Regulating the Environmental Footprint of AI |
The world is witnessing the rapid development of generative AIs. Contrary to the stark reality, this development is being framed as a solution to all contemporary global issues. However, the increasing environmental degradation resulting from AI development is being dismissed by big tech companies. The development of generative AI is characterized by the consumption of large quantities of electricity and water, i.e., training a single large language model (LLM) emits approximately 300,000 kg of carbon dioxide, equivalent to 125 round-trip flights between Beijing and New York. Even though the world is transitioning to sustainable energy development and discouraging the utilization of fossil fuels and oil in energy production. Yet, the development of AI in a vacuum with no regulatory mechanism poses a grave concern to environmental protection around the globe.
Notwithstanding, this development is being dominated by the global North, whereas the global South is bearing the shadow environmental cost. Despite the presence of procedural obligations under international law for the protection of the environment and the prevention of cross-boundary harm. No such practices have been adopted by the AI development companies, policymakers, or think tanks. This article argues for the urgency of adopting Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), a procedural obligation under international law, as a necessary mechanism of anticipatory governance and minimizing the shadow environmental cost in the global south.
Environmental impact assessment first emerged as a procedural obligation under international law in 1972 after the Stockholm Convention, and now it has been developed into an international and domestic mechanism for the integration of environmental considerations into socio-economic development and decision-making process. An environmental impact assessment describes a process that produces a report of the foreseeable environmental impact of the proposed activity or the project. Secondly, it provides policy or decision makers with all the necessary information on environmental consequences and proposed alternatives to prevent cross-boundary harms. Thirdly, it provides a mechanism for ensuring the participation of potentially affected states or individuals in the decision-making process. It has been formally recognized as a binding obligation in Principle 17 of the Rio Declaration, providing, “Environmental impact assessment, as a national instrument, shall be undertaken for proposed activities that are likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment and are subject to a decision of a competent national authority.” Furthermore, Principle 21 of the Rio Declaration imposes a binding duty on the states for cooperation for environmental protection and sustainable development. Moreover, the ICJ in the pulp mills case, “Argentina Vs Uruguay,” formally recognized EIA as a binding procedural........