Puxin Zhang , Krishna Jayakar , Richard Taylor , Chun Liu
{"title":"相同的目标,不同的路径:中国和印度人工智能监管方法的对比","authors":"Puxin Zhang , Krishna Jayakar , Richard Taylor , Chun Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.telpol.2025.103019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This paper is a comparative analysis of how two leading developing nations, China and India, are proposing to regulate artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Despite similarity in circumstances as large developing economies aiming to upgrade their technology sectors and create jobs, the two countries have taken significantly different approaches to AI regulation. Based on interest group theory, we argue that contrasting problem definitions—predominantly in terms of economic competitiveness and national security in China and as applications in India—resulted in the recruitment of very different decision-making groups in the two countries; homogeneous groups of technocrats and security specialists in China and a broader group including consumer advocates in India. This in turn resulted in ambitious and deep policy changes in China and relatively incremental and consensus-based moves in India.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":22290,"journal":{"name":"Telecommunications Policy","volume":"49 8","pages":"Article 103019"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Same goal, different paths: Contrasting approaches to AI regulation in China and India\",\"authors\":\"Puxin Zhang , Krishna Jayakar , Richard Taylor , Chun Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.telpol.2025.103019\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This paper is a comparative analysis of how two leading developing nations, China and India, are proposing to regulate artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Despite similarity in circumstances as large developing economies aiming to upgrade their technology sectors and create jobs, the two countries have taken significantly different approaches to AI regulation. Based on interest group theory, we argue that contrasting problem definitions—predominantly in terms of economic competitiveness and national security in China and as applications in India—resulted in the recruitment of very different decision-making groups in the two countries; homogeneous groups of technocrats and security specialists in China and a broader group including consumer advocates in India. This in turn resulted in ambitious and deep policy changes in China and relatively incremental and consensus-based moves in India.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22290,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Telecommunications Policy\",\"volume\":\"49 8\",\"pages\":\"Article 103019\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Telecommunications Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596125001168\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Telecommunications Policy","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596125001168","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Same goal, different paths: Contrasting approaches to AI regulation in China and India
This paper is a comparative analysis of how two leading developing nations, China and India, are proposing to regulate artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Despite similarity in circumstances as large developing economies aiming to upgrade their technology sectors and create jobs, the two countries have taken significantly different approaches to AI regulation. Based on interest group theory, we argue that contrasting problem definitions—predominantly in terms of economic competitiveness and national security in China and as applications in India—resulted in the recruitment of very different decision-making groups in the two countries; homogeneous groups of technocrats and security specialists in China and a broader group including consumer advocates in India. This in turn resulted in ambitious and deep policy changes in China and relatively incremental and consensus-based moves in India.
期刊介绍:
Telecommunications Policy is concerned with the impact of digitalization in the economy and society. The journal is multidisciplinary, encompassing conceptual, theoretical and empirical studies, quantitative as well as qualitative. The scope includes policy, regulation, and governance; big data, artificial intelligence and data science; new and traditional sectors encompassing new media and the platform economy; management, entrepreneurship, innovation and use. Contributions may explore these topics at national, regional and international levels, including issues confronting both developed and developing countries. The papers accepted by the journal meet high standards of analytical rigor and policy relevance.