Parliamentary Action and the Theory of Responsive Regulation in AI Regulation in Brazil

Abstract

[Purpose] This article presents an analysis of Bill No. 2,338 of 2023, which proposes the regulation of the development, application, and use of Artificial Intelligence in Brazil. The analysis is based on the following research question: how does the text approved by the Federal Senate for the regulation of Artificial Intelligence in Brazil align with the Theory of Responsive Regulation? The main hypothesis formulated for the study is that there is no proposal for responsive regulation in AI regulation in Brazil. To answer the research question and test the formulated hypothesis, legislative texts related to Bill No. 2,338 of 2023 will be analyzed. The general objective is to identify, in these texts under review by the Senate, whether there are elements that indicate a responsive regulation approach. The database for the analysis consists of the initial text of Bill No. 2,338 of 2023, presented by Senator Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD/MG), the initial report presented by Senator Eduardo Gomes (PL/TO), the final report approved by the Temporary Committee on Artificial Intelligence (CTIA), and the final version approved by the Senate Plenary.

[Methodology/approach/design] The theoretical framework for the study is the Theory of Responsive Regulation, developed by Braithwaite and Ayres. Based on the assumptions and recommendations outlined in this theory, a content analysis of the texts comprising the database will be conducted to identify elements of responsive regulation. For the computerized Content Analysis will be used the IraMuteQ tool, a software developed for syntactic, similarity, and term occurrence analyses. The selection of terms for analysis will begin with the elimination of endogenous words and terms, i.e., those inherent to the object of study, such as Artificial Intelligence, Bill, Amendment, etc. After this initial screening, terms deemed relevant to the analysis will be selected, particularly those that may lead to a responsive regulation approach. The objective of the analysis is to identify the presence of terms and correlations that indicate elements of responsive regulation in the listed documents. The analysis will also include a comparative process between the various texts in the database to determine how elements of responsive regulation appear—or do not appear—throughout the evolution of the discussions. The proposed content analysis allows for contextualization of the terms in the texts, enabling the description of their meanings and applications.

[Results] Through the content analysis described in the methodology, the actions of the parliamentarians distanced the final text of Bill 2338 of 2023 from the principles of responsive regulation. The analyses provided by the IraMuteQ software describe the connection between the selected terms, their correlations, and similarities throughout the texts, allowing for an understanding of their applications and meanings.

[Practical implications] The primary practical implication of this article is to contribute to the debates on the regulation of Artificial Intelligence in Brazil. It is known that the proposed and approved text by the Senate still has a long path ahead in the Chamber of Deputies, where it will inevitably receive new elements, undergo changes, and may return to the Senate. Thus, the contribution of this article is to add another perspective to the analysis and study of the regulation of so-called disruptive technologies, without the intention of being exhaustive or conclusive on the subject.

[Originality/relevance of the text] The originality of the study proposed in this article lies in the fact that the regulation of Artificial Intelligence is still a topic under debate, not only in Brazil. Here, discussions still have a long way to go before the country has specific legislation, and even after that, due to the characteristics of the regulated subject, discussions will continue regarding the updating of legal and regulatory norms. From another perspective, there is also originality in examining what Parliament proposes on this matter, as it is a relevant arena in these discussions and deserves academic attention.