Middle-power nations can advance global AI governance by creating permanent ties between specialized international centers, even as major powers remain locked in strategic competition. Rather than waiting for agreement between the United States, China, and Russia, countries like Switzerland, Kenya, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates can establish working groups, staff exchanges, and joint initiatives focused on AI safety, financial stability, and environmental protection.

What Is Polycentric Functional Multilateralism?

The concept, described in recent analysis, proposes a system of permanent connections between cities that serve as global hubs for specific governance areas. New York anchors universal political legitimacy, while Geneva hosts institutions for trade, health, labor, and humanitarian assistance. Vienna manages nuclear governance and arms control, Nairobi leads environmental governance, and Brussels sets regulatory policy standards.

Shanghai has emerged as a critical hub for financial innovation and artificial intelligence governance. The city hosts the Shanghai Gold Exchange, the New Development Bank, and the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization, or WAICO, which represents a growing effort to coordinate AI policy outside traditional Western-dominated institutions.

How Can International Centers Cooperate on AI Governance?

• Geneva-Shanghai Partnership: Institutions in Geneva could collaborate directly with Shanghai on AI governance standards, creating a bridge between European regulatory approaches and emerging Asian frameworks without requiring consensus from major powers.
• Environmental Infrastructure Coordination: Geneva and Nairobi could jointly address the energy, water, and environmental costs of AI infrastructure, ensuring that AI development does not undermine climate and sustainability goals.
• Digital Finance Stability: Basel, Singapore, and Hong Kong could deepen cooperation in digital finance and financial stability, creating safeguards as AI transforms banking and investment systems.

These connections would rely on more than conferences. The framework calls for regular working groups, staff exchanges, joint fellowship programs, data sharing, mutual observation, compatible reporting systems, and joint financing mechanisms. This approach mirrors existing models like the Bank for International Settlements Innovation Hub, which operates teams across Switzerland, Hong Kong, Singapore, London, Stockholm, Toronto, and the Frankfurt-Paris Centre.

Which Nations Could Lead This Effort?

Switzerland, Kenya, Thailand, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates possess the physical, legal, and diplomatic infrastructure to host and coordinate these connections. Meanwhile, South Korea, Indonesia, Brazil, and Turkey could finance joint initiatives, coordinate regulatory approaches, and co-chair functional coalitions focused on specific AI governance challenges.

This decentralized approach acknowledges a fundamental reality: technical cooperation will not eliminate the strategic rivalry between major powers. However, it can meaningfully limit the impact of geopolitical competition on critical areas including finance, health, climate, AI safety, humanitarian assistance, and international trade.

The proposal arrives as nations worldwide grapple with AI governance gaps. While the United States and China pursue competing AI strategies, and Europe implements strict regulatory frameworks, many middle-power nations lack the resources or institutional capacity to shape AI development independently. By linking existing international hubs through formal cooperation mechanisms, these countries can amplify their influence and ensure that AI governance reflects diverse perspectives rather than the preferences of a handful of superpowers.