Institutional Coordination for National AI Incident Reporting

Abstract

Background: Public institutions increasingly manage responsibilities connected with AI incidents, but the quality of implementation can vary markedly across organizations and jurisdictions.

Objective: We investigated the implementation of arrangements concerning AI incidents and identified organizational and regulatory factors linked to policy effectiveness and incident reporting.

Methods: Across 10 jurisdictions or institutional settings, legal and policy sources were combined with organizational evidence and, when available, key-informant material. Comparative coding focused on authority, coordination, transparency, safeguards, enforcement, and implementation capacity.

Results: Three distinct approaches to AI incidents were evident across the cases. Settings that combined clear mandates, formal coordination, and review mechanisms achieved a 27% higher composite implementation score; fragmented responsibility was the common feature in cases experiencing delay or inconsistent enforcement.

Conclusion: Taken together, the results indicate that outcomes related to AI incidents are shaped by operational governance as well as formal rules. Accordingly, responsible AI adoption requires governance arrangements that can be implemented consistently across agencies, not merely high-level principles.

Study design: interagency coordination study.

Publication history: Originally published in print on 15 June 2026, Volume 6, Article 20. Online abstract record added on 16 September 2026. Full-text PDF will be added when the digital galley is ready.