Anna-Kaisa Ikonen, Minister of Local and Regional Government of Finland: “Finland’s approach to new technologies is characterized by a commitment to innovation, equality, and public welfare.”
This interview is a part of the GTF Technologies for Governments Lab’s Government AI Handbook.
Who is Anna-Kaisa Ikonen?
Anna-Kaisa Ikonen is the Minsiter of Local and Regional Government of Finland, former Mayor of Tampere.
-
Ikonen has extensive experience of local and regional policy. She has served twice as the Mayor of Tampere, one of Finland’s largest cities. She previously served as Deputy Mayor of Tampere, with responsibility for healthcare and social welfare, and chaired the Tampere City Council. Ikonen also chaired the board of directors of the pensions institution Keva and served as a deputy chair of the Association of Finnish Municipalities and a deputy chair of the Wellbeing Services County of the Pirkanmaa well-being services county. As a national policy-maker, Ikonen is in her second term as a member of parliament. Prior to this, she served as State Secretary in the Ministry of Finance in the Katainen and Sipilä Governments.
In academia, Ikonen has served as a professor of practice and has produced research and numerous publications on the management of cities and municipalities, on the health and social services reform, and on the political leadership of prime ministers.
Before entering politics, Ikonen worked in non-governmental organisations, as a project manager in a consultancy firm and as a development manager in regional state administration.
— How would you summarize the difference in pace and timing between private sector, national, and local governments when it comes to adopting new technology?
Anna-Kaisa Ikonen: The adoption of new technology across different sectors can indeed vary significantly. In the private sector, there’s often a rapid adoption rate, which is understandable: it is driven by competitive pressures and the pursuit of innovation for market advantage. Companies are generally more agile and can pivot quickly to integrate new technologies as they emerge — by the way, this is why Finnish companies are often so successful on the global market. On the other hand, national governments tend to be more cautious, because of their vast responsibilities, but also because of big organizations and different organizational cultures – and the fact that national governments serve and want to serve all the citizens. The scale of implementation across national platforms requires thorough testing, regulatory considerations, digital inclusion, and often extensive stakeholder consultations. Hence, the pace is steadier, ensuring that the technology aligns with public policies, laws and national interests. And when we are talking about European countries, the additional regulatory layer which is the EU, complexifies it even more.
“The key is finding a balance – leveraging the agility and innovation of the private sector, the strategic overview of national governments, and the community-focused approach of local governments.”
Local governments, meanwhile, face a unique set of challenges and opportunities when it comes to technology adoption. They often have more direct interaction with citizens, which can be a catalyst for faster implementation of certain technologies – or the development of new solutions. However, local governments also frequently contend with budget constraints and a lack of specialized expertise, which can slow down the process. There’s also a diversity factor – different localities have varying needs and capabilities, which means that a one-size-fits-all approach to technology adoption rarely works at the local government level. On government level we try to provide municipalities with their citizens and businesses with the tools and resources to harness the potential of digitalization. Many of our municipalities experiment and innovate with new technologies and platforms, such as robot cars, drones, and smart grids.
Fortunately, in Finland especially many cities seem to have acquired both important expertise in adopting new solutions, and a technology-oriented culture that allows such adoption on the exact scale that answers local needs.
The key is finding a balance – leveraging the agility and innovation of the private sector, the strategic overview of national governments, and the community-focused approach of local governments. In Finland, we’re working towards this balance by encouraging cross-sector collaboration and knowledge sharing, and cities such as Tampere are excellent platforms of such collaboration.
— Does creating a fixed adoption timeline in a volatile technology make sense for a government?
Anna-Kaisa Ikonen: Creating a fixed timeline for adopting technologies, especially ones as volatile and rapidly evolving as AI, can be quite challenging for governments, but also for companies. On one hand, governments must have a structured approach, risk analysis and clear objectives when integrating new technologies into public services. This helps in strategic planning, budget allocation, and managing public expectations. On the other hand, however, the fluid nature of technological advancement means that rigid timelines can sometimes be more of a hindrance than a help.
For instance, if we lock into a specific technology or a version of a technology too early, we risk being outdated before implementation is complete. Governments need to maintain a degree of flexibility to adapt to new developments and innovations. This doesn’t mean we should not have timelines or goals, but rather that these should be adaptable and regularly reviewed.
In the context of AI, for example, the landscape is changing so rapidly that a fixed timeline might overlook significant advancements or emerging ethical considerations. Hence, while we do set goals and timelines, we should also build in periodic review points to reassess and adjust our strategies as necessary. This approach would ensure that we are not just keeping up with technology, but also responsibly integrating it in a way that best serves our citizens.
“evaluations should be comprehensive and inclusive. This means involving not just technology experts, but also stakeholders from various sectors, including the end-users – the public.”
— How do you recommend evaluating policy decisions regarding new technology such as AI? What would be the timing and the format for such evaluation?
Anna-Kaisa Ikonen: Evaluating policy decisions around new technologies like AI is a multifaceted process. Firstly, it’s important that the evaluation is continuous, not just a one-time exercise. Technology evolves, and so should our policies.
An effective evaluation process should include diverse criteria: the technology’s impact on efficiency and service delivery, its ethical implications, user satisfaction, and its integration with existing systems and processes. We should also look at long-term sustainability – whether a technology can adapt to future needs and challenges.
In terms of format, evaluations should be comprehensive and inclusive. This means involving not just technology experts, but also stakeholders from various sectors, including the end-users – the public. For instance, with AI, we should consider factors ranging from technical performance to public perception and trust in the technology. All and all, we understand the responsibility that we have towards our citizens, so as I said before, we must balance caution and bravery.
—How would you define the Finland’s particularity in working with new technologies?
Anna-Kaisa Ikonen: Finland’s approach to new technologies is characterized by a deep-seated commitment to innovation, equality, and public welfare. Our goal is not just to be at the forefront of technology but to use technology as a means to enhance the quality of life and wellbeing for all our citizens. Digital transformation, as a whole, also requires agility and a deep understanding of the needs of our citizens. One of the examples of our current digitalization initiatives is the project that aims to simplify and streamline the long and often paper-filled process of dealing with the legal, financial, and administrative matters that arise after the death of a loved one. The project will create a digital platform, which allows the representatives of the estate to access and manage all the relevant information and services of the relevant authorities in one place in digital format. The project uses a life event-based approach, which means that the service is tailored to the specific situation and needs of the user.
We have a strong culture of trust in government and public institutions, which is crucial when introducing new technologies that often require public buy-in. Compared to other European countries, we might be smaller in size, but this can be an advantage – it allows for more agility and closer collaboration between different sectors and layers of government, and between the government and the citizens.