Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming industries, solving complex problems, and improving daily life for many.
Yet, a new report highlights the uneven distribution of AI’s benefits across the world, raising concerns about whether AI might be reinforcing inequalities and exploiting vulnerable populations.
The disparity raises pressing questions about the exploitation of vulnerable populations and the potential reinforcement of inequalities.
AI Usage and Inequality: A Global Divide
According to an EY report, AI usage is significantly higher in wealthier nations than in developing ones. For example, 64% of respondents from high-income countries reported frequent AI use, while only 55% of those from low-income countries said the same.
The gap in AI adoption highlights a key issue: inclusive development. If AI is to reach its full potential, it must be designed and implemented with diverse data and contexts in mind.
EY’s Chief Technology and Innovation Officer for Oceania, Katherine Boiciuc, points out that “AI has great potential to address global challenges, but its benefits are unevenly distributed.”
North America currently controls nearly 40% of the AI market, while countries in the Global South, which account for over 75% of the world’s population, lag behind.
Disparate Risks Across Regions
The risks associated with AI also differ significantly by region. Globally, 68% of survey respondents cited misinformation as a top concern, followed by data bias (51%) and the exploitation of personal data (46%). However, when these numbers are broken down geographically, a troubling pattern emerges.
In Europe, only 41% of respondents believe AI could lead to the exploitation of personal data. However, this figure jumps to 54% in Africa, a region where data privacy laws and enforcement mechanisms may be weaker.
The contrast is even more stark when it comes to job displacement: just 33% of European respondents fear AI will displace jobs, compared to 45% of African respondents.
These findings suggest that vulnerable populations, particularly in developing nations, are more likely to experience the negative consequences of AI while reaping fewer of its benefits.
Boiciuc warns that “vulnerable communities are at risk of further discrimination as AI systems trained on biased data can reinforce existing patterns of inequality.”
The Investment Gap: A Global Problem
Boiciuc also emphasizes that the investment gap in AI technology exacerbates these inequalities. Wealthier countries have the resources to develop, regulate, and refine AI systems tailored to their specific needs.
Poorer nations, on the other hand, are more likely to import AI systems that were designed without considering their unique cultural, economic, and social contexts.
“This means it’s incredibly important that we position diversity not as a privilege, but as a right when it comes to designing and implementing AI,” said Boiciuc.
Without significant investment in AI infrastructure and the inclusion of diverse perspectives, countries that are net importers of AI could be subject to decisions about privacy, safety, and ethics made by foreign entities.
The dynamic also heightens the risk that vulnerable populations will be disproportionately affected by AI-related harms, such as biased healthcare algorithms or automated systems that exacerbate social inequalities.
As AI continues to shape the future of work, healthcare, and governance, the importance of diversity in its design and implementation cannot be overstated.
The question remains: Will AI developers and policymakers heed these warnings, or will vulnerable populations continue to bear the brunt of an unequal AI revolution? The answer could determine whether AI becomes a tool for empowerment or exploitation.
