Governing intelligence: Singapore’s evolving AI governance framework
This paper provides an outline analysis of the evolving governance framework for Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Singapore. Across the Singapore government, AI solutions are being adopted in line with Singapore’s “Smart Nation Initiative” to leverage technology to make impactful changes to the natio...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | text |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2025
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/4569 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/6527/viewcontent/Allen_Loo_and_Campoverde___Governing_Intelligence.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Singapore Management University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | This paper provides an outline analysis of the evolving governance framework for Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Singapore. Across the Singapore government, AI solutions are being adopted in line with Singapore’s “Smart Nation Initiative” to leverage technology to make impactful changes to the nation and the economy. In tandem, Singaporean authorities have been assiduous to release a growing number of governance documents, which we analyse together to chart the city-state’s approach to AI governance in international comparison. Characteristics of Singapore’s AI governance approach include an emphasis on consensusbuilding between stakeholders (particularly government and industry but also citizens) andvoluntary or “quasi” regulation, lately with an emphasis on promulgating standards (AI Standards, n.d.) and audit-like frameworks. Singaporean regulators have also been early movers (globally, and especially in the region) in the promulgation of normative instruments on AI governance including developing the world’s first AI Governance Testing Framework and Toolkit, AI Verify. The Singapore approach may be compelling for other jurisdictions in the region and around the world with an interest in a collaborative, balanced, andconsensual approach to governing AI outside of strict regulatory mechanisms. However, anyjurisdiction adopting aspects of its evolving model would have to duly account for relevant differences in social and institutional conditions. |
|---|