Aug 2026· Management Decision· 1 citation· 57 references
TL;DR
It is shown that the “dark side” of AI governance is not reducible to isolated ethical failures but emerges as an institutional outcome of competing governance logics, shifting attention from technical risks alone to the organizational architectures through which responsibility, control and legitimacy are continuously negotiated.
Abstract
This study proposes an integrative framework to explain how generative AI firms organize and adapt governance architectures to temporarily contain the conflicting logics of ethics, profit, stakeholder inclusion and technological autonomy.
Drawing on paradox theory, the study employs a multiple-case design analyzing ten frontier GenAI firms: OpenAI, Anthropic, Google DeepMind, Mistral AI, xAI, Inflection AI, Aleph Alpha, DeepSeek, Meta and Stability AI. A novel three-dimensional analytical framework operationalizes governance tensions through systematic documentary coding and comparative analysis.
The results identify five governance archetypes in GenAI firms: Contested Equilibrium, Institutionalized Ambiguity, Amoral Drift, Gilded Cage and the Founder’s Paradox. These archetypes demonstrate how attempts to incorporate ethics and accountability can create new forms of opacity, dependency and concentration of power. We interpret this recurring pattern as a form of “institutional paradoxification”, namely a theory-building construct that captures how governance mechanisms may, under certain conditions, amplify rather than resolve the tensions they are intended to contain.
This study extends paradox theory into the governance of frontier GenAI firms by showing that the “dark side” of AI governance is not reducible to isolated ethical failures but emerges as an institutional outcome of competing governance logics. In doing so, it shifts attention from technical risks alone to the organizational architectures through which responsibility, control and legitimacy are continuously negotiated.
This work argues that anticipatory regulatory governance rests on three operational premises—categorical stability, epistemic accessibility, and manageable pace—and that AI’s emergence, opacity, and velocity violate all three in compound, and proposes three premise-level substitutions each replacing a violated precondi...
This paper investigates how AI narratives actively constrain the horizon of conceivable governance options. Moving beyond the established finding that narratives influence policy, we argue they fundamentally prefigure the scope of the politically thinkable by creating what we term “Policy Umwelten.” Adapting Jakob von...
G. Papyshev, Ninell Oldenburg· The International Journal of...· 0 citations
The Qualitative Model of Ethics (QME), a naturalistic and teleological framework grounded in a single evaluative scalar: the generative capacity of the Whole Living System (WLS), provides a unified and operational framework for AI governance at scale.
A reframing of AI unaccountability as a constitutive property of sociotechnical systems, an extension of the four barriers to accountability, and a practical instrument for identifying accountability voids in specific AI deployments are contributed.
Long Hoang Nguyen, Eva Späthe, S. Lins et al.· 0 citations
The just circular economy (JCE) has emerged as a structuring normative horizon in sustainability transitions, but its analytical value remains limited by two structural gaps: the absence of a constitutive definition integrating all justice dimensions identified in the literature, and the absence of a typology capable o...
The study develops a Leo XIV-informed, normatively grounded hybrid model of AI governance that extends beyond the exercise of agency over technology to fostering a more just and inclusive social order in which technology enables human flourishing.
S. Fel, Marta Choroszewicz, Jarosław Kozak· AI and Ethics· 1 citation
A new computational approach reveals how cells communicate to assemble into tissues. This could accelerate stem cell engineering, improve disease models, and inform therapies.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 15, 2026