联邦拨款通知暗藏AI治理玄机,却少有具体规范。
One Bad NOFO? AI Governance in Federal Grantmaking
- 分析4万+份拨款公告,发现政府通过资助方向引导AI应用
- 仅少数公告对AI使用设评审标准或限制,多数保持沉默
- 适合关注政策制定、公共资金监管的研究者与实践者
大量研究关注美国联邦机构如何通过规则制定和内部使用政策管理人工智能(AI),但忽视了其在拨款决策中的隐蔽治理角色——每年数十亿美元的联邦资助资金流向州及地方政府,支持其开展AI相关研究、开发与应用。这些资金不仅用于专门的AI项目,也涵盖常规目标中使用AI的机构。作为具有裁量权的资助方,联邦机构通过设定项目目标、评审标准和使用限制,间接塑造了格助人对AI的采用方式。本文基于2009至2024年间超过4万份非国防类联邦拨款通知(NOFO)的新型数据集,筛选提及AI的记录并审查其目标与要求。结果显示,尽管多数公告在叙述中鼓励AI发展,但在涉及公民权利的敏感场景中,仍极少设立针对AI的专门评审标准或使用限制,这种现象即使在类似采购制度下本应触发额外监督的情况下亦然。研究指出,拨款公告正成为一种未被充分认识的AI治理场域,但其发展滞后于其他监管努力,且在透明度、问责与隐私保护方面明显不足。论文最后借鉴采购领域的经验,提出拨款治理的独特挑战,呼吁进一步研究。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Much scholarship considers how U.S. federal agencies govern artificial intelligence (AI) through rulemaking and their own internal use policies. But agencies have an overlooked AI governance role: setting discretionary grant policy when directing billions of dollars in federal financial assistance. These dollars enable state and local entities to study, create, and use AI. This funding not only goes to dedicated AI programs, but also to grantees using AI in the course of meeting their routine grant objectives. As discretionary grantmakers, agencies guide and restrict what grant winners do -- a hidden lever for AI governance. Agencies pull this lever by setting program objectives, judging criteria, and restrictions for AI use. Using a novel dataset of over 40,000 non-defense federal grant notices of funding opportunity (NOFOs) posted to the U.S. federal grants website between 2009 and 2024, we analyze how agencies regulate the use of AI by grantees. We select records mentioning AI and review their stated goals and requirements. We find agencies promoting AI in notice narratives, shaping adoption in ways other records of grant policy might fail to capture. Of the grant opportunities that mention AI, we find only a handful of AI-specific judging criteria or restrictions. This silence holds even when agencies fund AI uses in contexts affecting people's rights and which, under an analogous federal procurement regime, would result in extra oversight. These findings recast grant notices as a site of AI policymaking -- albeit one that is developing out of step with other regulatory efforts and incomplete in its consideration of transparency, accountability, and privacy protections. The paper concludes by drawing lessons from AI procurement scholarship, while identifying distinct challenges in grantmaking that invite further study.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。