Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.19264 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866908340010876928 |
|---|---|
| author | John, Angel Mary Panachakel, Jerrin Thomas P, Anusha S. |
| author_facet | John, Angel Mary Panachakel, Jerrin Thomas P, Anusha S. |
| contents | This paper explores the integration of human rights considerations into AI regulatory frameworks across different IEEE regions - specifically the United States (Region 1-6), Europe (Region 8), China (part of Region 10), and Singapore (part of Region 10). While all acknowledge the transformative potential of AI and the necessity of ethical guidelines, their regulatory approaches significantly differ. Europe exhibits a rigorous framework with stringent protections for individual rights, while the U.S. promotes innovation with less restrictive regulations. China emphasizes state control and societal order in its AI strategies. In contrast, Singapore's advisory framework encourages self-regulation and aligns closely with international norms. This comparative analysis underlines the need for ongoing global dialogue to harmonize AI regulations that safeguard human rights while promoting technological advancement, reflecting the diverse perspectives and priorities of each region. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2504_19264 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Navigating AI Policy Landscapes: Insights into Human Rights Considerations Across IEEE Regions John, Angel Mary Panachakel, Jerrin Thomas P, Anusha S. Computers and Society Machine Learning This paper explores the integration of human rights considerations into AI regulatory frameworks across different IEEE regions - specifically the United States (Region 1-6), Europe (Region 8), China (part of Region 10), and Singapore (part of Region 10). While all acknowledge the transformative potential of AI and the necessity of ethical guidelines, their regulatory approaches significantly differ. Europe exhibits a rigorous framework with stringent protections for individual rights, while the U.S. promotes innovation with less restrictive regulations. China emphasizes state control and societal order in its AI strategies. In contrast, Singapore's advisory framework encourages self-regulation and aligns closely with international norms. This comparative analysis underlines the need for ongoing global dialogue to harmonize AI regulations that safeguard human rights while promoting technological advancement, reflecting the diverse perspectives and priorities of each region. |
| title | Navigating AI Policy Landscapes: Insights into Human Rights Considerations Across IEEE Regions |
| topic | Computers and Society Machine Learning |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.19264 |