The study, which gathers responses from 100 senior UK executives at the director level or above in technology companies or within IT departments in other sectors, indicates a business impetus for this stance. Approximately 80% claim global government coordination of AI regulation is important to their company, with 41% describing it as 'very important'.

As international debates on AI policy continue to balance safety versus innovation, the research indicates strong positivity towards regulatory approaches within the UK. About 78% express satisfaction with the UK government’s current approach to AI regulation, and 43% rate it 'very positively'.

However, there are mixed views on the impact of existing international AI regulations on innovation. Just over a third (38%) believe existing regulations will impede innovation, while nearly half (45%) think they will ultimately encourage innovation. This division is even more pronounced regarding future AI regulations: 43% believe upcoming regulations will delay or prevent innovation, whereas another 43% believe they will encourage innovation. 12% are unsure.

“The dichotomy we’re seeing in response to AI regulation is fascinating. On the one hand, we are generally satisfied with the direction in which AI regulation is going globally. On the other, we have a sizable portion of executives claiming both existing and upcoming regulations may harm innovation,” says Michal Szymczak, Head of AI Strategy at Zartis. “The logical inference from this, as far as I see it, is that it speaks volumes about how much people might prefer solving the safety risks of AI versus innovation. They might be viewing any slowdown in innovation as a necessary evil in the face of the societal calamities they perceive as possible due to AI.”

The findings arrive on the news that the UK’s AI Bill is progressing to the House of Commons. If passed, it would establish an AI Authority to monitor the technology’s risks in the country while ensuring existing regulators are aligned in AI safety. While the UK has generally favoured a light-touch, pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, the EU AI Act enacts far stricter rules. Some have criticised AI start-ups, particularly over how over-regulation could hamper innovation.

Despite these criticisms in the press, even the EU AI Act appears to have found significant favour among tech executives:

• 78% agree it will facilitate wider AI adoption (of these, 42% somewhat agree and 36% strongly agree)
• 71% agree it will achieve better safety and security
• 74% agree it will accelerate opportunities for profitability
• 72% agree it will promote AI literacy and training among the general population
• 76% agree it will enable transparency in AI technologies and logic
• 73% agree it will help manage risks associated with AI use
• 79% agree it will increase understanding of AI across adopters

“The same executives voicing favour of the UK’s approach also seem to be condoning the EU’s methods,” says Angel Benito, CTO at Zartis. “If anything, it goes to show the eagerness of people to see any government action at all, regardless of the nuances that distinguish the EU’s approach from the UK’s. AI acceleration is in ‘powered flight’ mode. It’s progressing so fast that scarcely anyone can keep track of its developments, and this has likely got many executives concerned, given the ongoing issues AI has posed regarding data transparency, security, and more.”

Where tech executives are more muted, though, is on whether the EU AI Act will eliminate bias and promote fairness. Nearly a third (28%) neither agree nor disagree, while 41% ‘somewhat agree’. Only 22% strongly agree. And while there’s broad agreement that the EU AI Act will increase personal data protection (79%), only 36% of respondents ‘strongly agree’, while a sizable portion (43%) ‘somewhat agree’.