The United Nations is being urged to take a central role in how the world monitors and governs artificial intelligence. A report produced by the UN secretary general’s High Level Advisory Body on AI proposes a global effort built around shared information, policy coordination, and wider participation by poorer nations.
The proposal arrives as governments see both promise and danger in AI. Large language models and chatbots have raised hopes for major gains in economic productivity, while also intensifying concerns about risks that could spread across borders.
A Global Forum For AI Risks
The report recommends creating a body similar to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Its job would be to collect up-to-date information on AI and its risks, giving governments a common base of knowledge as the technology changes.
That kind of shared monitoring is central to the proposal. AI systems are developing quickly, and the report treats governance as a problem that cannot be left only to national regulators or private companies. The UN’s 193 members would also have a new policy dialog where they could discuss risks and agree upon actions.
Alondra Nelson, a professor at the Institute for Advanced Study who served on the UN advisory body at the recommendation of the White House and State Department, described the basic consensus behind the work:
“You’ve got an international community that agrees there are both harms and risks as well as opportunities presented by AI,”
The report’s framing is not only about slowing harm. It also recognizes that AI is seen as a tool for economic, scientific, and military benefits. That dual character is why the UN proposal puts risk assessment and access in the same conversation.
What The Report Wants The UN To Build
The recommendations are broad, but they point toward a practical governance structure. The report calls for an AI office within the UN to coordinate existing efforts inside the organization and help meet the goals laid out by the advisory body.
It also calls for steps to help poorer nations, especially those in the global south, benefit from AI and take part in decisions about how it is governed. That matters because a global AI system shaped only by wealthy nations would leave many countries responding to rules and technologies they had little role in creating.
The report says these efforts should include:
- Creating an AI fund to back projects in poorer nations.
- Establishing AI standards and data-sharing systems.
- Creating resources such as training to help nations with AI governance.
- Using the Global Digital Compact, an existing plan to address digital and data divides between nations, to facilitate some recommendations.
The emphasis on access is important because the source of AI power is not only technical capacity. It also includes data, standards, institutions, and the ability to evaluate systems before they cause harm. The report’s approach treats those capabilities as part of global governance, not as optional extras.
The Risks Driving The Urgency
The rise of large language models and chatbots has made AI governance more urgent for policymakers. The technology has demonstrated remarkable abilities, but experts have warned that AI may be developing too rapidly and could become difficult to control.
Not long after ChatGPT appeared, many scientists and entrepreneurs signed a letter calling for a six-month pause on development so that risks could be assessed. The report does not focus only on long-term fears. It also reflects immediate concerns that are already shaping public debate.
Those concerns include the potential for AI to automate disinformation, generate deepfake video and audio, replace workers en masse, and exacerbate societal algorithmic bias on an industrial scale. Nelson summarized the mood behind the push for coordination:
“There is a sense of urgency, and people feel we need to work together,”
The logic is straightforward. If AI tools can scale misleading media, workplace disruption, or biased decisions, then the effects may not stay inside one jurisdiction. A shared international process could help governments compare evidence, avoid duplicated work, and respond with more consistent expectations.
Major Powers Still Disagree
The UN proposals come as the United States and China compete to lead in AI. Both countries see the technology as strategically important, but they have different visions for how it should be used and controlled.
In March, the United States introduced a resolution to the UN calling on member states to embrace “safe, secure, and trustworthy AI.” In July, China introduced its own resolution emphasizing cooperation in AI development and making the technology widely available. All UN member states signed both agreements.
That shared support does not erase deeper disagreements. Joshua Meltzer, an expert at the Brookings Institute, a Washington, DC, think tank, said:
“AI is part of US-China competition, so there is only so much that they are going to agree on,”
According to Meltzer, key differences include what norms and values should be embodied by AI and protections around privacy and personal data. Those differences are already affecting markets. The EU has introduced sweeping AI regulations with data usage controls, and some US companies have limited the availability of their products there.
In the United States, the federal government’s hands-off approach has led California to propose its own AI rules. Earlier versions were criticized by AI companies based there as too onerous, including in how they would require firms to report their activities to the government, and the rules were watered down.
Why Implementation Will Matter Most
The report tries to establish common ground by emphasizing human rights. Chris Russell, a professor at Oxford University in the UK who studies international AI governance, said that approach gives the work a strong basis in international law, a broad remit, and attention to concrete harms as they occur to people.
Russell also noted that governments are already duplicating work as they evaluate AI for regulation. The US and UK governments have separate bodies probing AI models for misbehavior, for example. A UN-led effort could reduce redundancy by encouraging governments to share knowledge and pool efforts.
Still, the UN is unlikely to manage global AI cooperation by itself. Meltzer said the UN has an important role, but AI governance needs “a distributed kind of architecture,” with individual nations also working directly on the issue. He added: “You’ve got a fast-evolving technology, and the UN is clearly not set up to handle that.”
The report’s value may therefore depend on whether it becomes a working system rather than another statement of concern. Scientists from the West and China have issued a joint call for more collaboration on AI safety after a conference in Vienna, Austria, showing that expert concern can cross political lines. Nelson said government leaders may also be able to cooperate, but the outcome will depend on follow-through: “The devil will be in the details of implementation.”