Artificial Power: 2025 Landscape Report
A prominent critical-AI research organisation's annual framing of AI power risks shapes the international policy discourse that Australian regulators increasingly engage with.
Key points
- AI Now Institute's 2025 annual report frames AI as a power concentration problem, not a technology problem.
- Report argues AI harms are structural and calls for regulatory intervention, antitrust action, and community organising.
- Primarily a US-oriented advocacy document; APS relevance is indirect but useful for understanding critical-AI discourse.
Implications for Australian agencies
- Monitor Policy teams engaging with international AI governance debates may want to monitor AI Now's framing as it shapes civil society and parliamentary scrutiny discourse.
- Consider Agencies developing AI market regulation or responsible AI strategy could consider whether the report's structural critiques surface risks not fully addressed in current Australian frameworks.
Implications are AI-generated. Starting points, not advice — see methodology for how they're framed.
View original source
Copied.
"Artificial Power: 2025 Landscape Report"
Source: AI Now Institute – Publications
Published: 3 June 2025
URL: https://ainowinstitute.org/publications/research/ai-now-2025-landscape-report
AI Now Institute's 2025 Landscape Report, 'Artificial Power', argues that the AI boom concentrates economic and political power in a small number of large technology companies and their executives, to the detriment of the public. Authored by Kate Brennan, Amba Kak, and Dr. Sarah Myers West, the report diagnoses structural market failures, critiques the framing of regulation as an innovation barrier, and offers an action roadmap for policymakers, community organisers, and the public. While the analysis is primarily US-oriented and advocacy-driven, it synthesises a body of critical AI literature and engages contributors including researchers from Princeton, Oxford, and the UK AI Security Institute. APS policy teams working on AI governance, market regulation, or responsible AI frameworks may find it useful as a counterpoint to industry-led narratives circulating in international AI policy spaces.
Implications for Australian agencies:
- [Monitor] Policy teams engaging with international AI governance debates may want to monitor AI Now's framing as it shapes civil society and parliamentary scrutiny discourse.
- [Consider] Agencies developing AI market regulation or responsible AI strategy could consider whether the report's structural critiques surface risks not fully addressed in current Australian frameworks.
Retrieved from SIMS, 18 July 2026.