Articles and Research

The United States has formally established a National AI Safety Board (NAISB), an independent body modeled on the National Transportation Safety Board. Announced in early October 2025, the NAISB will investigate significant AI failures—ranging from algorithmic discrimination to catastrophic automation incidents—and publish public findings (White House, 2025). The move signals...

In October 2025, the United States announced the formation of a National AI Safety Board—a permanent oversight body modeled on the National Transportation Safety Board. Days later, the European Commission inaugurated its AI Office, and UNESCO expanded its Ethics of AI Observatory. Within weeks, three continents converged on one insight...

Integrating Governance into the Development Lifecycle Artificial-intelligence security is entering a phase where good intentions are no longer sufficient. 2025’s high-profile AI breaches—from model-prompt leaks to manipulated training datasets—exposed that most organizations still treat governance as a post-deployment activity. The new “secure-by-design” guidance from the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre...

A quiet revolution is taking place in corporate reporting. In their 2025 third-quarter filings, companies including Microsoft, SAP, and UBS began referencing AI risk governance alongside traditional cybersecurity and ESG disclosures (Bloomberg, 2025). These mentions are brief but significant.

As election seasons unfold across multiple continents, lawmakers and media organizations are racing to counter an explosion of AI-generated misinformation. In September 2025, the European Parliament advanced a bill requiring labeling of synthetic political content, while the U.S. Congress is considering a similar “AI Transparency in Communications Act”.

NATO’s new Defense Innovation Charter, signed in early October 2025, requires that any AI system deployed for military decision support or targeting must be explainable and auditable (NATO, 2025). The alliance’s move reflects growing recognition that the use of AI in defense demands not only effectiveness but demonstrable ethical restraint.

When senior officials from the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the European Commission met in Brussels this month, they discussed something unprecedented: cross-recognition of AI audits (Reuters, 2025). The idea that audit findings from one jurisdiction could satisfy regulators in another represents the next step in harmonizing global AI oversight.

Governor Gavin Newsom’s recent executive order on AI transparency may reshape global governance faster than many expect. Signed in late September 2025, the order requires state agencies and vendors to disclose when AI systems influence public services and to publish annual transparency reports (California Governor’s Office, 2025).

AI systems are not built; they are assembled. Every model, dataset, and line of code depends on an intricate supply chain of vendors, cloud providers, open-source libraries, and pre-trained components. As regulation tightens, this chain has become a new frontier of risk. The integrity of an organization’s AI...

Artificial intelligence has entered the stage of regulation, and organizations are now being asked not just to use AI responsibly but to prove that they are doing so. For years, industry conversations about “responsible AI” revolved around ethical aspirations—fairness, accountability, transparency. Today, boards, regulators, and auditors are demanding measurable evidence.