ERA Forum· 2026Q2
When AI secrecy meets regulatory science transparency: which way for algorithmic transparency at EFSA and EMA?
- 0citations
- Q2SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
EFSA's emerging approach to AI transparency offers a prospect for robust democratic governance, unlike EMA's, suggesting a divergence in how EU regulatory agencies are adapting to AI.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- EU regulatory agencies like EFSA and EMA are grappling with AI transparency.
- Existing scientific assessment logic, not the AI Act, forms the basis for AI transparency safeguards.
- EFSA's AI transparency approach is more promising for democratic governance than EMA's.
- Regulatory Science Transparency and expert accountability are key considerations.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract The advent of AI in EU regulatory science is a litmus test for transparency. This article examines how EFSA and EMA are responding. It is argued that both agencies are subject to stringent safeguards for AI transparency. However, these lie in the guarantees developed around their scientific assessments (i.e., the logic of Regulatory Science Transparency), rather than in the AI Act. From the vantage point of Regulatory Science Transparency, expert accountability and legitimacy, EFSA’s and EMA’s emerging approaches to AI transparency yield mixed results: only EFSA’s response holds out the prospect for robust democratic governance in the age of AI.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. ERA Forum, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Law
LawSocial Sciences