Updated OECD AI Principles to keep up with novel and increased risks from general purpose and generative AI

Kathrin Gardhouse
Jun 12, 2024
Share this post
Sharing to FacebookSharing to LinkedInSharing to XSharing to Email

On May 3, 2024, the OECD released updated AI Principles that build upon the 2019 version with some notable differences that respond to risks emerging from latest technological developments such as general purpose and generative AI systems.

This article contains a summary of the changes as well as a line-by-line comparison of the old and new AI Principles.

The most notable changes are:

  • Principle 1.1 now explicitly calls out environmental sustainability, acknowledging increased concerns around the environmental footprint of large language models over the past years.
  • Principle 1.2 received a new heading which now includes respect for the rule of law, human rights and democratic values, and privacy, while fairness has been there all along. However, all of these elements were previously included in the Principle itself. The Principle also specifically mentions that mis- and disinformation amplified by AI must be addressed while respecting freedom of expression. Some more details are added around the required safeguards with an emphasis on human agency and oversights as well as risks resulting from misuse.
  • Principle 1.3 saw only slight changes. One of them is the specification of information requirements enabling an understanding of the AI system, which now explicitly include capabilities and limitations.
  • Elements of Principle 1.4 have been moved to Principle 1.5 “Accountability” while override, repair, decommission, and information integrity requirements were added.
  • Principle 1.5 receives a large addition covering ongoing systematic risk management and responsible business conduct, calling out specifically harmful bias, human rights including safety, security, and privacy, as well as labour and intellectual property rights. Net new among those is bias, which did not find any mention in the previous version of the Principles

Summary

New additions to the OECD AI Principles that had not been included previously are environmental sustainability, mis- and disinformation, as well as bias.

Increased emphasis is placed most notably on risk management practices highlighting novel risks and mechanisms to address risks such as override, repair, decommissioning, and cooperation between AI actors. Privacy, too, takes a more prominent position than before with now 3 vs. 1 mention in the Principles.

How Private AI can Facilitate Adherence to Privacy Principle and Bias Mitigation

The best way to preserve the privacy of individuals is not to contain personal identifiers in the training or fine-tuning data of LLMs. Where personal data redaction or replacement with synthetic data is an option from a data utility standpoint, technology can now be leveraged to greatly facilitate the task of removing personal information from vast amounts of data, even unstructured data.

Private AI has developed solutions that do exactly that, and with unparalleled accuracy. Our AI-driven technology is trained to detect over 50 entities of personal information, using the context of the text to determine what constitutes a personal identifier. Available as on-prem deployment or via an API key, the tool works across many different file formats and over 50 languages. You can try it here on your own data.

Removing indirect personal identifiers such as origin, race, gender, and physical attribute can also help with the mitigation of bias. During inference, this can be achieved by using common LLMs with the added PrivateGPT interface of Private AI. PrivateGPT filters out any selected personal identifiers, including those to which biases most commonly attach, before they are sent to ChatGPT or other LLMs. Before the response is sent to the user, the original identifiers are automatically included back into the output for a seamless user experience. Try PrivateGPT here for free.

Table 1

The table below displays a colour-coded line-by-line comparison of the old and new principles with green indicating new additions, yellow a re-organization, and red deletions.

Old Principles

New Principles

1.1 Inclusive growth, sustainable development, and well-being

Stakeholders should proactively engage in responsible stewardship of trustworthy AI in pursuit of beneficial outcomes for people and the planet, such as augmenting human capabilities and enhancing creativity, advancing inclusion of underrepresented populations, reducing economic, social, gender and other inequalities, and protecting natural environments, thus invigorating inclusive growth, sustainable development and well-being.

1.1. Inclusive growth, sustainable development and well-being

Stakeholders should proactively engage in responsible stewardship of trustworthy AI in pursuit of beneficial outcomes for people and the planet, such as augmenting human capabilities and enhancing creativity, advancing inclusion of underrepresented populations, reducing economic, social, gender and other inequalities, and protecting natural environments, thus invigorating inclusive growth, well-being, sustainable development and environmental sustainability.

1.2 Human-centred values and fairness

AI actors should respect the rule of law, human rights and democratic values, throughout the AI system lifecycle. These include freedom, dignity and autonomy, privacy and data protection, non-discrimination and equality, diversity, fairness, social justice, and internationally recognised labour rights. 

To this end, AI actors should implement mechanisms and safeguards, such as capacity for human determination, that are appropriate to the context and consistent with the state of art.

1.2. Respect for the rule of law, human rights and democratic values, including fairness and privacy

a) AI actors should respect the rule of law, human rights, democratic and human-centred values throughout the AI system lifecycle. These include non-discrimination and equality, freedom, dignity, autonomy of individuals, privacy and data protection, diversity, fairness, social justice, and internationally recognised labour rights. This also includes addressing misinformation and disinformation amplified by AI, while respecting freedom of expression and other rights and freedoms protected by applicable international law.

b) To this end, AI actors should implement mechanisms and safeguards, such as capacity for human agency and oversight, including to address risks arising from uses outside of intended purpose, intentional misuse, or unintentional misuse in a manner appropriate to the context and consistent with the state of the art.

1.3 Transparency and explainability

AI Actors should commit to transparency and responsible disclosure regarding AI systems. To this end, they should provide meaningful information, appropriate to the context, and consistent with the state of art: 

to foster a general understanding of AI systems, 

to make stakeholders aware of their interactions with AI systems, including in the workplace, 

to enable those affected by an AI system to understand the outcome, and, 

to enable those adversely affected by an AI system to challenge its outcome based on plain and easy-to-understand information on the factors, and the logic that served as the basis for the prediction, recommendation or decision.

1.3. Transparency and explainability

AI Actors should commit to transparency and responsible disclosure regarding AI systems. To this end, they should provide meaningful information, appropriate to the context, and consistent with the state of art:

i. to foster a general understanding of AI systems, including their capabilities and limitations,

ii. to make stakeholders aware of their interactions with AI systems, including in the workplace,

iii. where feasible and useful, to provide plain and easy-to-understand information on the sources of data/input, factors, processes and/or logic that led to the prediction, content, recommendation or decision, to enable those affected by an AI system to understand the output, and,

iv. to provide information that enable those adversely 

affected by an AI system to challenge its output.

1.4 Robustness, security, and safety

AI systems should be robust, secure and safe throughout their entire lifecycle so that, in conditions of normal use, foreseeable use or misuse, or other adverse conditions, they function appropriately and do not pose unreasonable safety risk.

To this end, AI actors should ensure traceability, including in relation to datasets, processes and decisions made during the AI system lifecycle, to enable analysis of the AI system’s outcomes and responses to inquiry, appropriate to the context and consistent with the state of art.

1.4. Robustness, security and safety

a) AI systems should be robust, secure and safe throughout their entire lifecycle so that, in conditions of normal use, foreseeable use or misuse, or other adverse conditions, they function appropriately and do not pose unreasonable safety and/or security risks

b) Mechanisms should be in place, as appropriate, to ensure that if AI systems risk causing undue harm or exhibit undesired behaviour, they can be overridden, repaired, and/or decommissioned safely as needed.

c) Mechanisms should also, where technically feasible, be in place to bolster information integrity while ensuring respect for freedom of expression.

1.5 Accountability 

AI actors should be accountable for the proper functioning of AI systems and for the respect of the above principles, based on their roles, the context, and consistent with the state of art.

1.5. Accountability

a) AI actors should be accountable for the proper functioning of AI systems and for the respect of the above principles, based on their roles, the context, and consistent with the state of the art.

b) To this end, AI actors should ensure traceability, including in relation to datasets, processes and decisions made during the AI system lifecycle, to enable analysis of the AI system’s outputs and responses to inquiry, appropriate to the context and consistent with the state of the art.

c) AI actors, should, based on their roles, the context, and their ability to act, apply a systematic risk management approach to each phase of the AI system lifecycle on an ongoing basis and adopt responsible business conduct to address risks related to AI systems, including, as appropriate, via co-operation between different AI actors, suppliers of AI knowledge and AI resources, AI system users, and other stakeholders. Risks include those related to harmful bias, human rights including safety, security, and privacy, as well as labour and intellectual property rights.

Data Left Behind: AI Scribes’ Promises in Healthcare

Data Left Behind: Healthcare’s Untapped Goldmine

The Future of Health Data: How New Tech is Changing the Game

Why is linguistics essential when dealing with healthcare data?

Why Health Data Strategies Fail Before They Start

Private AI to Redefine Enterprise Data Privacy and Compliance with NVIDIA

EDPB’s Pseudonymization Guideline and the Challenge of Unstructured Data

HHS’ proposed HIPAA Amendment to Strengthen Cybersecurity in Healthcare and how Private AI can Support Compliance

Japan's Health Data Anonymization Act: Enabling Large-Scale Health Research

What the International AI Safety Report 2025 has to say about Privacy Risks from General Purpose AI

Private AI 4.0: Your Data’s Potential, Protected and Unlocked

How Private AI Facilitates GDPR Compliance for AI Models: Insights from the EDPB's Latest Opinion

Navigating the New Frontier of Data Privacy: Protecting Confidential Company Information in the Age of AI

Belgium’s Data Protection Authority on the Interplay of the EU AI Act and the GDPR

Enhancing Compliance with US Privacy Regulations for the Insurance Industry Using Private AI

Navigating Compliance with Quebec’s Act Respecting Health and Social Services Information Through Private AI’s De-identification Technology

Unlocking New Levels of Accuracy in Privacy-Preserving AI with Co-Reference Resolution

Strengthened Data Protection Enforcement on the Horizon in Japan

How Private AI Can Help to Comply with Thailand's PDPA

How Private AI Can Help Financial Institutions Comply with OSFI Guidelines

The American Privacy Rights Act – The Next Generation of Privacy Laws

How Private AI Can Help with Compliance under China’s Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL)

PII Redaction for Reviews Data: Ensuring Privacy Compliance when Using Review APIs

Independent Review Certifies Private AI’s PII Identification Model as Secure and Reliable

To Use or Not to Use AI: A Delicate Balance Between Productivity and Privacy

To Use or Not to Use AI: A Delicate Balance Between Productivity and Privacy

News from NIST: Dioptra, AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF) Generative AI Profile, and How PII Identification and Redaction can Support Suggested Best Practices

Handling Personal Information by Financial Institutions in Japan – The Strict Requirements of the FSA Guidelines

日本における金融機関の個人情報の取り扱い - 金融庁ガイドラインの要件

Leveraging Private AI to Meet the EDPB’s AI Audit Checklist for GDPR-Compliant AI Systems

Who is Responsible for Protecting PII?

How Private AI can help the Public Sector to Comply with the Strengthening Cyber Security and Building Trust in the Public Sector Act, 2024

A Comparison of the Approaches to Generative AI in Japan and China

Updated OECD AI Principles to keep up with novel and increased risks from general purpose and generative AI

Is Consent Required for Processing Personal Data via LLMs?

The evolving landscape of data privacy legislation in healthcare in Germany

The CIO’s and CISO’s Guide for Proactive Reporting and DLP with Private AI and Elastic

The Evolving Landscape of Health Data Protection Laws in the United States

Comparing Privacy and Safety Concerns Around Llama 2, GPT4, and Gemini

How to Safely Redact PII from Segment Events using Destination Insert Functions and Private AI API

WHO’s AI Ethics and Governance Guidance for Large Multi-Modal Models operating in the Health Sector – Data Protection Considerations

How to Protect Confidential Corporate Information in the ChatGPT Era

Unlocking the Power of Retrieval Augmented Generation with Added Privacy: A Comprehensive Guide

Leveraging ChatGPT and other AI Tools for Legal Services

Leveraging ChatGPT and other AI tools for HR

Leveraging ChatGPT in the Banking Industry

Law 25 and Data Transfers Outside of Quebec

The Colorado and Connecticut Data Privacy Acts

Unlocking Compliance with the Japanese Data Privacy Act (APPI) using Private AI

Tokenization and Its Benefits for Data Protection

Private AI Launches Cloud API to Streamline Data Privacy

Processing of Special Categories of Data in Germany

End-to-end Privacy Management

Privacy Breach Reporting Requirements under Law25

Migrating Your Privacy Workflows from Amazon Comprehend to Private AI

A Comparison of the Approaches to Generative AI in the US and EU

Benefits of AI in Healthcare and Data Sources (Part 1)

Privacy Attacks against Data and AI Models (Part 3)

Risks of Noncompliance and Challenges around Privacy-Preserving Techniques (Part 2)

Enhancing Data Lake Security: A Guide to PII Scanning in S3 buckets

The Costs of a Data Breach in the Healthcare Sector and its Privacy Compliance Implications

Navigating GDPR Compliance in the Life Cycle of LLM-Based Solutions

What’s New in Version 3.8

How to Protect Your Business from Data Leaks: Lessons from Toyota and the Department of Home Affairs

New York's Acceptable Use of AI Policy: A Focus on Privacy Obligations

Safeguarding Personal Data in Sentiment Analysis: A Guide to PII Anonymization

Changes to South Korea’s Personal Information Protection Act to Take Effect on March 15, 2024

Australia’s Plan to Regulate High-Risk AI

How Private AI can help comply with the EU AI Act

Comment la Loi 25 Impacte l'Utilisation de ChatGPT et de l'IA en Général

Endgültiger Entwurf des Gesetzes über Künstliche Intelligenz – Datenschutzpflichten der KI-Modelle mit Allgemeinem Verwendungszweck

How Law25 Impacts the Use of ChatGPT and AI in General

Is Salesforce Law25 Compliant?

Creating De-Identified Embeddings

Exciting Updates in 3.7

EU AI Act Final Draft – Obligations of General-Purpose AI Systems relating to Data Privacy

FTC Privacy Enforcement Actions Against AI Companies

The CCPA, CPRA, and California's Evolving Data Protection Landscape

HIPAA Compliance – Expert Determination Aided by Private AI

Private AI Software As a Service Agreement

EU's Review of Canada's Data Protection Adequacy: Implications for Ongoing Privacy Reform

Acceptable Use Policy

ISO/IEC 42001: A New Standard for Ethical and Responsible AI Management

Reviewing OpenAI's 31st Jan 2024 Privacy and Business Terms Updates

Comparing OpenAI vs. Azure OpenAI Services

Quebec’s Draft Regulation Respecting the Anonymization of Personal Information

Version 3.6 Release: Enhanced Streaming, Auto Model Selection, and More in Our Data Privacy Platform

Brazil's LGPD: Anonymization, Pseudonymization, and Access Requests

LGPD do Brasil: Anonimização, Pseudonimização e Solicitações de Acesso à Informação

Canada’s Principles for Responsible, Trustworthy and Privacy-Protective Generative AI Technologies and How to Comply Using Private AI

Private AI Named One of The Most Innovative RegTech Companies by RegTech100

Data Integrity, Data Security, and the New NIST Cybersecurity Framework

Safeguarding Privacy with Commercial LLMs

Cybersecurity in the Public Sector: Protecting Vital Services

Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) Requirements under Law25

Elevate Your Experience with Version 3.5

Fine-Tuning LLMs with a Focus on Privacy

GDPR in Germany: Challenges of German Data Privacy (Part 2)

Comply with US Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence using Private AI

How to Comply with EU AI Act using PrivateGPT