It’s important to create an AI-friendly government, not just an AI-equipped government. Its aim is to provide responsible governance with the help of AI.
Published June 7, 2026 | 7am ⚊ Updated June 7, 2026 | 7am
Representative image. (St. Petersburg)
Synopsis: Bangalore suffers from governance inefficiencies, but AI alone cannot solve them. It’s a question of responsibility. AI has the potential to make governance more efficient, but not necessarily better unless issues of accountability and responsibility are addressed.
The people of Bangalore face governance constraints every day. Despite years of data collection on travel patterns, we are still stuck in traffic jams. They are expected to cross different agencies and experience smooth interactions with citizen services. Also known as the technology capital of India, the city regularly faces floods, waste management issues and infrastructure bottlenecks.
This is not surprising, as artificial intelligence (AI) has become a popular buzzword as the next big solution to public sector inefficiency. AI is expected to transform governance to become faster, smarter, and more responsive in various aspects such as traffic management, urban planning, welfare provision, and grievance handling.
It’s natural to have expectations. But it has the potential to obscure a more fundamental truth. India’s governance problems are not due to technology failure. It’s a question of responsibility. AI has the potential to make governance more efficient, but not necessarily better unless this issue is resolved.
Also read: Why local democracy matters for public health
What AI can and cannot do
This distinction is important because governments too often confuse technological modernization with institutional change. India has implemented a number of reforms over the past decade and has taken steps to make public services more digital.
A generation ago, citizens could obtain certificates, monitor applications, and access government services simply by visiting a government office. Citizens can now obtain certificates online, pay digitally, monitor applications, and interact with government portals. This was unthinkable a generation ago.
However, despite advances in digitalisation, many grievances faced by the public still remain. Slow processes, overlapping jurisdictions, lack of coordination between government agencies, and inconsistent implementation are common.
Technology often makes existing systems more efficient, but not the same in terms of increasing accountability.
AI is poised to preempt this transformation. AI systems can process large amounts of data, identify trends, predict customer needs for services, and automate repetitive tasks. AI can be used to manage traffic lights, predict water levels in reservoirs, identify infrastructure risks, optimize waste collection routes, and more.
Advanced analytics can be applied to the welfare sector to identify fraud and better target welfare recipients. Creating predictive models and sharing them with public health agencies can help predict emerging disease outbreaks.
endless possibilities
These are possibilities that must be taken seriously. However, the relationship between technology and governance is not a simple “as is” relationship. In fact, there are many examples of governance failures despite sufficient information.
Today, governments have more data at their disposal than ever before. The challenge is often a lack of action or accountability.
Bringing Bangalore’s governance issues to the fore. Traffic cameras, sensors, GPS on public transportation, digital records of real estate, and citizen complaints and complaints generate large amounts of data in cities. However, some civic issues remain unresolved because responsibilities are divided among multiple agencies with overlapping powers.
No algorithm can solve institutional fragmentation. Technology can help with decision-making, but it cannot replace administrative coordination and political accountability.
This also applies to welfare provision. AI has the potential to clearly detect anomalies and optimize targeting. Automated systems can also generate new exclusion patterns. Even if the data is accurate, the algorithms used may be flawed or the data may be incomplete, resulting in eligible citizens being denied benefits.
Who is responsible when these types of errors occur: the software developer, the department using the system, or the person responsible for the program?
Having answers to questions like these is important for democratic governance. A related problem is the so-called “automation bias,” which refers to the tendency to overconfident algorithmic suggestions.
Authorities may be reluctant to challenge the output of AI tools due to the perceived objectivity and scientific nature of the results. Results produced by AI can give the impression of being objective or scientific, which can make officials reluctant to question them.
However, the accuracy of an algorithm is determined by the data and assumptions included in the algorithm. Judgment is essential, especially when rights, livelihoods, and access to public services are at stake.
Also read: Embarrassed by portfolio allocation, Ramalinga Reddy resigns as Karnataka minister
Ensuring accountability
As such, innovation is not the only issue to be discussed when considering AI in governance. Equal responsibility should be emphasized. Three principles can shape the responsible use of AI by governments.
First of all, transparency. We need to ensure that the public is informed about the use of AI systems in decision-making. The rationale and considerations behind these systems and their recommendations must be clearly explained by public authorities.
Next is auditability. An independent review process should assess and verify the accuracy, fairness, and lack of systematic bias of algorithms. It is impossible for citizens to trust public institutions in a system that is essentially a black box.
Third, human surveillance. All important decisions made with the help of AI are subject to human review and challenge. Citizens should be able to contest the results and seek redress from specific public authorities.
Karnataka is a unique state at the forefront of this debate. Because of their unique capabilities, states have the knowledge and potential to demonstrate the transformative power of AI in strengthening governance while maintaining democratic protections. It’s important to create an AI-friendly government, not just an AI-equipped government. Its aim is to provide responsible governance with the help of AI.
Governments can use AI to digest information more effectively, process it on time, and increase efficiency in a variety of ways. However, efficiency alone does not equate to governance.
The true measure of technological progress is not whether public institutions are using advanced tools. The question is whether the people can enjoy more transparent, responsive, and fair governance.
(Views expressed are personal. Edited by Muhamed Fazil.)
