In a rapidly evolving digital landscape, Europe is taking significant steps to address the challenges and opportunities presented by artificial intelligence (AI). Central to this effort is the establishment of the AI Scientific Panel, which has become a focal point in Europe’s advanced AI strategy. As the European Union (EU) prepares to regulate AI through the AI Act, the selection of experts for this panel is critical. Here’s an exploration of the latest developments in this space and what they mean for Europe’s AI future.
The establishment of the AI Scientific Panel is a significant milestone for Europe. This panel will consist of 60 independent experts who will advise the European AI Office on implementing the AI Act, which aims to create a framework for the safe and ethical use of AI technologies. Specifically, these experts will provide guidance on general-purpose AI (GPAI) systems, such as ChatGPT and Claude, addressing systemic risks and evaluating methodologies while also monitoring emerging AI risks.
A Call for Expertise
Around a month ago, the European Commission concluded its call for expressions of interest, drawing hundreds of applicants eagerly vying for a spot on the panel. This was encouraging, as it implies a robust pool of candidates available to choose from as the Commission embarks on this pivotal selection process. However, this process has not been without its complexities. Testimony to the political nature of this initiative, member states significantly restricted the Commission’s freedom of choice by imposing national quotas for panel representation.
Under the guidelines established by the Implementing Act recognized in March 2025, every EU member state must contribute one expert, with 80% of the panel consisting of candidates from EU or European Free Trade Association (EFTA) states. This has raised questions about the feasibility and efficacy of such quotas, particularly for smaller nations. For example, countries like Malta or Cyprus, which have relatively small populations, may struggle to find a high-caliber candidate ready to tackle Europe’s expansive AI challenges.
Questioning Quotas
Is it practical for every member state to have a representative? The AI field is still maturing, and ensuring wide-ranging expertise while adhering to quota requirements could prove difficult. Instead, some argue that compliance with national quotas should depend on meeting specific expertise criteria rather than simply fulfilling a numerical allocation.
For optimal outcomes, the focus should be on selecting the world’s leading AI researchers—those who have demonstrated expertise and a capacity for innovation rather than simply meeting national representation quotas. The intention behind creating the panel should revolve around assembling the best minds in AI, skilled at scrutinizing industry claims and preemptively addressing risks associated with emerging technologies.
A Need for Specialized Knowledge
Historical patterns indicate that many of Europe’s previous expert groups on AI have consisted of generalists rather than specialists. This has often led to mixed results. The new Scientific Panel must break this trend by prioritizing candidates with deep, hands-on expertise in advanced AI technologies, particularly those with experience in risk management and independent evaluation.
It’s also essential for the panel to include younger voices—individuals in their 20s and 30s who are active in the AI space and can contribute fresh perspectives to the group’s discussions. A blend of seasoned professionals and enthusiastic newcomers can strike a balance between innovation and wisdom. The experience demonstrated by Vice-Chairs of the GPAI Code of Practice, who had extensive working knowledge of cutting-edge AI, shows the importance of establishing a panel that is actively engaged with current technologies and trends.
Evolving Digital Governance Mechanisms
The formation of the AI Scientific Panel not only aims to advance digital governance but also presents a unique opportunity to engage top talent in the field of AI as part of the broader European project. Yet, the Commission must remain vigilant. It should not simply accept recommendations from member states but instead strive to identify and appoint the best candidates available, irrespective of their country of origin.
In doing so, Europe can foster a truly representative Scientific Panel that combines diverse expertise, geographical representation, and innovative thinking. A focus on objectivity, skill, and dedication should remain paramount in the selection process. By crafting a panel that embodies true subject-matter expertise, Europe will enhance its efforts to regulate AI effectively for the benefit of society as a whole.
While Europe moves forward in developing its advanced AI strategy, the challenges surrounding the composition of the AI Scientific Panel are emblematic of the broader issue of governance in the digital age. The decision to prioritize national quotas must be balanced against the pressing need for specialized knowledge capable of engaging with the complexities of AI technologies.
As Europe navigates this uncharted territory, a careful evaluation of the pool of candidates and their qualifications is essential. Ultimately, the selection process should be founded on the principle that the best interests of the European citizens should take precedence over political considerations. With thoughtful leadership and an eye toward innovation and integrity, Europe’s Advanced AI Strategy could set a standard for effective digital governance in the 21st century.
