Over the past decade, artificial intelligence has moved from a niche technological frontier to a transformative global force. The number of new AI firms financed globally has increased four times, and investments have increased fifteenfold, a rate of acceleration that is starting to represent the dawn of the fourth stage of production, governing principles, and social existence. Asia-Pacific countries are also trying to ride this wave. However, according to a recent UN report, the initial positions of the countries in this region are highly unequal. The IMF AI Preparedness Index shows this contrast: while advanced economies like Singapore, South Korea, Australia, and China are at ease with scores well above 70 percent, weak or low-income states can barely score above 20. For many, the new AI environment poses an external threat, creating more gaps between countries unless carefully handled.
This gap is not only a result of differences in the level of technological enthusiasm, but is also structural. The nature of some economies has built the foundation of AI based on good digital infrastructure, uninterrupted power supply, good data systems, and high-speed connectivity. On the other hand, some continue to struggle with intermittent power supply, lack of adequate data governance, and low-level internet access services. These concerns define who is part of the AI-controlled change and who is left behind. While Singapore experiments with large-scale AI deployment in finance, healthcare, and public administration, several South Asian and Pacific Island economies still struggle to build reliable data centres or digital authentication systems. The technological race, therefore, begins on an uneven track.
These inter-regional divisions lie over centuries-old inequalities even within nations. Income and wealth are very concentrated in the upper ten percent in most regions of Asia and the Pacific. Those with access to higher education, urban connectivity, and access to capital are in a better position to reap the benefits as AI tools become part of the workplace and change the forces of demand. At the same time, low-income employees, informal labourers, and rural communities are more vulnerable to these changes. AI is not just a reward for those with skill; it increases existing privilege. Without international policy intervention, the AI revolution may strengthen deeply-rooted structural inequalities.
The aforementioned UN report highlights the fact that the inclusive adoption of AI needs to reinforce both hard and soft infrastructure. Hard infrastructure is defined as the physical infrastructure of digital transformation: cheap internet, reliable and clean power, data center cooling, and sufficient computing power. Though the use of the internet has increased in the region, huge disparities exist. Some economies continue to experience a lack of affordability, lack of equal coverage between rural and urban areas, and gender differences in access. Such gaps are important since AI systems are based on stable high quality connectivity. It is impossible to jump into advanced governance with AI-driven technologies when a high percentage of the population does not have the basic access to high-speed data transmission.
Soft infrastructure also plays an important role in this issue. The capacity of societies to take up the opportunities of AI without falling into its pitfalls is determined by human capital, robust state institutions, and reputable regulatory systems. There is an acute skills shortage in data science, machine learning, cybersecurity, and advanced analytics in many countries in the Asia-Pacific. The education systems in some countries do not yet match the rapidly changing requirements of the AI economy. Meanwhile, public institutions are not able to adopt or establish ethical protection, privacy, and algorithm accountability measures. Unchecked AI adoption is unlikely to deliver sustained growth. Without effective governance, AI will be deployed unevenly and unpredictably, exposing countries to heightened risks of surveillance abuse, labour displacement, and the entrenchment of digital monopolies.
This is due to another dilemma created by AI and gender. In the Asia-Pacific, women are more exposed to AI-based automation than men. This is mainly due to the fact that women are overworked in clerical, administrative, and routine cognitive work-places; these are the areas that are highly prone to algorithmic replacement. This feminine vulnerability is aggravated by the inequalities that exist in access to digital devices, education, and labour participation. Devoid of intentional inclusion policies, the region is prone to establishing a future where technological advancement will replace women more than it empowers them.
The interplay of inequitable infrastructure, institutional underperformance, labor shortage, and gender inequality implies that the AI transition cannot be delegated to the market forces alone. The coming decade of AI uptake in Asia-Pacific will determine the growth direction of the economies, geopolitics, and stability of societies. The countries able to implement AI in manufacturing, services, and governance can gain significant productivity, while the others will become losers in a new technological tier of divergence. More to the point, the social gap between connected and disconnected, skilled and unskilled, and protected and unprotected workers might become even more rigid without early government intervention.
A multilayered solution beyond an increase in infrastructure is necessary to establish a more equal AI future. States should manage AI as a challenge of development and governance and reinforce public institutions, reestablish education systems, and invest in digital rights infrastructure that protects citizens against exploitation and expands access to opportunity. The key to inclusive adoption will be the ability of countries to democratize the benefits of AI, not just allowing them to be concentrated among elites. It is not a question of whether the Asia-Pacific will embrace AI—the actual question is whether the region will permit AI to intensify the existing inequalities or whether it will adopt the course of joint technological development.
If the Asia-Pacific can close its preparedness gaps and build cohesive, inclusive AI ecosystems, the technology has the potential to become a force for development, resilience, and inclusive growth. But if disparities remain unaddressed, the region may soon find itself confronting a new digital divide, one defined not by access to the internet alone, but by access to the future itself.
Featured/Headline Image Caption and Citation: AI, Image sourced from Peak Outsourcing | CC License, no changes made