Australia · Policy / Strategy
Australia — Safe and Responsible AI in Australia Government Interim Response
Issued by Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DISR).
Summary
Australia’s government interim response to the Safe and Responsible AI consultation proposed a differentiated approach to AI governance. Rather than adopting a single generic standard, it suggested mandatory safeguards for high-risk settings such as critical infrastructure, healthcare, and predictive administrative tools, while leaving lower-risk uses to voluntary or self-regulatory standards. The response outlined potential mandatory guardrails covering testing, accountability, data quality, and human-in-the-loop oversight. It also considered using updates to existing consumer and privacy protection laws as implementation pathways.
Why it matters
Bifurcated governance approach; mandatory safeguards for high-risk settings; voluntary standards for low-risk applications; ten potential guardrails; testing; accountability; data quality; human-in-the-loop oversight; implementation through existing laws.
Governance themes
Topics
Record metadata
- Country
- Australia
- Region
- Asia-Pacific
- Governance themes
- AI governance, Risk management, Safety, Accountability, Transparency
- Document type
- Policy / Strategy
- Status
- Published
- Publication date
- 17 January 2024
- Last updated
- 27 June 2026
- Language
- English
- Original source
- View original source
Citation export
Plain citation
Department of Industry, Science and Resources, Safe and Responsible AI in Australia: Government Interim Response, 17 January 2024.
BibTeX
@misc{australia_safe_responsible_ai_government_interim_response_2024,
title = {Australia — Safe and Responsible AI in Australia Government Interim Response},
author = {Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DISR)},
year = {2024},
howpublished = {Global AI Governance Archive},
url = {https://www.industry.gov.au/publications/safe-and-responsible-ai-australia-discussion-paper/government-response}
}See the citation guide for style-specific examples.
Recorded cross-references
- Australia — Safe and Responsible AI Discussion Paper
- Singapore — Model AI Governance Framework for Generative AI
- Council of Europe Framework Convention
Related Entries
- JapanFramework14 February 2024
Japan — Establishment of the Japan AI Safety Institute
Japan established the Japan AI Safety Institute in February 2024 to coordinate national work on AI safety evaluation. The institute aligned Japan’s approach with the emerging international network of AI safety institutes…
- AustraliaReport1 June 2023
Australia — Safe and Responsible AI in Australia Discussion Paper
Australia’s Safe and Responsible AI discussion paper launched a national consultation on the governance of AI systems. It examined existing domestic frameworks, including consumer law, privacy law, and administrative rul…
- CanadaBill / ProposalUndated
Canada — Proposed Amendments to the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act
Canada’s 2024 proposed amendments to the Artificial Intelligence and Data Act refined the pending Bill C-27 framework. The amendments focused on defining classes of high-impact AI systems, including biometric identificat…
- Council of EuropeTreaty / Convention17 May 2024
Council of Europe — Framework Convention on AI, Human Rights, Democracy and Rule of Law
The Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence, Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law became the first binding international treaty on AI. Adopted in May 2024 and opened for signature in Sept…
- InternationalStandardUndated
ISO 10218 — Safety Requirements for Industrial Robots
ISO 10218-1 and ISO 10218-2 are international safety standards for industrial robots and robot system integration. They are central to embodied AI governance because AI-driven vision, pathfinding, and adaptive control ca…
This archive is provided for research and informational purposes. It should not be interpreted as legal or regulatory advice.