The coordination gap in frontier AI safety policies

Isaak Mengesha

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: Frontier AI Safety Policies concentrate on prevention -- capability evaluations, deployment gates, and usage constraints -- while neglecting institutional capacity to coordinate responses when prevention fails. We argue that this coordination gap is structural: investments in ecosystem robustness yield diffuse benefits but concentrated costs, generating systematic underinvestment. Drawing on risk regimes in nuclear safety, pandemic preparedness, and critical infrastructure, we propose that similar mechanisms -- precommitment, shared protocols, and standing coordination venues -- could be adapted to frontier AI governance. Without such architecture, institutions cannot learn from failures at the pace of relevance.

Date: 2026-02
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-reg
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.10015 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:2603.10015

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().