A rare policy consensus emerges as AI’s impact moves beyond innovation into governance and societal risk
Updated
May 5, 2026 5:42 PM
A mechanical hand reaching for the hand of flesh. PHOTO: UNSPLASH
A new survey from Povaddo, a policy research firm, suggests that concern about artificial intelligence is no longer limited to industry or academia. It is now firmly present within the policy community.
The survey draws on responses from 301 public policy professionals across the United States and Europe, including lawmakers, staffers and analysts involved in shaping and evaluating public policy. A majority of respondents—61%—say governments are falling short in addressing the negative impacts of AI.
There is also broad agreement that regulation needs to increase. In the United States, 92% of respondents support stronger AI regulation, compared to 70% in Europe. At a time when consensus is often difficult, the findings point to a shared view across policy circles that current frameworks are not keeping pace with technological development.
Differences emerge when looking at how AI is affecting national contexts. In the U.S., 57% of policy experts believe AI is already harming the labor market. In Europe, 34% say the same. U.S. respondents are also more likely to see AI as a greater threat to jobs than immigration, with 63% holding that view compared to 47% in Europe.
On misinformation, responses are closely aligned. A large majority of policy experts in both regions expect an AI-driven misinformation crisis within the next one to two years—87% in the U.S. and 82% in Europe. Many also believe that AI-generated or AI-amplified misinformation could affect elections and public health information.
Some respondents frame the risks in more fundamental terms. In the United States, 41% of policy experts say AI poses an existential threat to humanity. In Europe, 29% share that view. U.S. respondents are also more likely to believe that advances in AI could harm global security and stability.
The findings come as policymakers begin to respond more actively. In the U.S., Senators Josh Hawley, Richard Blumenthal and Mark Warner have introduced bipartisan legislation focused on AI accountability, including measures aimed at protecting workers and children.
In Europe, the introduction of the EU AI Act marks a more advanced regulatory approach. The framework sets out rules based on levels of risk and is widely seen as the first comprehensive attempt to govern AI at scale.
William Stewart, President and Founder of Povaddo, said: "What makes these findings so significant is who is saying it. These are the practitioners who work inside the policy process every day, spanning every corner of the policy world from defense to healthcare to finance, not activists or everyday citizens. These findings foreshadow real action. The current path of governments accelerating AI deployment while falling short on governance is not sustainable, and the people who know that best are the ones in this survey. You cannot have nine-in-ten policy insiders demanding more regulation and four-in-ten calling AI an existential threat without that eventually moving the needle in Washington and Brussels in terms of legislative or regulatory action".
Taken together, the survey reflects a shift in how AI is being discussed within policymaking circles. Concern is no longer limited to future risks. It is increasingly tied to current gaps in governance and the pace of deployment.
Keep Reading
A look at how motivation, not metrics, is becoming the real frontier in fitness tech
Updated
February 7, 2026 2:18 PM
A group of people running together. PHOTO: FREEPIK
Most running apps focus on measurement. Distance, pace, heart rate, badges. They record activity well, but struggle to help users maintain consistency over time. As a result, many people track diligently at first, then gradually disengage.
That drop-off has pushed developers to rethink what fitness technology is actually for. Instead of just documenting activity, some platforms are now trying to influence behaviour itself. Paceful, an AI-powered running platform developed by SportsTech startup xCREW, is part of that shift — not by adding more metrics, but by focusing on how people stay consistent. The platform is built on a simple behavioural insight: most people don’t stop exercising because they don’t care about health. They stop because routines are fragile. Miss a few days and the habit collapses. Technology that focuses only on performance metrics doesn’t solve that. Systems that reinforce consistency, belonging and feedback loops might.
Instead of treating running as a solo, data-driven task, Paceful is built around two ideas: behavioural incentives and social alignment. The system turns real-world running activity into tangible rewards and it uses AI to connect runners to people, clubs and challenges that fit how and where they actually run.
At the technical level, Paceful connects with existing fitness ecosystems. Users can import workout data from platforms like Apple Health and Strava rather than starting from scratch. Once inside the system, AI models analyse pace, frequency, location and participation patterns. That data is used to recommend running partners, clubs and group challenges that match each runner’s habits and context.
What makes this approach different is not the tracking itself, but what the platform does with the data it collects. Running distance and consistency become inputs for a reward system that offers physical-world incentives, such as gear, race entries or gift cards. The idea is to link effort to something concrete, rather than abstract. The company also built the system around community logic rather than individual competition. Even solo runners are placed into challenge formats designed to simulate the motivation of a group. In practice, that means users feel part of a shared structure even when running alone.
During a six-month beta phase in the US, xCREW tested Paceful with more than 4,000 running clubs and around 50,000 runners. According to the company, users increased their running frequency significantly and weekly retention remained unusually high for a fitness platform. One beta tester summed it up this way: “Strava just logs records, but Paceful rewards you for every run, which is a completely different motivation”.
The company has raised seed funding and plans to expand the platform beyond running, walking, trekking, cycling and swimming. Instead of asking how accurately technology can measure the body, platforms like Paceful are asking a different question: how technology might influence everyday behaviour. Not by adding more data, but by shaping the conditions around effort, feedback and social connection.
As AI becomes more common in consumer products, its real impact may depend less on how advanced the models are and more on what they are applied to. In this case, the focus isn’t speed or performance — it’s consistency. And whether systems like this can meaningfully support it over time.