Multilateral Export Regimes Need Better Coordination to Implement Emerging Tech Controls, Study Says

Although multilateral export regimes share many of the same concerns over emerging technologies, coming to an agreement on the controls is proving increasingly difficult, according to a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Regimes are facing issues reaching consensus due to the large number of “membership combinations” across multiple regimes, which have to take into account the needs of every state, and an inability to coordinate, the report said.

While general export controls are often difficult to implement, “discussions on proposals concerning emerging technologies therefore often take longer,” according to the December report, which proposed better coordination among the four main regimes: the Australia Group, the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Nuclear Suppliers Group and the Wassenaar Arrangement. Better coordination can particularly improve the upcoming rollout of controls on emerging technologies, as the U.S. Commerce Department prepares to restrict sales of certain categories of artificial intelligence, semiconductors and more (see 1912160032).

Emerging technology controls need to be coordinated across multiple regimes due to their constantly changing nature, which can make some controls ineffective even before they are implemented, the report said. The controls “frequently need to be redefined during the process because of technological advances and changes,” SIPRI said. And reaching agreements on controls across regimes “is particularly difficult if it relates to proliferation risks” in multiple regimes, the report said. “States need to agree both on the threat and the need and the appropriateness of export controls before moving to identify and decide on specific list items and technical parameters.”

Regimes could simplify the coordination process by sharing information about “research efforts and industrial applications” within these sensitive technology areas, the report said, although some countries may not want to disclose information about their strategic technology sectors in the interest of “preserving any advantage they may have over other countries.” Regime coordination and discussions are further complicated by a lack of “agreed international standards,” which could set “meaningful parameters” for control-list items. The report lists 3D printing as an example, saying international standards and technical parameters for the technology have not yet been set. Parameters could “sufficiently distinguish machines of concern from the vast amount of general-purpose machines produced in this sector.”

Regimes should also not overlook the importance of “foresight work” -- or forecasting and scenario-planning -- when considering controls on emerging technologies. Every technical expert working for an international export control authority “needs to keep themselves updated on technological developments that currently may not pose a proliferation threat … but that have the potential to do so in the future,” the report said. Foresight work should be “incorporated into [the] consultation processes to inform discussions within the regimes.”

And although regimes normally discuss export controls separately, SIPRI suggested that regimes should collaborate more, which could improve the controls while preventing “unnecessary overlaps” in future controls. “Consultations between regimes at the technical level could further the understanding of aspects of a technology based on the different regime perspectives,” the report said.

Regimes can take several practical steps to increase coordination, the report said, including designating a point person to prepare and set up the meetings; identifying topics for discussion and setting parameters of discussion; and setting realistic, limited goals. “Creating clear expectations and a positive connotation of the engagement, and highlighting pay-offs for the participants, can improve their willingness to share and engage,” the report said. Regimes should also provide “clear and compatible mandates” and set up advance consultations to “clarify their responses to expected difficulties and how discussions can be structured and conducted to be most beneficial.”