Artificial Intelligence Governance for Local Administrative Organizations: Opportunities, Risks, and a Governance Framework

Abstract

This academic article aims to analyze artificial intelligence (AI) governance for local administrative organizations by examining the relationship between the opportunities to use AI to enhance public service delivery and the risks that may affect rights, equality, transparency, and administrative accountability. It also synthesizes governance approaches based on relevant academic literature, laws, policies, and standards in order to propose a framework for AI adoption that is consistent with the rule of law and public value.

         The findings indicate that AI can enhance the operational efficiency of local administrative organizations in areas such as complaint management, citizen information services, service demand forecasting, waste collection planning, disaster monitoring, and spatial decision support. However, its implementation entails risks arising from data inaccuracies and bias, personal data breaches, lack of transparency, vendor dependence, cyberattacks, the digital divide, and the use of system outputs as substitutes for official discretion without adequate oversight. Relevant Thai laws are dispersed across multiple legal instruments; therefore, they need to be translated into governance processes covering the entire AI system life cycle. Accordingly, this article proposes a six-stage AI governance framework: (1) system inventory and purpose definition; (2) risk classification; (3) legal basis and impact assessment; (4) authorization and allocation of accountability; (5) human oversight during system operation; and (6) monitoring, appeal, and continuous improvement.

         The study recommends that local administrative organizations initially adopt AI for low-risk tasks and establish governance measures proportionate to the level of impact on citizens' rights. They should promote resource sharing at the provincial or local-government network level and incorporate requirements concerning data quality, cybersecurity, and auditability into procurement contracts. Clear accountability for system outputs should also be assigned to responsible individuals. Automated systems should not be used as the final decision-makers in matters affecting citizens' rights, welfare, licenses, penalties, or obligations. These measures aim to ensure that AI serves as a tool for strengthening the capacity of local administrative organizations while safeguarding the rule of law and public trust.