Position: Democratic AI is Possible. The Democracy Levels Framework Shows How It Might Work.

Aviv Ovadya, Kyle Redman, Luke Thorburn, Quan Ze Chen, Oliver Smith, Flynn Devine, Andrew Konya, Smitha Milli, Manon Revel, Kevin Feng, Amy X Zhang, Bilva Chandra, Michiel A. Bakker, Atoosa Kasirzadeh

TL;DR: Effectively "democratizing AI" requires democratic governance and alignment of AI; we propose a Democracy Levels framework for evaluating the degree to which such efforts are democratic.

Abstract: This position paper argues that effectively "democratizing AI" requires democratic governance and alignment of AI, and that this is particularly valuable for decisions with systemic societal impacts. Initial steps—such as Meta's *Community Forums* and Anthropic's *Collective Constitutional AI*—have illustrated a promising direction, where democratic processes could be used to meaningfully improve public involvement and trust in critical decisions. To more concretely explore what increasingly democratic AI might look like, we provide a "Democracy Levels" framework and associated tools that: (i) define milestones toward meaningfully democratic AI—which is also crucial for substantively pluralistic, human-centered, participatory, and public-interest AI, (ii) can help guide organizations seeking to increase the legitimacy of their decisions on difficult AI governance and alignment questions, and (iii) support the evaluation of such efforts.

Lay Summary:

The power to make decisions about AI is becoming increasingly important as AI systems become more ubiquitous and capable. This has led to talk about "democratizing" AI, but that often just means making AI accessible. We argue that it is also important to have democratic decision-making about how AI is built and used.

To make this more concrete, we introduce the Democracy Levels Framework, which defines milestones (L0-L5) for transferring decision-making power to democratic systems. Building on this framework, we provide tools for helping identify when it makes sense to make decisions more democratic, and to evaluate the quality of a democratic system. We also address concerns about why this matters, and how to make it feasible. Ultimately, truly democratic AI could prevent unprecedented power concentration as AI capabilities increase.

Verify Author Names: My co-authors have confirmed that their names are spelled correctly both on OpenReview and in the camera-ready PDF. (If needed, please update ‘Preferred Name’ in OpenReview to match the PDF.)

No Additional Revisions: I understand that after the May 29 deadline, the camera-ready submission cannot be revised before the conference. I have verified with all authors that they approve of this version.

Pdf Appendices: My camera-ready PDF file contains both the main text (not exceeding the page limits) and all appendices that I wish to include. I understand that any other supplementary material (e.g., separate files previously uploaded to OpenReview) will not be visible in the PMLR proceedings.

Latest Style File: I have compiled the camera ready paper with the latest ICML2025 style files <https://media.icml.cc/Conferences/ICML2025/Styles/icml2025.zip> and the compiled PDF includes an unnumbered Impact Statement section.

Paper Verification Code: NzljY

Link To Code: https://democracylevels.org/

Primary Area: Research Priorities, Methodology, and Evaluation

Keywords: democratic AI, participatory AI, pluralistic AI, public AI, human-centered AI

Submission Number: 173