AIP 25: Special Midsummer Celebration

Reflecting on 25 consecutive editions of AI Perspectives, the evolving Swedish AI landscape, and the spirit of Midsummer

As Midsummer arrives in Sweden, a season marked by light, renewal, and gathering. I find myself pausing to reflect on a personal milestone: 25 consecutive weeks of publishing AI Perspectives. The symbolism of Midsummer feels especially fitting. Just as Swedes celebrate the turning point of the year with joy and reflection, I look back at these six months with a sense of accomplishment and gratitude.

Sustaining a weekly column, written on the fly and rooted in the moment’s events and debates, has been both a challenge and a joy. Each weekend, I’ve sat down, sometimes with only a spark of an idea from the week’s news, a conversation, or a shift in the public mood, and shaped it into a perspective worth sharing. The discipline of this routine has taught me to trust my instincts, to capture the pulse of what matters in AI policy and practice, and to make complex issues accessible and relevant.

What stands out most is how this journey has mirrored the Swedish summer itself: unpredictable, vibrant, and full of surprises. Some weeks, the column flowed easily, inspired by clear developments or urgent debates. Other times, I wrestled with ambiguity, searching for the right angle or insight. Yet, every edition became a snapshot of the ongoing dialogue around AI, its promises, its pitfalls, and its profound impact on society.

This milestone is not just about endurance. It’s about the evolving conversation we’re building together: readers, experts, sceptics, and enthusiasts alike. I’m grateful for the engagement, feedback, and occasional debate that each piece has sparked. As we celebrate Midsummer and the 25th edition, I invite you to see this as a collective achievement: a testament to the value of regular, independent reflection in the midst of rapid technological change.

Let’s carry this spirit of openness and curiosity into the long, bright days ahead.

Looking Back: My Favorite Issues and Why They Matter

With 24 editions behind me, I’ve had the chance to explore a wide range of topics, challenges, and opportunities shaping the AI landscape in Sweden and beyond. Some pieces stand out not just for the issues they tackled, but for the conversations they sparked and the insights they offered in moments of change or uncertainty.

Below, I’ve gathered a selection of my favorite issues from the past six months, arranged in a deliberate order to guide you from the broad, global context of AI governance, through Sweden’s unique leadership and practical frameworks, to the most urgent challenges facing society today. Each choice is meant to build on the last, helping you see how these themes connect and why each step is essential for a trustworthy AI future. I invite you to revisit these columns, reflect on their relevance today, and share your own thoughts or favorites as we continue this journey together.

Here are a few highlights worth reading (or reading again), in the order that best tells this story:

AIP 14 is a crucial read because it confronts the glaring absence of real accountability in how AI is developed, deployed, and governed across society, business, and government. In this issue, I draw a stark comparison: while industries like automotive or pharmaceuticals demand rigorous safety checks and liability frameworks for every component, AI systems, capable of influencing healthcare, justice, and democracy, are often released into the world with minimal oversight and fragmented responsibility. This “Wild West” approach has allowed harms like bias, discrimination, and environmental exploitation to proliferate in plain sight, with each layer of the AI stack (from infrastructure to applications and user interfaces) able to deflect blame and avoid scrutiny.

What makes this piece especially important is its call to move beyond performative “ethics” and voluntary pledges, exposing how these often mask systemic negligence and allow powerful actors to shift costs and risks onto the most vulnerable, especially in the Global South. I argue for a layered governance model that mandates transparency, third-party audits, enforceable liability frameworks, and global coordination, making accountability a shared and inescapable reality at every stage of the AI lifecycle. If you want to understand the true scale of the AI accountability gap and why urgent, enforceable action is needed to protect society from unchecked harm, this is the issue to read or revisit.

AIP 17 is a standout for me because it offers a comprehensive yet accessible overview of the Total Governance (TG) Model, distilling what could be a dense fifty-page whitepaper into a single, readable column. In this piece, I explore how Sweden is leveraging its unique legacy of pragmatic, transparent, and inclusive governance rooted in the Total Defence tradition to pioneer a new approach to AI oversight. The TG Model is not just another regulatory framework; it’s a holistic, action-driven response to the complex challenges and opportunities that AI presents at both national and global levels. The article explains how TG draws on Sweden’s culture of consensus-building and public good, adapting military-grade standards like explainability, bias mitigation, and human oversight for civilian AI governance.

What makes this issue especially valuable is its clarity in laying out the TG Model’s core principles: targeted regulation for high-impact organizations, transparency and accountability, bias mitigation, dynamic oversight, and shared responsibility across all stakeholders. I also highlight the critical role of AI Centers of Excellence and initiatives, whether in government, business, or academia, in operationalizing these principles through concrete practices like audits, risk management, and continuous improvement. The piece demonstrates how Sweden’s approach is both rigorous and flexible, focusing on real-world impact and adaptability rather than vague ethical slogans. If you want to quickly understand what Total Governance is, why it matters, and how Sweden is positioning itself as a global leader in responsible AI, this is the issue to read or revisit.

AIP 22 is especially important because it addresses a critical gap in how the world manages the rapid growth and complexity of artificial intelligence. Traditional, fragmented approaches to AI governance simply can’t keep pace with the speed at which AI is transforming society, often leading to duplicated efforts, inconsistent standards, and a lack of meaningful oversight. In this piece, I argue that every country urgently needs a national AI association, one that brings together government, business, researchers, and civil society under a unified, transparent, and adaptive framework. By aligning with the Total Governance (TG) Model, these associations can ensure accountability, openness, and resilience, connecting local and national initiatives into a global backbone for responsible AI development.

What makes this article especially relevant now is its practical vision for how such associations, built on TG principles, can overcome the pitfalls of ethics-washing and sectoral silos. A TG-aligned association isn’t just another coordinating body; it’s an independent, neutral platform that creates trust, adapts to new challenges, and enables seamless collaboration across borders. I recommend revisiting this issue to understand why, in a world where AI’s risks and opportunities are constantly shifting, we simply can’t afford to go without strong, connected, and credible AI associations.

AIP 7 is a cornerstone piece for anyone seeking to move beyond the simplistic view of AI as just another productivity tool. In this article, I challenge the prevailing mindset that treats AI as a set of isolated applications for automation or efficiency, urging readers to recognize AI as a strategic asset that can fundamentally reshape entire industries and redefine what it means to be competitive. The column lays out a clear distinction: using AI tactically to optimize existing processes is not enough for long-term success. Instead, organizations, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, must embed AI at the heart of their business models, allowing it to inform decision-making, drive innovation, and create new sources of value that were previously unimaginable.

What makes this piece especially important is its practical guidance on how to make this mindset shift. I highlight real-world examples where AI-driven strategies have led to dramatic improvements in sales, customer engagement, and operational agility, demonstrating that those who treat AI as a core strategic pillar are better positioned to adapt to rapid market changes and seize new opportunities. The article also addresses the risks of a fragmented, tool-based approach: companies that fail to integrate AI strategically risk falling behind more agile, AI-driven competitors and missing out on transformational growth. I recommend this issue because it provides both the rationale and the roadmap for leaders and teams to start seeing AI not as an add-on solution, but as the foundation for future business strategy, a perspective that is essential for anyone aiming to thrive in an AI-powered economy.

This issue is a cornerstone in the ongoing conversation about the future of AI governance, and it stands out to me for its clear-eyed analysis of a pivotal moment in global regulatory leadership. In AIP 24, I examine how the United States, once considered a potential leader in AI regulation, has retreated into a state of policy instability and fragmentation. The reversal of comprehensive governance under the Biden administration and the introduction of the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," which imposes a decade-long moratorium on state and local AI regulations, have created a regulatory vacuum at precisely the moment when the world needs robust oversight the most. Against this backdrop, the European Union emerges as the world’s last reliable advocate for comprehensive, enforceable, and value-driven AI governance. The EU AI Act, with its risk-based approach and harmonized standards across all 27 member states, is not just a European milestone; it is a blueprint for global regulation, thanks to the powerful "Brussels Effect" that compels multinational companies to adopt EU standards worldwide.

What makes this piece especially meaningful to me is the way it highlights Sweden’s unique and strategic position within this new landscape. I explore Sweden’s Total Governance (TG) Model, an innovative framework developed by the Swedish AI Association that emphasizes transparency, accountability, fairness, and adaptability. The TG Model, with its certification mechanism (the TG Mark), offers a practical, scalable approach to trustworthy AI, complementing the EU’s legal foundation and reinforcing Europe’s leadership on the global stage. Sweden’s tradition of consensus-building and community engagement is not just a national asset but a template for how AI governance can be both rigorous and inclusive. I encourage readers to revisit this issue to understand why the decisions made in Brussels and Stockholm over the coming years will have profound implications for the future of AI both in Europe and around the world. If you want to grasp the stakes of this moment and why Sweden’s approach could set the standard for responsible AI everywhere, this is the piece to read again.

Looking Ahead

As we celebrate this milestone and the spirit of Midsummer, I’m energized by the journey so far and excited for what lies ahead. The conversation around AI is evolving rapidly, and I remain committed to capturing its nuances, challenges, and possibilities with each new edition. Thank you for reading, engaging, and sharing your thoughts. Your participation shapes this column as much as my words do. Here’s to many more weekends of reflection, debate, and discovery together.