Jul 2026· AI and Ethics· Vol 6· 0 citations· 64 references
TL;DR
This paper introduces the concept of “epistemic infrastructure” to capture AI’s role in constituting the conditions of possibility for thought, and proposes governance mechanisms calibrated to this infrastructural function.
Abstract
Contemporary artificial intelligence (AI) governance frameworks predominantly view AI systems as tools or discrete instruments that augment human capabilities while remaining subordinate to human intention. This paper argues that as AI systems achieve infrastructural status—embedded, ubiquitous, and foundational to cognitive activity—and hence, they demand fundamentally different regulatory logics. From this lens, we develop a systematic framework that distinguishes tool properties (visibility, optionality, task-boundedness) from infrastructure properties (invisibility, obligatoriness, epistemic generativity). We then apply this framework to evaluate six AI governance instruments adopted in North America, Europe, and Asia. Our analysis reveals a systematic regulatory gap, wherein current frameworks address what AI systems do but not what they render thinkable. To bridge this gap, we introduce the concept of “epistemic infrastructure” to capture AI’s role in constituting the conditions of possibility for thought, and propose governance mechanisms calibrated to this infrastructural function.
Agentic artificial intelligence (AI)—systems that reason, act, and interact with autonomy and persistence—presents qualitatively new governance challenges compared to traditional large language models. By operating across multimodal environments and pursuing goals without constant human input, agentic AI introduces b...
Angeline Lee, Shahla Naimi· Business and Human Rights Jo...· 0 citations
To support the next phase of European AI governance, this paper asks what forms of knowing, judging, and acting already exist within public administration—and how these should shape the design of artificial intelligence tools introduced to work alongside public servants. The notation Alternative Intelligence [ai] is in...
This policy note highlights two primary gaps in the current AI landscape: an advancement gap—where technological capabilities evolve faster than institutional capacity to govern them—and a participation gap, where communities most affected by AI lack influence over its development.
I. Bittencourt, Seiji Isotani, Thomaz Veloso· 0 citations
This paper argues that most responsible AI (RAI) governance frameworks do not meaningfully address AI’s environmental and social costs, and proposes the concept of critical AI governance, which rests on three overarching principles: critically questioning dominant ideologies and economic imperatives, prioritizing socia...
Paul Schuetze, B. Brevini· AI & SOCIETY· 0 citations
It is argued that AI is no longer merely a computational instrument, but increasingly functions as a structural mediator shaping human consciousness through the reconstruction of global information architecture, and the future trajectory of civilization will be determined not merely by control over energy and material...
La Himmah Il Princess Choris, M. Shoim· Journal La Bisecoman· 0 citations
This paper argues for a transition from AI Governance as Compliance to AI Governance Engineering , a systems-oriented discipline in which governance is embedded throughout the enterprise intelligence lifecycle, enabling enterprise intelligence systems that are secure, explainable, trustworthy, and governable by design.
Faruk Çelikkanat· International Journal of Res...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
