How Do AI Companies "Fine-Tune" Policy? Examining Regulatory Capture in AI Governance

Kevin Wei,Carson Ezell,Nick Gabrieli,Chinmay Deshpande

2024-10-17

Abstract:Industry actors in the United States have gained extensive influence in conversations about the regulation of general-purpose artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Although industry participation is an important part of the policy process, it can also cause regulatory capture, whereby industry co-opts regulatory regimes to prioritize private over public welfare. Capture of AI policy by AI developers and deployers could hinder such regulatory goals as ensuring the safety, fairness, beneficence, transparency, or innovation of general-purpose AI systems. In this paper, we first introduce different models of regulatory capture from the social science literature. We then present results from interviews with 17 AI policy experts on what policy outcomes could compose regulatory capture in US AI policy, which AI industry actors are influencing the policy process, and whether and how AI industry actors attempt to achieve outcomes of regulatory capture. Experts were primarily concerned with capture leading to a lack of AI regulation, weak regulation, or regulation that over-emphasizes certain policy goals over others. Experts most commonly identified agenda-setting (15 of 17 interviews), advocacy (13), academic capture (10), information management (9), cultural capture through status (7), and media capture (7) as channels for industry influence. To mitigate these particular forms of industry influence, we recommend systemic changes in developing technical expertise in government and civil society, independent funding streams for the AI ecosystem, increased transparency and ethics requirements, greater civil society access to policy, and various procedural safeguards.

Computers and Society

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is: **How does the influence of the artificial intelligence (AI) industry lead to "regulatory capture" and thus harm the public interest?** Specifically, the authors explore the phenomenon that AI companies exert influence through various mechanisms in the policy - making process, which may lead to policy outcomes contrary to the public interest, and put forward suggestions to prevent or mitigate this phenomenon.

### Detailed Explanation:

1. **Background Problems**:
- The AI industry has gained extensive influence in the United States, especially in policy discussions regarding general - purpose AI systems.
- This influence may lead to "regulatory capture", that is, the industry influences policy - makers through specific mechanisms, making policy outcomes give priority to private interests rather than the public interest.

2. **Defining "Regulatory Capture"**:
- The authors define "regulatory capture" as two situations:
1. Policy outcomes go against the public interest.
2. Industry participants exert influence on policy - makers through specific mechanisms, resulting in the above - mentioned policy outcomes.

3. **Research Methods**:
- Through 17 expert interviews and literature reviews, the authors identify policy outcomes that may constitute "regulatory capture" and the specific mechanisms by which industry participants currently exert influence.

4. **Main Findings**:
- **Policy Outcomes**: Policy outcomes that may be caused include lack of AI regulation, weakened regulation, or over - emphasis on certain policy goals.
- **Influence Mechanisms**: Industry participants exert influence through multiple mechanisms, such as agenda - setting, lobbying, academic capture, information management, and cultural capture, etc.

5. **Preventive Measures**:
- The authors propose some systemic and procedural measures to mitigate or prevent "regulatory capture", such as:
- Strengthening the technological capabilities of the government and civil society.
- Strengthening transparency requirements.
- Providing funding support independent of the industry.
- Establishing an independent review mechanism.
- Strengthening government ethics policies, such as conflict - of - interest reviews.

Through these analyses, the paper aims to provide a framework to promote constructive discussions on industry influence in AI governance and ensure that AI policies can truly promote the public interest.