As a complement to the IGF tools/platforms, we intend to use Menti Meter to gain participant engagement and feedback during the lightening session. We will use those in the latter part of our lightening talk when we discuss the policy implications of our findings.
Open Zoom
