top of page

AI Governance in 2025

Trust, Compliance, and Innovation to Take Center Stage this Year

By Tommy Cooke, powered by caffeine and curiousity

Jan 20, 2025

Key Points:

  • AI governance is transitioning from a reactive compliance measure to a proactive discipline

  • Innovations like AI impact assessments help organizations operationalize transparency

  • AI governance frameworks are no longer regulatory shields. They enhance brands


What was an emerging concern over the last few years will become a mature and necessary strategic discipline in 2025. As we move deeper into another year and while AI remains in its infancy, it is necessary to have the guardrails in place to ensure that AI grows and contributes successfully. The landscape of AI governance is thus evolving in many meaningful ways, much of which is due to growing international regulatory pressure, increasing stakeholder expectations, and the ongoing need to ensure significant financial investments in AI generate reliable returns. This Insight looks at what has changed over the last couple of years and looks ahead to how AI governance is maturing – and why these shifts matter.


From Awareness to Structure


In the couple short years of AI’s proliferation across virtually every industry, AI governance can be characterized as reactive. Organizations leveraging AI to innovate and reduce costs – particularly those with high stakes in demonstrating that AI can be trustworthy – has tended to approach governance as a checkbox exercise. Unless an organization existed within the purview of a particular jurisdiction requiring compliance, like the EU’s AI Act, holding up a compass to determine how and whether an organization required a dedicated office with a detailed AI governance strategy depended largely on its own awareness and relationship with its stakeholders.


Moving forward, that awareness is intensifying. Organizations are no longer waiting for compliance to simply arrive. Even in the face of shifting political landscapes in North America where AI regulation seems to be losing momentum, the AI governance market is expected to grow from $890 million USD to $5.5 billion USD by 2029. This statistic is indeed a reflection of regulatory pressure abroad – and it is also a reflection of the maturating need for structured management of AI.


With AI systems earning the trust of organizations around the world to make critical decisions, the potential for damage and unintended consequences is becoming far too risky: algorithmic bias, breaches, and ethical violations can cause significant reputational liabilities and financial penalties that would almost certainly erase any organization’s AI investment; non-compliance with the EU’s AI Act, for example, can result in fines up to €35 million or 7 percent of an organization’s annual turnover.


Transparency in the Spotlight


Over the last couple of years, transparency has been a buzzword. It existed in a gray space because organizations tended to use the term strategically in public-facing white papers and proposal packages. The word “transparency” often appears through corporate “AI-washing”: the process of exaggerating the use of AI in products and services, particularly when companies make misleading claims about the safety and ethics of their systems.


Moreover, transparency tends to be perceived as difficult to achieve. Many large-scale AI adopters believe that AI systems’ outputs are difficult to explain or that its processes are virtually impossible for laypeople to understand. This adage will no longer be satisfactory in 2025 and the years ahead. Why? Contrary to what some may belief, societal, political, and ethical pressures for transparency are growing. And those pressures are leading to AI transparency innovations. Here are two examples:


  • AI impact assessments (AI-IAs) are not merely designed to identify positive and negative impacts of AI – they are also growing in popularity because they are positioning organizations to critically reflect and discuss the social and ethical consequences of using AI. What AI-IAs essentially do is commit an organization to comprehending how their AI systems can be improved as well as what the risks may be – whether emerging or existing in the present moment. These dynamics already exist in every AI system. By making them visible, organizations take crucial steps toward demonstrating transparent and accountable relationships with their AI systems


  • 2024 observed a significant maturation in the AI model documentation: an explanation of what an AI system’s model is, what it was trained on, any tests or experiments conducted on it, etc. The goal is to document what the AI system is doing. By noting what the system does, an organization provides its stakeholders with a track record that can be examined to ensure responsible and ethical use as well as to demonstrate compliance


Data Sovereignty on the Rise


While data privacy has been a long-standing focus throughout the previous years, 2025 will mark a significant shift toward data sovereignty. As regulatory, geopolitical, and social concerns continue to rise around responsible and ethical use of AI, 2025 will observe organizations increasingly designing AI systems in ways that deal with how data is stored, processed, and accessed. Compliance with data residency laws to ensure that sensitive data will remain within a national boundary or specific jurisdiction, for example, will trend this year. We will hear more about other privacy-preserving technologies in AI systems, such as federated learning: a machine learning technique that allows AI to be trained across datasets from different sources without transferring sensitive data across borders.


Data is no longer viewed as merely a business asset but a national asset. For organizations operating globally, this can make daily operations rather complicated due to the existence of multiple international laws and norms if they are to avoid penalties while maintaining trust. When data involves national security, healthcare, or financial sectors, demonstrating the ability to respect data storage laws when using AI will be a top priority for organizations this year.


Ethical AI as a Top Operational Priority


Much like the way in which buzzwords like transparency have been used to gesture toward responsible AI use, ethical AI will finally emerge as fully operationalized practices. Unlike the stretch of AI adoption in the early 2020’s where AI ethics tended to be little more than a vague concept, ethical AI discourse and debate have been sustained for a considerable period of time. Organizations are recognizing that failing to act upon the principles and values of ethical AI not only poses reputational harms and financial risks, but they can also harm operational integrity.


Organizations have been and will continue to conduct structured reviews to identify potential bias, discrimination, and unintended social consequences of their AI systems. These kinds of assessments are being applied across an AI system’s lifecycle, from design to monitoring after implementation.


According to the AI Ethics Institute (2023), 74 percent of consumers prefer to use products certified as ethically deployed and developed. This makes comprehensive AI training with a focus on governance, privacy, and of course – ethics – a must. The same will hold true for selecting AI vendors and designers committed to embedding ethical considerations into their products from the beginning and not merely as an afterthought.


AI Governance as a Strategic Differentiator


A commonplace perception of all-things related to privacy, ethics, and governance is that they are expensive and stifle innovation. It is often echoed by techno-libertarians, those who believe that innovation and business should be left largely unregulated in order to maximize growth and creativity – people who resist external intervention unless mandated by law. What proponents of these perceptions and beliefs fail to understand is that proactivity in the realm of responsible and ethical management of technology is becoming extraordinarily risky and costly.


In 2025, AI governance will be embraced as business strategies that not only mitigate risks but also allow organizations to actively differentiate themselves in competitive markets. AI-IAs, audits, transparent reporting, and other AI governance-related activities will be more directly attributable to brand equity and stakeholder confidence. In recognizing that the world’s legal, social, political, and ethical standards are strengthening around the use of AI, organizations are realizing that demonstrating and sharing a robust AI governance framework showcases the organization and its talent as thought leaders who are able to navigate complex technology while building trust-based relationships with customers, partners, regulators, and so on.


So, Why Now?


What is driving the maturation and higher adoption rates of AI governance? Here are three catalysts to consider:


  1. Regulatory Evolution: despite the resurgence of techno-liberalists who may be slowing the advance of AI-related regulatory agendas, this only applies to limited jurisdictions. It’s important to remember that sub-sovereign jurisdictions (e.g., state and provincial level government authorities) are developing their own regulations. Whether they deal specifically with AI or not, data and privacy laws are always changing – and they almost always have implications on how organizations use AI.


  2. Public Scrutiny: High-profile AI failures have made stakeholders more vigilant about ethical and operational risks. Consumers are increasingly skeptical about how organizations use AI. C-suite executives are becoming more and more aware of how important it is to demonstrate to stakeholders that they are using AI responsibly, necessitating the need to implement strong AI governance frameworks – and prove that they work.


  3. Market Maturity: Markets do not mature merely due to an invisible economic hand. Much of their maturation is driven by the behaviour, perception, and demands of its consumers. As AI becomes integral to business operations, it is perhaps unsurprising that consumers do not trust organizations that do not openly disclose that they use AI.


Final Thoughts

AI governance in 2025 represents a pivotal shift from a regulatory afterthought to a core strategic priority. Organizations that adopt structured governance frameworks, emphasize transparency, and prioritize ethical AI are not only mitigating risks but also distinguishing themselves in competitive markets. As regulatory landscapes evolve and public scrutiny intensifies, investing in robust AI governance is no longer optional.

bottom of page