Can effective international governance for artificial intelligence remain fragmented, or is there a need for a centralised international organisation for AI? We draw on the history of other international regimes to identify advantages and disadvantages in centralising AI governance. Some considerations, such as efficiency and political power, speak in favour of centralisation. Conversely, the risk of creating a slow and brittle institution speaks against it, as does the difficulty in securing participation while creating stringent rules. Other considerations depend on the specific design of a centralised institution. A well-designed body may be able to deter forum shopping and ensure policy coordination. However, forum shopping can be beneficial and a fragmented landscape of institutions can be self-organising. Centralisation entails trade-offs and the details matter. We conclude with two core recommendations. First, the outcome will depend on the exact design of a central institution. A well-designed centralised regime covering a set of coherent issues could be beneficial. But locking-in an inadequate structure may pose a fate worse than fragmentation. Second, for now fragmentation will likely persist. This should be closely monitored to see if it is self-organising or simply inadequate.

中文翻译：

---

人工智能治理应该集中化吗？历史的设计教训

人工智能的有效国际治理能否保持碎片化，或者是否需要一个集中的人工智能国际组织？我们借鉴其他国际制度的历史来确定集中人工智能治理的优势和劣势。一些考虑因素，例如效率和政治权力，支持集中化。相反，创建一个缓慢而脆弱的机构的风险与它背道而驰，在制定严格规则的同时确保参与的困难也是如此。其他考虑取决于中心化机构的具体设计。一个精心设计的机构可能能够阻止论坛购物并确保政策协调。然而，论坛购物可能是有益的，而且机构的碎片化景观可以自组织。中心化需要权衡，细节很重要。我们总结了两个核心建议。首先，结果将取决于中央机构的确切设计。一个设计良好、涵盖一系列连贯问题的集中制度可能是有益的。但是锁定一个不适当的结构可能会导致比碎片化更糟糕的命运。其次，目前碎片化可能会持续下去。这应该被密切监控，看它是自组织的还是完全不够的。