Kenya stands at the precipice of a technological revolution in robotics and Artificial Intelligence. As it embraces this new frontier, the debate over how to regulate these emerging technologies has intensified.
The public petition proposing a Kenya Robotics and Artificial Intelligence Society Draft Bill, 2023 aims to establish a regulatory body to oversee this sector.
However, rushing into this model without fully understanding our unique challenges and opportunities could hinder the innovation we seek to promote. While this proposed Bill intends to bring order and safety to the growing AI and robotics industry, it mirrors regulatory frameworks from the Global North, which may not suit our developing context.
This rush to “regulate” points to gatekeeping the field as per its clauses that restrict the public from practising or researching AI. To foster a robust AI and robotics industry, there is a need to address fundamental challenges.
They include inadequate infrastructure, insufficient local expertise, and higher costs. The latter affects startups and other firms negatively. Kenya’s ranking of 101 in the Government AI Readiness Index 2023 highlights the need for foundational growth.
A primary function of the proposed society is to regulate the robotics and AI sector, presupposing a mature industry in Kenya.
Despite significant activity, such as startup growth, AI seminars and infrastructure investments, our industry is still developing. Therefore, premature regulation detracts attention from pressing constraints inhibiting the growth.
Moreover, the society’s proposed mandate of regulation, awareness creation, and capacity building exceeds its scope and duplicates existing efforts within the sector. This mandate requires multi-stakeholder collaboration, a formidable task for the proposed society.
Numerous stakeholders, including ministries, private companies, educational institutions and NGOs are already working on these initiatives. Imposing this redundant mandate will burden taxpayers unnecessarily and create additional bureaucratic obstacles for practitioners, revealing an impractical solution.
Researchers in AI and ethics argue that because AI is heterogeneous, regulations must also be heterogeneous. Traditional regulations typically address point problems — think of anti-competitive behaviour or environmental pollution.
For example, a drug company has to pass through several regulators to ensure its products won’t damage the environment or consumers.
It might be tempting to conclude that AI algorithms require their own dedicated regulatory body as proposed by the Robotics Society of Kenya. AI regulation is specialised and best handled through several targeted approaches designed to address artificial intelligence technologies’ unique challenges and risks.
Ethical considerations are paramount with the formation of ethics boards and the implementation of bias audits to promote fairness and equity.
Transparency and explainability standards mandate clear documentation and understandable decision-making processes of AI systems.
Interdisciplinary collaboration and global coordination further enhance the regulatory framework, involving diverse stakeholders and harmonising regulations across borders.
Lastly, consumer protection is prioritised through rights and remedies for users, ensuring informed consent and accountability in AI deployments.
The writers are researchers
