Strong SDOs are key to regulating AI in a way that maximizes upsides while minimizing downsides.

Hadrien Pouget, “What will the role of standards be in AI governance?,” Ada Lovelace Institute, 04-05-2023, https://www.adalovelaceinstitute.org/blog/role-of-standards-in-ai-governance/

A tool for regulating AI?

With regulation on the way, standards are emerging as a potential tool for AI governance because they offer a flexible way for governments to benefit from industry expertise and a supposedly promising path for international cooperation.

Notably, AI standards would have played (and will play) a role regardless of any specific regulation. Industry actors want a clear, coherent approach to AI and are interested in limiting risks resulting from its use (although, of course, the risks they perceive may differ from those feared by other groups in society). For these reasons, the ISO/IEC’s AI standards work began in 2017 – before most countries had an official, high-level AI strategy, let alone specific regulations or guidelines.7

Of all standardisation work that is already underway internationally, the ISO/IEC joint effort is the most prominent attempt. The national SDOs that compose ISO/IEC are likely to adopt the agreed international standards, making them official within their country. The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), which has broader membership, is also creating sometimes competing, sometimes complementary AI standards, and, on some aspects, it is moving faster than ISO and IEC.

Turning to national standard-setting institutions, in the USA, NIST has developed the aforementioned voluntary AI RMF, which outlines useful internal governance processes for those aiming to use AI. The USA’s leading standards body, the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), is heavily involved in setting standards at ISO/IEC level, and it is likely that it will respect the standards developed there.