The business sector is welcoming the Government’s new AI strategy, a national first.
“AI could add $76 billion to our GDP by 2038, but we’re falling behind other small, advanced economies on AI-readiness and many businesses are still not planning for the technology,” said Science, Innovation, and Technology Minister Dr Shane Reti.
He says the strategy sends a strong signal to the world that New Zealand supports the uptake of AI. By creating a regulatory environment, the Government aims to give businesses the confidence to invest in technology.
“The Government’s role in AI is to reduce barriers to adoption, provide clear regulatory guidance, and promote responsible AI adoption.
“New Zealand’s strength lies in being smart adopters. From AI-powered precision farming techniques to diagnostic technology in healthcare, Kiwi businesses can tailor AI to solve our unique challenges and deliver world-leading solutions.”
Guidance on using AI responsibly was released in tandem with the new strategy. Dr Reti says New Zealanders will need to develop trust and give social license to AI use.
“Private sector AI adoption and innovation will boost productivity by unlocking new products and services, increasing efficiency, and supporting better decision-making.”
Business sector reacts
Business New Zealand welcomed the strategy, with Director of Advocacy Catherine Beard highlighting how the emerging technology could be worth billions to New Zealand’s GDP over the next decade.
“Artificial intelligence is already reframing the way we work, learn and interact daily. We’ve seen an increased uptake of generative models and more across the economy, but currently, large businesses are more willing to make use of AI than smaller businesses.”
The strategy aligns with the policies adopted by other OECD countries, which Beard found reasonable. “While we should set rules that best advantage New Zealand, we don’t need to be entirely bespoke in the way we approach AI.
“AI and the benefits that come with it are for all businesses. There are ways in which small businesses could benefit from even a basic understanding of the technology to boost productivity.”
Elsewhere, Auckland Business Chamber chief executive Simon Bridges said the release of New Zealand’s Strategy for Artificial Intelligence: Investing with Confidence gives businesses clarity and “cuts through the fog”.
“This removes unintended barriers and clears up uncertainty. Whether you’re a manufacturer in Onehunga or a tech start-up in Takapuna, it’s about enabling real productivity gains,” he said.
AI strategy light on details
Despite the positive reception from business leaders, some critics argue the strategy lacks concrete regulatory details, implementation timelines, and investment.
Ben Reid is the founding executive director of the AI Forum NZ and operates an emerging technologies consultancy, Memia. He told the New Zealand Herald that the strategy plan “feels really insubstantial considering the amount of time it’s taken the Government to finally deliver a position on. Some of us have been talking about a national AI strategy since 2018.
Strategy lacks legislative bite
“Taking a read through the lightweight 20-page document, I’m not so sure it’s a strategy as much as a ‘vibe’.”
One recent NZIER report found that 68% of New Zealand small and medium businesses (SMEs) have no plans to evaluate or invest in AI technology. They cite a lack of understanding and perceived absence of value as the key barriers to AI adoption.
AI concerns workforce
The New Zealand Council of Trade Unions (NZCTU) Te Kauae Kaimahi is concerned that the AI document overlooks the impacts of artificial intelligence on working people and imitates the corporate hype of other tech giants.
“It is crucial that no workers are left behind as AI usage increases, and so it is deeply concerning that workers are absent from the document released by the Government today,” said NZCTU President Richard Wagstaff.
“AI technologies do provide opportunities for improving productivity and the quality of service. But this will only happen if workers are actively engaged on the implementation and governance of these technologies.”
AI education needed
Wagstaff called for workers to be properly trained on using AI safely and productively, a goal that the strategy failed to outline a coherent plan for achieving.
“Some workers, particularly in clerical and administrative roles, are at a high risk of being displaced by AI. We need to deliver a just transition for any workers negatively affected by AI by supporting them to retrain and find good work,” he said.
“The strategy also skates over the very real risks that AI technologies pose for workers. This includes the severe health and safety risks associated with AI surveillance systems, productivity monitoring, and automated management.
Society versus economy
Senior lecturer and AI programme director at Victoria University of Wellington, Dr Andrew Lensen, says the “AI Strategy sets a dangerous path forward for New Zealand, with an attitude of economic growth above social good.
“As expected, the Government’s AI Strategy is heavy on economic growth opportunities but worryingly light on the ethical and societal issues of AI.”
Ethical risks overlooked
The strategy takes a light-touch, principles-based approach to promote innovation and economic growth while giving businesses flexibility.
Dr Lensen, this approach all but rules out new legislation for managing the risks of AI. “The Strategy suggests that new legislation is unnecessary, which I, and many other AI researchers, disagree with.
“Having ‘Principles’ is not nearly sufficient to reduce AI-induced harm, bias, and inequity—we need clear legislation and well-resourced enforcement mechanisms to ensure AI does not further harm New Zealanders.
Absence of Treaty obligations
Dr Lensen also noticed how the strategy does not mention the Treaty of Waitangi.
“Māori face unique risks from AI, with most modern AI systems being sourced from overseas Western contexts, which have been designed with Western values in mind.
“Consider, for example, a healthcare AI system sourced from the USA—how can there be no guidance in the AI Strategy about the need to validate and refine such systems for the unique demographics of our society?
SPONSORED
