The Global Risks Forum (GRF)
Technologies that cross borders faster than rules do, from artificial intelligence and cyber operations to satellites, submarine cables and biotechnology, are now negotiated in foreign ministries as well as in standards bodies. Technology diplomacy covers norms of state behaviour, export controls, technical standards, spectrum and orbit allocation, and cooperation on dual-use research. This page sets out the forums where technology is governed internationally, how commitments are recorded and what states need to take part on equal terms.
GRF · Established · service level R0
Technology diplomacy is the negotiation between states over technologies that cross borders faster than rules, from artificial intelligence and cyber operations to satellites, submarine cables and biotechnology. It covers norms of state behaviour, export controls, treaties, spectrum and orbit allocation and international standards, across many overlapping forums.
The jurisdictions that hold authority over this question: countries, their first-level divisions and capitals, shown for the Gulf as an example geography for this subject.
The working screen behind this subject: its structure, terms and states. Names are placeholders and values illustrative.
Technology diplomacy · Shared basin dialogue · Round 7
| Art. 3 | Data exchange | 2 | Agreed ad ref |
| Art. 5 | Low-flow sharing | 4 | Open |
| Art. 7 | Notification of works | 2 | Open |
| Art. 9 | Dispute avoidance | 3 | Not discussed |
International technology governance conversations. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
Technology is governed at once in the UN General Assembly, the ITU, standards bodies, export control regimes, regional organisations and industry consortia. States with small delegations cannot follow every forum, so rules are often shaped by those that can.
Where states cannot agree binding rules they adopt voluntary norms, confidence-building measures and guidelines, such as the UN framework of responsible state behaviour in cyberspace. Norms set expectations and can harden into law, but they carry no enforcement.
Most enabling technologies serve civilian and military ends. Export control regimes coordinate national licensing, which protects security but can restrict scientific exchange and access for countries outside the regimes.
Technical standards decide interoperability, security and what data systems collect. Taking part in standard setting is costly, so standards can embed the priorities of those who wrote them, including on privacy and human rights.
Each term as this page uses it. Where a standard-setting body defines the term, the wording follows that body.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Cyber norms | Voluntary, non-binding expectations of responsible state behaviour in cyberspace, endorsed in UN processes. |
| Export control regime | A multilateral arrangement coordinating national controls on sensitive goods and technology. |
| Radio Regulations | The ITU treaty governing the use of the radio-frequency spectrum and satellite orbits. |
Each indicator carries its unit, its cadence, the kind of source behind it and the evidence label a value would carry. No values are shown: a programme supplies them under its own authority.
| Indicator | Unit | Cadence | Source type | Label |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| States party to technology-related treaties | count of parties | continuous | Depositary records | OFFICIAL |
| Confidence-building measure submissions under the Biological Weapons Convention | submissions per year | annual | BWC Implementation Support Unit | OFFICIAL |
| Reports to the UN Register of Conventional Arms | count of reporting states | annual | UN Office for Disarmament Affairs | OFFICIAL |
| Published national positions on international law in cyberspace | count of states | continuous | National statements and policy portals | DECLARED |
| National AI policy instruments | count of instruments by country | continuous | OECD.AI policy observatory | REPORTED |
| Participation in international standards committees | member bodies and delegates | annual | ISO, IEC and ITU membership records | OFFICIAL |
| Satellite network filings and space objects registered | count of filings and objects | continuous | ITU and UNOOSA registers | OFFICIAL |
The topic as a computational graph: named sources feed the methods, an evidence review gates the outputs, and the decisions stay with the authorities that hold them.
Fig. 02Nodes carry their type, two metric rows and a state; connectors show what feeds what; dashed frames name the owners; the timeline is the cadence. Design of the pipeline, not a record of a run.
Named public datasets and institutional records, each with its licence class. Sources by agreement are used only under their terms and never republished.
| Source | What it gives | Licence class |
|---|---|---|
| UN Office for Disarmament Affairs databases | The Register of Conventional Arms, BWC confidence-building measures and treaty status | Public records; BWC submissions public where the submitting state consents |
| UNIDIR Cyber Policy Portal | National cyber policies, strategies and positions on international law | Free to read, terms of use |
| OECD.AI policy observatory | National AI strategies and policy instruments | Free, attribution and OECD terms |
| ITU Radio Regulations and frequency records | Spectrum and orbit allocations agreed at World Radiocommunication Conferences | Terms per ITU publication |
| UNOOSA register of objects launched into outer space | Objects registered under the Registration Convention | Public records |
| SIPRI arms transfers database | Transfers of major conventional weapons between states | Free to use, attribution and terms |
| Council of Europe treaty office | Status of the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime and the Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence | Public records |
Diplomacy Nexus prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| Who decides | The question | Evidence this page serves |
|---|---|---|
| Foreign ministries and technology envoys | Which forums to prioritise and which positions to take on norms and treaty proposals | Forum maps, the positions of other states on record, the text history of each proposal |
| Export control authorities | How to license dual-use exports without blocking legitimate scientific cooperation | Regime control lists and guidance, comparative national practice |
| National standards bodies and regulators | Where to take part in international standard setting and with what resources | Committee membership and scope, the standards under development |
| Telecommunications ministries | Which spectrum and orbit resources to seek at the next radiocommunication conference | Conference agenda items, filings and the coordination record with neighbouring administrations |
Digital and emerging technologies are developed by a limited number of firms and countries but used everywhere. Their risks, such as unsafe AI systems, cyber incidents, biological misuse or space debris, can affect people far from where decisions are made. National rules may conflict, creating gaps or barriers.
Strategic competition complicates cooperation. Technologies with economic and security value become subjects of export controls and industrial policy, and trust between jurisdictions may be low. Yet some risks are shared by all, which creates incentives for minimum common rules.
Technical standards bodies, scientific communities and industry play large roles alongside governments. Inclusion of lower-capacity countries and affected communities remains limited.
Comparing national and international approaches to technology governance. Approaches change quickly.
Drawing on GCRI platforms such as Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Systems for technical understanding.
Using game theory to understand cooperation and competition dynamics.
Convening technical, policy and institutional participants under agreed rules.
The platform does not advocate for any regulatory model or take positions in strategic competition.
The current service level is R0: information and enquiries. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.