Between Innovation and Oversight: A Cross-Regional Study of AI Risk Management Frameworks in the EU, U.S., UK, and China

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.05773v1
• Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 18:52:17 GMT
• Title: Between Innovation and Oversight: A Cross-Regional Study of AI Risk Management Frameworks in the EU, U.S., UK, and China
• Authors: Amir Al-Maamari,
• Abstract summary: This paper conducts a comparative analysis of AI risk management strategies across the European Union, United States, United Kingdom (UK), and China.<n>The findings show that the EU implements a structured, risk-based framework that prioritizes transparency and conformity assessments.<n>The U.S. uses a decentralized, sector-specific regulations that promote innovation but may lead to fragmented enforcement.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: As artificial intelligence (AI) technologies increasingly enter important sectors like healthcare, transportation, and finance, the development of effective governance frameworks is crucial for dealing with ethical, security, and societal risks. This paper conducts a comparative analysis of AI risk management strategies across the European Union (EU), United States (U.S.), United Kingdom (UK), and China. A multi-method qualitative approach, including comparative policy analysis, thematic analysis, and case studies, investigates how these regions classify AI risks, implement compliance measures, structure oversight, prioritize transparency, and respond to emerging innovations. Examples from high-risk contexts like healthcare diagnostics, autonomous vehicles, fintech, and facial recognition demonstrate the advantages and limitations of different regulatory models. The findings show that the EU implements a structured, risk-based framework that prioritizes transparency and conformity assessments, while the U.S. uses decentralized, sector-specific regulations that promote innovation but may lead to fragmented enforcement. The flexible, sector-specific strategy of the UK facilitates agile responses but may lead to inconsistent coverage across domains. China's centralized directives allow rapid large-scale implementation while constraining public transparency and external oversight. These insights show the necessity for AI regulation that is globally informed yet context-sensitive, aiming to balance effective risk management with technological progress. The paper concludes with policy recommendations and suggestions for future research aimed at enhancing effective, adaptive, and inclusive AI governance globally.

Related papers

• Towards Adaptive AI Governance: Comparative Insights from the U.S., EU, and Asia [0.0]
  This study conducts a comparative analysis of AI trends in the United States (US), the European Union (EU), and Asia. It focuses on three key dimensions: generative AI, ethical oversight, and industrial applications. The US prioritizes market-driven innovation with minimal regulatory constraints, the EU enforces a precautionary risk-based framework emphasizing ethical safeguards, and Asia employs state-guided AI strategies that balance rapid deployment with regulatory oversight.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-01T11:05:47Z)
• HH4AI: A methodological Framework for AI Human Rights impact assessment under the EUAI ACT [1.7754875105502606]
  The paper highlights AIs transformative nature, driven by autonomy, data, and goal-oriented design. A key challenge is defining and assessing "high-risk" AI systems across industries. It proposes a Fundamental Rights Impact Assessment (FRIA) methodology, a gate-based framework designed to isolate and assess risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-23T19:10:14Z)
• Regulating Ai In Financial Services: Legal Frameworks And Compliance Challenges [0.0]
  Article examines the evolving landscape of artificial intelligence (AI) regulation in financial services. It highlights how AI-driven processes, from fraud detection to algorithmic trading, offer efficiency gains yet introduce significant risks. The study compares regulatory approaches across major jurisdictions such as the European Union, United States, and United Kingdom.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T14:29:09Z)
• Media and responsible AI governance: a game-theoretic and LLM analysis [61.132523071109354]
  This paper investigates the interplay between AI developers, regulators, users, and the media in fostering trustworthy AI systems.<n>Using evolutionary game theory and large language models (LLMs), we model the strategic interactions among these actors under different regulatory regimes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-12T21:39:38Z)
• Mapping the Regulatory Learning Space for the EU AI Act [0.8987776881291145]
  The EU's AI Act represents the world first transnational AI regulation with concrete enforcement measures.<n>It builds upon existing EU mechanisms for product health and safety regulation, but extends it to protect fundamental rights.<n>These extensions introduce uncertainties in terms of how the technical state of the art will be applied to AI system certification and enforcement actions.<n>We argue that these uncertainties, coupled with the fast changing nature of AI and the relative immaturity of the state of the art in fundamental rights risk management require the implementation of the AI Act to place a strong emphasis on comprehensive and rapid regulatory learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-27T12:46:30Z)
• Global Perspectives of AI Risks and Harms: Analyzing the Negative Impacts of AI Technologies as Prioritized by News Media [3.2566808526538873]
  AI technologies have the potential to drive economic growth and innovation but can also pose significant risks to society.<n>One way to understand these nuances is by looking at how the media reports on AI.<n>We analyze a broad and diverse sample of global news media spanning 27 countries across Asia, Africa, Europe, Middle East, North America, and Oceania.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-23T19:14:11Z)
• Democratizing AI Governance: Balancing Expertise and Public Participation [1.0878040851638]
  The development and deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) systems, with their profound societal impacts, raise critical challenges for governance.<n>This article explores the tension between expert-led oversight and democratic participation, analyzing models of participatory and deliberative democracy.<n> Recommendations are provided for integrating these approaches into a balanced governance model tailored to the European Union.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-16T17:47:33Z)
• Securing the AI Frontier: Urgent Ethical and Regulatory Imperatives for AI-Driven Cybersecurity [0.0]
  This paper critically examines the evolving ethical and regulatory challenges posed by the integration of artificial intelligence in cybersecurity.<n>We trace the historical development of AI regulation, highlighting major milestones from theoretical discussions in the 1940s to the implementation of recent global frameworks such as the European Union AI Act.<n>Ethical concerns such as bias, transparency, accountability, privacy, and human oversight are explored in depth, along with their implications for AI-driven cybersecurity systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-15T18:17:37Z)
• An evidence-based methodology for human rights impact assessment (HRIA) in the development of AI data-intensive systems [49.1574468325115]
  We show that human rights already underpin the decisions in the field of data use. This work presents a methodology and a model for a Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA) The proposed methodology is tested in concrete case-studies to prove its feasibility and effectiveness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-30T16:27:52Z)
• Open Problems in Technical AI Governance [93.89102632003996]
  Technical AI governance refers to technical analysis and tools for supporting the effective governance of AI. This paper is intended as a resource for technical researchers or research funders looking to contribute to AI governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T21:13:56Z)
• AI Risk Categorization Decoded (AIR 2024): From Government Regulations to Corporate Policies [88.32153122712478]
  We identify 314 unique risk categories organized into a four-tiered taxonomy. At the highest level, this taxonomy encompasses System & Operational Risks, Content Safety Risks, Societal Risks, and Legal & Rights Risks. We aim to advance AI safety through information sharing across sectors and the promotion of best practices in risk mitigation for generative AI models and systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T18:13:05Z)
• Application of the NIST AI Risk Management Framework to Surveillance Technology [1.5442389863546546]
  This study offers an in-depth analysis of the application and implications of the National Institute of Standards and Technology's AI Risk Management Framework (NIST AI RMF) Given the inherently high-risk and consequential nature of facial recognition systems, our research emphasizes the critical need for a structured approach to risk management in this sector.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-22T23:07:11Z)
• The risks of risk-based AI regulation: taking liability seriously [46.90451304069951]
  The development and regulation of AI seems to have reached a critical stage. Some experts are calling for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This paper analyses the most advanced legal proposal, the European Union's AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:51:37Z)
• Regulation and NLP (RegNLP): Taming Large Language Models [51.41095330188972]
  We argue how NLP research can benefit from proximity to regulatory studies and adjacent fields. We advocate for the development of a new multidisciplinary research space on regulation and NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T09:22:40Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.