Data story highlights disciplinary diversity in the second round of the German federal and state governments’ Excellence Strategy / “Analysis of great relevance to the research system”

In a Policy Forum, Rishi Bommasani et al. argue that successful artificial intelligence (AI) policy must be grounded in solid evidence and scientific understanding rather than hype or political expediency. “AI policymaking should place a premium on evidence: Scientific understanding and systematic analysis should inform policy, and policy should accelerate evidence generation,” write Bommasani et al. Although developing sound AI policy hinges on clearly defining and effectively using credible evidence, the authors note that what is considered to be valid or credible varies across AI policy domains, leading to uncertainty in governance. This uncertainty creates a policy challenge: act too soon and risk overregulation; wait too long and risk real harm. Here, Bommasani et al. call for developing mechanisms that allow AI policy to evolve alongside emerging scientific understanding, which would ensure that governance remains both effective and grounded in the current state of the technology. To achieve evidence-based AI policy, the authors suggest that governments should incentivize rigorous pre-release model evaluations, increase public transparency around safety practices, and establish systems to monitor post-deployment harms. Protecting independent researchers through safe harbor provisions is essential to expand the evidence base. Policies should also prioritize interventions supported by strong evidence across the broader sociotechnical landscape. Finally, fostering expert consensus through credible, inclusive scientific bodies will help guide responsible AI governance amid uncertainty and disagreement, say the authors.

In a Review, Tiffany Morrison and colleagues discuss the risks associated with rapidly emerging marine-climate intervention approaches. Because current governance systems are ill-suited to the scale and novelty of these new interventions, the authors argue, new regulatory frameworks are urgently needed to balance risk and reward, avoid harm, and ensure that ocean-based climate solutions are safe, equitable, and effective. Rapid climate-driven changes are occurring in marine ecosystems worldwide. As a result, a range of new marine-climate interventions have been proposed, ranging from anthropogenically enhancing ocean alkalinity, to removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, to using assisted gene flow to breed heat-resistant corals. However, while many of these strategies inspire optimism, they are largely untested and pose unprecedented governance challenges. Here, Morrison et al. argue that the pace of new interventions is eclipsing the capacity of current governance systems and without careful oversight, these strategies may instead lead to unintended or irreversible harm. According to the authors, governance of marine-climate interventions must go beyond technical plans and public approval and should consider environmental, ethical, and political impacts, especially when projects are carried out on a large scale. While some early-stage guidelines exist, they have yet to be fully integrated into broader governance frameworks. The authors note that this lack of coordination slows progress toward achieving global marine and climate goals. To move forward, Morrison et al. advocate for dynamic governance principles that support “responsible marine transformation.” “There is mounting evidence that responsible transformation principles, if applied, can improve social, equity, and biodiversity outcomes and generate more durable ocean solutions,” write Morrison et al.

A Texas A&M University professor emeritus believes adding a policy option to history programs would benefit graduate students and policymakers alike.

Climate-related wildfires are once again making headlines as they rage across the northern hemisphere this summer. New IIASA research shows that addressing social and economic vulnerability across countries will be a key factor in mitigating the scale of resulting financial damage and emphasize sustainable development as key to reducing climate-related impacts.