Generative artificial intelligence is not just another technology: a reconsideration of governance for a unique tool - Navigating a New Frontier

Generative AI (GenAI) is not merely an evolution in artificial intelligence; it marks a profound transformation in how we interact with technology and, ultimately, how we define its role in society. Unlike previous technological revolutions—such as the advent of electricity or the internet—GenAI is unique in its speed, scale, and complexity. Its ability to not just process data but to generate creative, human-like content, from text and images to music and code, places it in a league of its own. But this power also means that GenAI governance cannot be approached with the same framework used for traditional technologies.

A New Frontier in Technology: What sets GenAI apart is its ability to create and generate, making it fundamentally different from prior innovations. While traditional AI systems are designed to perform specific tasks—like recommending movies or detecting spam—GenAI tools can produce original content that feels autonomous and sometimes even intelligent. The emergence of platforms like ChatGPT, MidJourney, and DALL·E illustrates how these systems can engage with creativity, problem-solving, and even empathy. This opens up unprecedented possibilities, but it also opens the door to serious concerns about responsibility, transparency, and potential misuse.

GenAI’s unique characteristics—speed, scale, and opacity—pose new challenges that traditional governance frameworks are ill-equipped to address. These systems, which rely on deep learning models, are essentially black boxes: even the developers behind these technologies often don’t fully understand how or why they produce certain outputs. This lack of transparency makes it difficult to pinpoint errors, assess accountability, and anticipate the consequences of deployment.

The Challenge of Emergent Behaviour: One of the most pressing concerns surrounding GenAI is emergent behaviour—unexpected capabilities that arise from these systems as they improve. For example, a model trained to summarize articles may spontaneously develop the ability to write poetry or solve coding problems. While such capabilities may seem like exciting milestones, they present challenges when it comes to governance. Predicting every possible risk or outcome is impossible, especially when the very nature of these systems involves continuous learning and evolution.

In contrast to narrow AI, where the scope of a model's functionality is clearly defined, GenAI tools can evolve in unpredictable ways, often outpacing the laws and regulations designed to manage them. As a result, traditional regulatory frameworks, which typically rely on anticipating all potential risks in advance, struggle to cope with this new reality.

Dual-Use Dilemma - The Power to Do Good and Harm: Perhaps one of the most critical issues with GenAI is its dual-use nature: a single tool that can be used for both beneficial and harmful purposes. The same systems that generate educational content, assist in scientific research, and fuel innovation can also be exploited to create deepfakes, spread misinformation, or manipulate public opinion through targeted disinformation campaigns. This dual-use dilemma is more pronounced in the age of GenAI, where the very same technologies can be used to sow division or build understanding.

Governance mechanisms that fail to account for this dual-use potential will struggle to balance the benefits and risks of GenAI. Regulatory bodies must find a way to promote the positive uses of GenAI, while safeguarding against its more dangerous applications. Failing to do so may result in an erosion of trust in AI technologies and their potential to enhance human welfare.

Outdated Governance Frameworks: Existing governance structures are largely designed for older generations of AI, where systems were far less powerful, more narrowly focused, and easier to control. For example, AI regulations around data privacy, like those seen in the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), were not built with the vast generative capabilities of GenAI in mind. Similarly, the AI Act currently being developed in the EU still grapples with the challenges presented by the rapid rise of GenAI. In the United States, initiatives like the AI Bill of Rights offer guidelines but lack the enforceable authority needed to address the complexities of generative technologies. Meanwhile, in India, while there is an emphasis on fostering innovation, regulatory conversations around AI are still in their infancy.

The lack of an adaptable, flexible governance structure leaves gaps that could allow GenAI to evolve unchecked. Current regulatory models are too rigid, and this leaves a dangerous lag between technological advancements and legislative action. What’s needed now is governance that isn’t stuck in outdated paradigms.

Towards a Flexible, Risk-Aware Approach: The solution lies in a new approach to governance that transcends traditional legal categories. Instead of fitting GenAI into pre-existing regulatory frameworks designed for narrower AI applications, policymakers must adopt frameworks that evolve as the technology does. This would include regulatory sandboxes, where developers and regulators can test new innovations in a controlled environment; ethical review boards that ensure AI developments meet societal standards of fairness and equity; and multi-stakeholder councils that allow for diverse voices to contribute to the policy-making process.

Moreover, feedback mechanisms need to be real-time, allowing regulations to be updated as the technology evolves. Continuous public consultations will be key to ensuring that the governance model reflects the public’s concerns and adapts to new risks or opportunities. As GenAI becomes more ubiquitous, it is essential that governance mechanisms not only protect against harm but also embrace innovation in a way that benefits society as a whole.

India’s Opportunity to Lead: India, with its rapidly growing tech sector, has a unique opportunity to shape the future of AI governance. By building an inclusive, ethical framework for AI governance, India can establish itself as a global leader in responsible AI development. This means creating an independent, well-resourced AI regulatory body, investing in public-sector AI risk assessment tools, and making AI literacy more accessible to the public, especially in areas like AI auditing and education.

India can position itself at the forefront of this revolution by embracing not just the development of AI but also its ethical governance, ensuring that the country’s technological growth aligns with its social values and global responsibilities.

Conclusion: A Future Shaped by Wise Governance: GenAI is not merely a tool for automating tasks or generating content—it is a transformative force that will reshape everything from education and healthcare to national security and democracy. If left unchecked, it could become a source of division, misinformation, and harm. But if governed with foresight and care, GenAI holds the potential to elevate human creativity, foster inclusive development, and solve some of the world’s most pressing challenges.

The stakes are high, and the time to act is now. Like the challenges of climate change or global security, the risks posed by GenAI transcend borders and generations. Its governance must be equally ambitious, collaborative, and adaptive to the rapid pace of technological progress. The future of GenAI will be determined not by its inherent capabilities, but by how we choose to shape its development—and this is a responsibility that cannot be ignored.

Let’s act with purpose, creativity, and collective responsibility, ensuring that GenAI serves humanity’s best interests for generations to come.