Artificial intelligence is becoming increasingly embedded across societies, offering opportunities to expand access and personalize healthcare and education and improve public services. Yet AI risks undermining human agency through power concentration, opaque decision-making, biases that deepen inequality and potential misuse if left unchecked. And while technological change is accelerating, human development is slowing to its weakest pace in 35 years. The 2025 Human Development Report asserts that AI’s impact depends on "how it is deployed—by whom, with whom, for whom—and with what kind of accountability", meaning parliaments face a defining role in ensuring AI is governed in ways that advance human development and protect the public interest.

The HDR calls for action to build a 'complementarity economy", with parliaments central in  steering tax incentives, labour codes and procurement policies toward AI that augments rather than replaces workers. To promote 'innovation with intent' and unlock 'capabilities that count', they can oversee how AI is advancing equity, wellbeing and public value; enshrine legal protections against AI risks; scrutinise AI investments in the national budget; and ensure the public are well-informed and can exercise their rights.

“Technology always coevolves with economic, social and political systems and is codetermined with the evolution of norms, institutions and public policies”. Are parliaments ready to meet the challenges of the AI era and address fast-paced change in society, the economy and public services? Can they adapt their practices and what support do they need?

As AI systems become more autonomous and embedded in critical sectors, revamped oversight and accountability mechanisms are essential. The HDR warns that AI development is outpacing regulatory responses and recent disclosures suggest AI could assist cyberattacks or weapons development. Mitigating AI's risks requires sustained investment in parliamentary oversight capacity: specialized MPs and staff, dedicated committees and cross-party caucuses.

The HDR stresses the need for AI audits to keep systems safe, fair and aligned with human development goals. Independent audit bodies reporting to parliaments could evaluate wider social impacts - such as bias, exploitation and environmental harm - while ensuring government AI systems remain transparent and accountable. Building this expertise would help MPs spot risks early and keep a ‘human in the loop’ as AI is deployed across sectors.

"The outcomes of technological change are not inevitable; they are contingent on social choices." The HDR notes that few people, companies and countries dominate AI design and deployment, while 70% of the population feel they lack influence in governmental AI decisions, risking public trust. This demands "inclusive policy conversations on how to make AI work for people" and which define safety boundaries and shape regulatory frameworks reflecting national values and context. 

Parliaments as the primary representative institution can host hearings and consultations engaging those most affected by AI are included, but the scale of challenge likely requires institutional innovation. Citizens assemblies on AI are used in some countries, while open-source tools like Polis AI could help parliamentarians gather public sentiment to guide decision-making. UNDP has demonstrated this potential at scale, using Polis to engage over 30,000 youth across Bhutan, Pakistan, and Timor Leste on national policy priorities.

Data from the IPU demonstrates a range of initiatives that parliaments are taking. In the Asia-Pacific region, the Philippines House of Representatives introduced nine AI-related bills, including creating new  institutions reporting to parliament, and held hearings on disinformation. In Thailand, legislation was passed by parliament to both promote AI innovation and introduce risk-based regulation for businesses that use AI. Across the region however, there is a stark divide between countries such as Malaysia with national AI strategies and emerging regulatory frameworks, and those such as Lao PDR which face foundational gaps in AI literacy and digital infrastructure.

The HDR's call for strategic international collaborations to assess AI's implications for human development must therefore include dedicated efforts to engage all parliaments. Parliamentary networks can facilitate peer learning on AI governance approaches, ensuring that policies reflect not only state interests but also the needs and rights of diverse populations they represent.

The Human Development Report offers the framework; now we need a dedicated effort to capacitate and future-proof parliaments to take action. An upcoming UNDP, IPU and CPA conference with the Parliament of Malaysia - “The Role of Parliament in Shaping the Future of Responsible AI” -  will be an important milestone in discussing effective parliamentary responses to AI. Working with such platforms and partners, UNDP can provide resources to track AI impacts and risks, specialise MPs and committees, support public hearings and strengthen parliament’s digital infrastructure. This aligns closely with UNDP’s Strategic Plan 2026-2029, which prioritizes digital and AI transformation, governance innovation and inclusive institutions.

“AI is not about technology - it is about people.” Choices we make today will determine whether AI advances human development or exacerbates inequalities. This demands effective governance responses. Parliaments are pivotal in representing the public interest, and an agenda to support them in the AI era could not be more timely.