COP28 discussions include a focus on AI because it is both part of the problem and, potentially, part of the solution for addressing climate change.
Efforts to regulate AI at the global, federal, and state levels alike are going to create an uneven patchwork of challenges for every industry that relies on the technology.
Enforcing AI regulations will be problematic not only because of differences in regulations across jurisdictions but also because the technology will continue to evolve faster than the policymaking process can keep up.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly become embedded into our lives, influencing every industry on a global scale. Last week, world leaders gathered at COP28 to discuss global strategies for climate action, and AI solutions took center stage as both a key tool in addressing climate issues and a contributor to the threat of climate change.

AI Is Simultaneously Part of the Problem and Part of the Solution

This attention on AI is yet another example of how the world – and policymakers – are grappling with how to weigh the risks and benefits of AI. On the one hand, AI could accelerate efforts to combat climate change by optimizing low-carbon technologies, identifying high-risk areas, and providing timely climate assistance, among many other uses. On the other hand, the enormous amount of computing power needed to run advanced AI could send emissions soaring, making climate change worse.

It’s this type of conundrum that has complicated the passage of AI regulation for industries across the board. Just last week, the EU passed its AI Act, but the marathon session to meet their year-end legislative deadline does not mean regulating AI will be straightforward moving forward. The new regulations will be closely watched globally and will affect not only major AI developers like Google, Meta, Microsoft and OpenAI, but other businesses that are expected to use the technology in areas like education, health care, and banking, in addition to climate.

Businesses Are Facing a Patchwork of Regulations across Multiple Jurisdictions

Here in the U.S., the lack of any meaningful federal legislation has left a void for states to step up and fill. Many state legislators are taking cues from the EU and focusing on specific risk-based legislation addressing privacy, bias, and algorithmic discrimination, but this could expand as new and evolving threats like climate come into focus. State legislators will also be taking notes as the EU struggles with enforcement, which out of the gate will involve regulators across 27 nations and require new experts to manage the complicated web of standards.

What We’re Seeing

1. THE BRUSSELS EFFECT

The European Union has been known to lead the world when it comes to regulating new technologies, passing environmental policy, and taking enforcement actions against Big Tech. Now that the EU has passed AI legislation, we can expect to see the same “Brussels Effect” that we’ve observed in the past – companies globally will likely adopt these new standards preemptively, to ensure compliance and avoid potential legal complexities down the line. We saw this play out when the EU passed the General Data Protection Regulation (GDRP), which later served as a model for privacy laws in states like California, Virginia, and Colorado, and we will see it again and again in various proposed state legislation now that an official AI Act has passed.

2. ENFORCEMENT CHALLENGES

Both the EU and the US will continue to face significant challenges enforcing any legislation. For the EU, the issue arises from the fact that each member state will be responsible for overseeing the enforcement of the AI Act within their respective jurisdictions. This could potentially lead to discrepancies in how the law is applied, creating an inconsistent regulatory environment for AI across the continent. A similar situation is looming in the US, where each state is expected to pass its regulatory framework and establish enforcement mechanisms. This could lead to a patchwork of different regulations across the country, complicating compliance for businesses and potentially stifling AI innovation.

3. NEW THREATS

The AI Act and legislation passed in the US address the timeliest and most glaring threats. As AI evolves, those threats will also evolve. COP28 was a reminder that using AI to address climate change presents risk akin to privacy and security threats. Most would agree that leveraging AI for climate change has enormous promise given the technology’s strength in understanding and modeling complex systems, but risks like data center emissions, water use for data center cooling, and electronic waste as well as broader concerns about equity and privacy must be managed thoughtfully. Expect iterations of AI policy in the U.S to address developing concerns around transparency and sustainable AI practices to offset the dramatic increase in AI use already underway.

AI discussions on international stages like COP28 underscore the appetite for understanding and managing AI on a global scale. As U.S. state regulations go into effect and the AI Act kicks into gear in 2025, we’ll see a patchwork of rules that will make AI enforcement challenging for businesses to comply. The one certainty is this: The speed of tech will continue to outpace the speed at which legislators can react, and stakeholders will have to navigate that disconnect. DDC’s Fortify Global is built to help clients manage this type of cross-border uncertainty, including the local stakeholders and nuances that necessitate a unique approach for audiences in different geographies. We have been tracking the trajectory of AI regulation long before ChatGPT was a thing, and we continue to monitor trends to understand the big issues of tomorrow before they become big issues for our clients in the U.S. and across the globe.

COP28 Reminder that AI Risk is Bigger than Privacy