Paper short abstract:

This contribution investigates how and why technocratic rather than democratic discourses dominate public discussions about AI governance. To explain why even deeply political questions of AI governance tend to be portrayed as technocratic ones, it draws attention to unequal distribution of power.

Paper long abstract:

While the development and use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in governance raise profound democratic questions about participation, justice, and power, dominant discourses tend to portray AI as purely technocratic matter. Even deeply political issues in public discussions about AI tend to be presented as technocratic ones. Instead of opening up democratic questions of AI governance, policy makers repeat the mantra that ‘we have to get AI governance right to increase the benefits and mitigate risks.’ Democratic questions about what are benefits and for whom are often sidelined and neglected. Similarly, a popular discourse of using AI to solve major societal challenges of our times in areas such as environment and health tends to present AI as a quick technological fix to complex and uncertain ‘wicked problems’ rather than focusing on wide ranging participation of diverse actors in tackling socio-technical problems in a collaborative and inclusive manner. Against this background, this contribution investigates how and why technocratic rather than democratic discourses dominate public discussions about AI governance. It demonstrates how this discourse privileges narrow technical expertise over broader focus on social and political perspectives. To explain the dominance of technocratic discourse, this contribution draws attention to unequal power distribution in the field of AI where not only economic and technical but also political and discursive power is highly concentrated in a small number of big tech companies. Empirically, it will draw on documents on AI governance issued by governments, international organizations, consultancies, and civil society organizations.