Part three

This final part deals with the use of AIME as a procurement tool in government procurement processes.

10. We are exploring the possibility of embedding AIME in government procurement frameworks. In this model, organisations supplying government with AI products and services would be required to complete the tool to demonstrate baseline responsible AI management processes. Do you agree that this would incentivise organisations to implement responsible AI management systems?

11. Do you believe that embedding AIME in government procurement processes could have an adverse effect on competition (e.g. add disproportionate burden on SMEs who may have less resources/capacity to full out a tool like this, compared to larger organisations)?

General observations.

We have grouped questions 10 and 11 together because we believe they are tackling the same issue. Below we set out the key findings from our participants. The overall view was that inclusion of AIME in government procurement processes was a good idea notwithstanding the drawbacks.

Potential Benefits To Inclusion in Government Procurement Process:

  • Incentivises organisations to establish and document sound AI governance practices.
  • Enhances transparency in the AI supply chain by requiring organisations to demonstrate their commitment to responsible AI.
  • Mitigates potential risks associated with the use of AI in government services.
  • Could create a more level playing field by ensuring all suppliers adhere to similar minimum standards.

Potential Drawbacks To Inclusion in Government Procurement Process:

  • Smaller organisations might face difficulties in completing AIME due to limited resources, potentially hindering their ability to compete for government contracts. This may mean that fewer organisation apply, or are successfully awarded, government contracts which in turn has a negative effect on competition.
  • The process of completing AIME and implementing necessary changes to comply with its requirements could add significant costs for smaller organisations.
  • Organisations might focus solely on meeting the minimum requirements of AIME rather than genuinely adopting robust AI management practices. They could provide inaccurate responses to help accelerate the likelihood of a positive award. This would need to be countered by some kind of audit trail.
  • Completing AIME could be time-consuming, potentially delaying the procurement process.

Areas of Uncertainty:

  • One issue with this question is that it is not clear how much weight will be placed on AIME in the procurement exercise. Presumably the amount of weight will be commensurate with the risk associated to the use of AI in the relevant contract, suggesting a tailored approach. However, the group’s experience of contracting for government services was that tailored approaches were unheard of.
As one participant put it:
“Are the AIME questions proportionate to the risk associated with the AI system? The draft AIME tool suggests a single standard, no matter what the risk is or whether you are a user, distributor or developer of an AI system. This is a rather blunt approach. If the AI system carries a low risk, it could create an unnecessary administrative burden to ask bidders to complete the entire questionnaire or even substantiate their answers.”