The inaugural UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance marked progress in moving global AI policy from foundational ethics toward practical implementation. Yet, a profound trust gap remains between international decision-making bodies and the communities most affected by AI technologies — especially marginalized and digitally excluded populations.
- Global AI governance advancing from principles to implementation.
- Trust deficits inhibit marginalized communities’ meaningful participation.
- Trusted local mediators critical for equitable AI policy impact.
What happened
In early July 2026, Geneva hosted the first session of the United Nations Global Dialogue on AI Governance, convening global actors to address artificial intelligence risks and governance strategies. UN Secretary-General António Guterres underscored the progress from framing ethical principles toward implementing effective institutions and policies.
Concurrently, reports from focus groups and field research in marginalized communities—such as quilombola groups in Brazil and low-income families in US cities—revealed widespread exclusion from AI governance conversations. These studies demonstrate that such forums primarily reach institutional actors, missing those who experience AI impacts directly but lack channels for trust-based engagement.
Why it matters
The growing momentum for international AI governance risks being superficial without addressing trust deficits that hinder meaningful community involvement. Institutional processes must go beyond engagement with multilateral organizations to recognize local social infrastructures that serve as intermediaries of trust, such as community leaders, educators, and health workers.
Research underscores that marginalized populations neither reject technology nor digital participation outright, but seek pathways aligned with their social ecosystems. Without integrating these community-based intermediaries and their knowledge systems, digital and AI policies are prone to failure, perpetuating exclusion and limiting equitable outcomes.
What to watch next
Emerging initiatives like the Participatory AI Research Network highlight promising directions by fostering collaborations among communities, journalists, and researchers to generate evidence on AI’s societal effects. Yet, international AI governance discussions must diversify not only stakeholder participation but also their empirical foundations by incorporating territorial methodologies from the Global South.
Practically, successful AI governance will depend on empowering and investing in trusted intermediaries—termed digital navigators or sociotechnical mediators—who can facilitate equitable access, learning, and trust. Policy makers and technology developers should prioritize sustained recognition and support for these community-level actors to bridge the divide between global AI governance and real-world impact.