The rapid expansion of cloud computing and artificial intelligence (AI) has driven transformative change across various industries, presenting both opportunities and challenges in the realms of compliance and governance. This review examines the distinctive and overlapping compliance and governance issues faced by the United States (USA) and African countries in managing cloud computing and AI technologies. In the USA, compliance frameworks such as the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), HIPAA, and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework provide regulatory infrastructure, emphasizing data privacy, sovereignty, and AI ethics. In contrast, African nations, led by South Africa’s Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA) and regional initiatives like those promoted by the African Union, are developing data protection and AI governance structures within diverse and resource-constrained environments. Key compliance concerns include data privacy, sovereignty, and cross-border data transfers, with the USA focusing on sectoral regulations and Africa on emerging continent-wide data frameworks. Governance challenges differ across regions, especially in data ownership, AI ethics, and risk management; in the USA, well-established risk management frameworks enable more consistent cybersecurity practices, whereas African nations often face hurdles related to limited infrastructure and varying regulatory standards. This comparative analysis underscores the importance of harmonized policies, highlighting the need for collaborative, cross-regional initiatives to mitigate regulatory disparities and foster secure data flows. Ultimately, this review advocates for adaptive, flexible frameworks that incorporate ethical AI guidelines and global best practices, which are essential for supporting sustainable cloud and AI adoption across the USA and Africa. Through proactive compliance strategies and enhanced governance mechanisms, these regions can effectively navigate the challenges of a technology-driven global landscape while promoting innovation and protecting stakeholder interests.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Folorunso et al. (2024) studied this question.