AI in Southeast Asia: Optimism, Investment, and Opportunities

An interview with Edward Tsoi

Edward Tsoi walked me through what AI in Southeast Asia looks like. The region is quickly becoming central to global AI systems when it comes to adoption and infrastructure, but investments in governance are lagging. 

Ed is the co-founder of AI Safety Asia, a nonprofit working to strengthen safe and effective AI governance across the region through training, research, and policy work with governments and civil society. During the past year, he’s led seven regional roundtables, and the organization is about to launch an AI governance training program in Indonesia for 30 senior officials in partnership with the Ministry of Communication and Digital Affairs. Originally from Hong Kong and now based in London, he sits on the boards of two university AI divisions and previously founded an education NGO in Myanmar. Long story short: Ed knows what’s up.

Photo by Z on Unsplash

This interview has been edited for clarity and length. 
Interviewer: Meenakshi Dalal (MD) 
Interviewee: Edward Tsoi (ET)

AI Optimism and Investment in Southeast Asia

MD: Is what I’ve been reading true: that people in Southeast Asia see AI as a net good? I came across a recent Stanford University study showing that 80% of people in Indonesia and 77% in Thailand believe the benefits of AI outweigh the risks—nearly double the percentage in the U.S. and Canada.

ET: People see technology as a force for good in a way that is often taken for granted in the Global North. It’s viewed as something that can quickly boost quality of life. In Southeast Asia, digital tools like messaging or mobile payments have leapfrogged entire stages of development, saving people hours of travel just to make a call or transfer money. This kind of ease helps explain the eagerness around adopting AI in Southeast Asia.

MD: That sounds very positive. How else is AI showing up in the region?

People [in Southeast Asia] see technology as a force for good in a way that is often taken for granted in the Global North. —Edward Tsoi

ET: Southeast Asia is already part of the global AI value chain. Companies rely on real people to do something called data annotation, which involves reviewing and labeling the information that AI models are trained on. It’s created a lot of job opportunities, particularly for gig workers.

We’re now also seeing major tech companies invest heavily in the region, in a way that will make Southeast Asia a much bigger player in the global AI system. We’re talking about upwards of $30 billion in committed investments to build data centers and other infrastructure projects in countries like Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand.

MD: But?

ET: What we are not seeing is matching investment on the governance side, which is critical for AI to be adopted safely. The real issue isn’t that Asia will somehow fall behind when it comes to AI: it’s that it’s already central and strong governance needs more attention.

Why Investing in AI Governance in Asia Matters

MD: Let’s start with why investment in safe AI governance matters in the first place.

ET: People often frame growth and regulation, innovation and safety, as opposites. They’re not. We can—and must—have both.

Take cars, for example. They’re powerful machines that improve everyday life but can also be dangerous. That’s why we have seat belts, traffic lights, and road laws. Without seat belts and traffic regulations, driving will be a dangerous mess, and it would be bad for the car industry. Regulations don’t eliminate risk, but they reduce it significantly. These guardrails benefit both the public and the automotive industry.

That’s our argument at AI Safety Asia: adopting AI safely through a mix of governance, regulation, and legislation is a win for both the industry and society.

MD: What are you worried about when you say ‘risk’?

ET: We are concerned about a spectrum of risks, from those we are seeing right now including bias, discrimination and disinformation, to risks that are coming soon with early warning signs from empirical AI safety research. These include biosecurity, loss of control, and alignment problems.

Misinformation in London looks very different from misinformation in Yangon. —Edward Tsoi

MD: I’ve heard people agree wholeheartedly on the need for safety and then argue that the biggest gains in AI safety governance are going to come from the West. What do you say to them?

ET: That’s a bit shortsighted. AI is a global technology, and its risks manifest differently depending on the context. Misinformation in London looks very different from misinformation in Yangon.

Sixty percent of the world’s population lives in Asia. It’s a diverse region with distinct political, social, and technological environments. We can’t afford to operate blindly there or apply another region’s lens without deep consideration. The challenge is that right now governance, research, technical talent, and safety infrastructure across Southeast Asia are uneven—advanced in some countries and just beginning in others. That’s why we started AI Safety Asia: to help build the policy, technical, and research capabilities needed to govern AI safely.

How Southeast Asia is Approaching AI Governance

MD: AI Safety Asia started its work in Southeast Asia. Why?

ET: It’s where we could have the biggest impact early on. Of all the sub-regions in Asia, it had a less developed AI ecosystem. One thing that stands out after hundreds of hours of roundtables and listening exercises is that most countries in this region—aside from countries like China and Singapore—are not trying to build the next ChatGPT or Claude. They fully accept that, at least for now, they will be the users of this technology, not the producers.

MD: What’s political will like?

ET: Like everywhere, AI is a popular topic for politicians. Everyone understands that AI is going to reshape their countries in big ways.

MD: And how does that understanding translate into governance?

ET: Unevenly. In Southeast Asia we’re looking at a wide spectrum of abilities, priorities, financial resources, and progress. Six countries have already set up their national AI roadmaps or strategies. Some of them are even starting to consider setting up governance boards and research centers.

MD: Can you elaborate a bit more on that unevenness?

ET: On one end, you have Singapore, which is moving fast when it comes to adopting AI policies, building infrastructure, and helping people adopt the technology in a constructive way. On the other, you have places like Myanmar, where an ongoing civil war makes AI governance a low priority. Or, countries like Laos or Cambodia that haven’t begun drafting legislation yet.

In between, there’s a lot of variation.

Take Indonesia: it’s actively working on AI governance but facing challenges that could severely limit progress. Its electrical supply per capita is about a third of Singapore’s and the government is in the middle of a massive (and expensive) effort to relocate the capital city, which is currently sinking.

In the Philippines, the government is laser-focused on the job displacement angle. About 8% of the country’s GDP comes from the outsourcing industry and AI has the potential to disrupt that.

What’s Holding Effective AI Governance in Southeast Asia Back

MD: What do you make of these initiatives so far?

ET: I see two main issues.

First, even when leaders are pushing pragmatic AI policies, coordination across government departments is often weak. Every department wants to be the champion of AI, which ironically can stall progress.

Secondly, many national AI strategies are super high-level and vague, sometimes more slogan than substance. They often lack the concrete detail needed to guide meaningful policy.

MD: What do you think is driving these challenges?

ET: A lot of it comes down to familiarity and understanding of AI—not a lack of will. At the roundtables, many officials expressed feeling a bit lost. Some said they’re not familiar with how this technology works at a very basic level, while others want a better handle on the full spectrum of risks and opportunities that AI brings.

They’re also trying to absorb the latest research on technical safety and AI governance to understand the key lessons learned in other parts of the world and figure out what makes sense to incorporate into their own national contexts.

What’s next?

MD: What will build the momentum needed to move safe governance in Southeast Asia forward?

If Southeast Asian countries want to drive meaningful AI policies…they’ll need to come up with a harmonized approach. Tough, but not impossible. —Edward Tsoi

ET: First, there needs to be more investment in building know-how among the people making the laws. No matter whether the civil servants work in digital affairs or science and technology, they need a solid understanding of how this technology works, its risks, and what governance options exist globally, which AI Safety Asia is supporting through our AI governance training program.

Secondly, the 2026 AI Impact Summit, which will be hosted by India, is a big opportunity. It’s a chance to bring equitable AI, and the priorities of Southeast Asia (and other countries in the Global South) to the center of the global conversation. Those contributions can’t be surface level.

Finally, collective and harmonized influence matter. Individual countries will have a hard time gaining traction alone. If Southeast Asian countries want to drive meaningful AI policies that genuinely serve their people, especially when navigating the priorities of powerful multi-trillion-dollar tech companies, they’ll need to come up with a harmonized approach. Tough, but not impossible.

Follow AI Safety Asia’s work via their LinkedIn page and website. The organization will be publishing its first research report with the Brookings Institution on AI Governance in Southeast Asia in the coming month. They also run the Southeast Asia AI Observatory that tracks policies and legislation coming out of the region.