AI as Governance

Political scientists have had remarkably little to say about artificial intelligence (AI), perhaps because they are dissuaded by its technical complexity and by current debates about whether AI might emulate, outstrip, or replace individual human intelligence. They ought to consider AI in terms of its relationship with governance. Existing large-scale systems of governance such as markets, bureaucracy, and democracy make complex human relations tractable, albeit with some loss of information. AI’s major political consequences can be considered under two headings. First, we may treat AI as a technology of governance, asking how AI’s capacities to classify information at scale affect markets, bureaucracy, and democracy. Second, we might treat AI as an emerging form of governance in its own right, with its own particular mechanisms of representation and coordination. These two perspectives reveal new questions for political scientists, encouraging them to reconsider the boundaries of their discipline.

Other Writing:

Essay

Saving Democratic Institutions from Corrupting Markets

Brink Lindsey and Steven Teles’ essay – and the book that lies behind it – are part of a broader liberaltarian challenge. Liberaltarianism, as I understand it, looks to use classical liberalism as a set of foundations for a very different understanding of market and state than libertarianism. Rather than starting from the market order ...
Read Article
Chapter in an Edited Volume

“Great Britain: Falling Through the Holes in the Network Concept,” in Local Production Systems in Europe: Rise or Demise? – with Colin Crouch – ed. Colin Crouch et al.

British economic development has long exhibited strong regional patterns and contrasts. The UK shares with France a characteristic not possessed by Germany or Italy: the contemporary weakness of its major regional centres, so that the capital cities (London and Paris) and the regions surrounding them (the so-called Home Counties in south-east England and the Ile ...
Read Article