The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Anticipatory regulatory instruments for AI systems: A comparative study of regulatory sandbox schemes
Open accessAbstract
Anticipatory regulatory instruments are pre-emptive approaches to identify and anticipate risks arising from new technologies. They can also act as indicators of ‘pro-innovation’ economic support for digital technologies. The extent to which regulatory agencies can fulfil their regulatory remit, aimed at the protection of the public good, and signal support for innovative and disruptive technologies is an open policy question. Regulatory sandbox schemes are comparatively new anticipatory tools, operating within a small number of regulators, and their potential to assess contextual or cross-sectoral risk is unclear. However, emerging proposals for the regulation of AI increasing feature various models of regulatory sandboxes often aligned to the need to reduce access barriers for SMEs and innovators. Examples include the European Commission's Proposal for a regulation concerning AI [3] and the recent United Kingdom AI White Paper, AI Regulation: A Pro-Innovation Approach [8]. Disentangling the causal dimensions of why regulatory sandboxes are proposed to regulate AI, and their utility as tools of pre-emptive risk assessment are my core research questions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“By allowing selected entities to test products, services, or business models in controlled real-world environments, sandboxes temporarily relax certain compliance obligations while maintaining regulatory oversight (Kilian, J¨ ack, and Ebel 2025; Morgan 2023).”
From Bridging Liability Gaps in the Age of AI: The Case for No-Fault Compensation Schemes (2025) · cites this paper as Morgan 2023
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- Julia Black and Andrew Douglas Murray. 2019. Regulating AI and machine learning: setting the regulatory agenda. Eur. J. Law Technol. 10, 3 (2019).
- Hubert Buch-Hansen and Peter Nielsen. 2020. Critical realism: Basics and beyond. Bloomsbury Publishing
- Elinor Ostrom. 2009. Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton university press.
- Cristina Poncibò and Laura Zoboli. 2022. The Methodology of Regulatory Sandboxes in the EU: A Preliminary Assessment from a Competition Law Perspective. EU Law Work. Pap. No 61 Stanf.-Vienna Transatl. Technol. Law Forum (June 2022).
- Jacob S Sherkow. 2022. Regulatory sandboxes and the public health. U Ill Rev (2022), 357.
- Jess Whittlestone and Jack Clark. 2021. Why and How Governments Should Monitor AI Development. arXiv Prepr. arXiv:210812427. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.12427 · arXiv
- Dirk Zetzsche, Ross Buckley, Janos Barberis, and Douglas Arner. 2017. Regulating a Revolution: From Regulatory Sandboxes to Smart Regulation. Fordham J. Corp. Financ. Law 23, 1 (January 2017), 31. [7]
Cited by
Bridging Liability Gaps in the Age of AI: The Case for No-Fault Compensation Schemes
Tran, H.-C. (2025) · Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society · doi:10.1609/aies.v8i3.36797 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Morgan, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Bath (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Morgan, Deborah
- ORCID
- Morgan, Deborah
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2023 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2023-08-08
- Pages
- 980-981
- ISSN
- 3065-8365 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4386246860
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 13.84
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- UK Research and Innovation (EP/S023437/1)
- University of Bath
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Social Sciences › Public Administration › Regulation and Compliance Studies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- anticipatory regulation, regulatory sandboxes, AI regulation, disruptive technologies, EU AI Act, regulatory agencies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
