Forskningsprojekter

CAISA brings together researchers from technical, social science, and humanities disciplines in interdisciplinary AI research projects. These projects explore both the development and real-world application of artificial intelligence, as well as the technology’s societal, organizational, and human impacts. Through cross-disciplinary collaboration, CAISA advances knowledge on responsible AI, emerging technologies, and the opportunities and challenges that artificial intelligence creates for society.

This page provides an overview of CAISA’s current research projects. The page is continuously being developed, and not all projects have been published yet. New research projects are added on an ongoing basis, reflecting CAISA’s expanding portfolio of interdisciplinary research on artificial intelligence and its societal impact.

Current Research Projects

Faglighed under AI forandring?

The Danish public sector has ambitious plans to integrate artificial intelligence (AI) into public administration in order to improve efficiency and help ensure the long-term sustainability of the welfare state. AI systems are currently being developed and implemented across the public sector and are gradually becoming an integrated part of employees’ daily work. This raises a number of fundamental questions of interest to employees, citizens, researchers, and labor unions: How does the use of AI in everyday work challenge, support, or reshape professional expertise? What role does professional expertise play in a data-driven public sector, and how do employees experience these changes in their working lives?

This project establishes a survey panel in collaboration with five Danish labor unions with the aim of generating systematic, empirical knowledge about how the use of different types of AI tools affects professional expertise among employees in Danish public sector organizations.

The project addresses a current gap in the research literature by examining how AI is integrated into employees’ daily practices and how this interaction shapes task performance, professional judgment, conceptions of quality, perceived competence, and professional identity across different professions and organizational contexts. In doing so, it contributes comparative and longitudinal insights into the evolving relationship between AI and professional work.

Through the survey panel, we aim to build a research and dissemination infrastructure that can improve understanding of how working life changes over time across professional groups, while creating opportunities for dialogue and insight into how technology is transforming work.

CPH Tech Policy Committee

CPH Tech Policy Committee samler forskere og fagfolk fra den offentlige sektor, virksomheder og civilsamfundet for at diskutere udfordringer inden for teknologi- og digitaliseringspolitik med afsæt i den nyeste forskning. Udvalget arbejder for at bringe danske erfaringer i dialog med internationale praksisser og skabe nye, varige globale partnerskaber.

CPH Tech Policy Youth Committee

CPH Tech Policy Youth Committee er et studenterdrevet udvalg, der samler engagerede studerende for at debattere og forme fremtidens teknologikpolitik. Udvalget arbejder blandt andet med digitalisering, velfærd, psykisk trivsel, cybersikkerhed, geopolitik, desinformation, ulighed og den grønne omstilling.

Som medlem bliver man en del af et aktivt netværk, deltager i møder, events og samarbejder med centrale aktører fra civilsamfundet, erhvervslivet, og den offentlige sektor.

CPH Tech Policy Youth Committee arbejder for at styrke unges stemme i debatten om digitalisering og teknologi og dermed bidrage til en mere retfærdig og inkluderende digital fremtid.

Strategisk indsats for kunstig intelligens

CAISA er en del af regeringens Strategiske indsats for kunstig intelligens og et af fire nye initiativer, der skal være med til at bane vejen for ansvarlig kunstig intelligens. De andre initiativer er:

Heading 1

Heading 2

Heading 3

Heading 4

Heading 5

Heading 6

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.

Block quote

Ordered list

Item 1
Item 2
Item 3

Unordered list

Item A
Item B
Item C

Text link

Bold text

Emphasis

^Superscript

_Subscript

Den Digitale Taskforce for kunstig intelligens, som er etableret i samarbejde med KL og Danske Regioner
Etablering af en platform, som sætter skub på udviklingen af sikre og transparente danske sprogmodeller
Tilgængeliggørelse af danske tekstdata open source

Digital sovereignty is multidimensional and requires priority

In a time of geopolitical instability and rapid AI development, control over digital infrastructure and data has become critical. While there is broad agreement on the need for action at the national, Nordic, and EU levels, a shared language around digital sovereignty is still lacking. This lack of alignment leads either to inaction or to narrow technical solutions without strategic direction. The core argument of the brief is that digital sovereignty is a multidimensional concept, involving both principled positions and pragmatic choices. Reducing it to technical solutions risks overlooking the values and trade-offs that determine who controls and benefits from these systems. Conversely, focusing solely on values leads to abstract principles without practical implementation or real impact. Digital sovereignty is rarely about choosing between full self-sufficiency and total dependence. Rather, it is about balancing often competing demands for openness, security, competitiveness, growth, values, and rights in a world where capabilities are unevenly distributed. This means that it is necessary to define who or what is to be protected or promoted, within the domains of security, economic growth, or citizens’ rights, and to recognize that choices in one domain may strengthen or undermine another. The brief focuses on AI as the area where digital sovereignty is most acutely at stake, but the concepts apply more broadly to digital infrastructure and data. It provides decision-makers with tools to navigate these dilemmas by presenting:

- A conceptual framework for identifying who or what should be digitally sovereign.

- An overview of how digital sovereignty is prioritized around the world.

- An understanding that sovereignty can be exercised through three control regimes: ownership, expertise, or regulation – but that none of these are sufficient on their own.

The central implication of the brief is that digital sovereignty requires an integrated strategy that combines ownership, expertise, and regulation, while managing the interdependencies and trade-offs between security, economic growth, and citizens’ rights through clear objectives. Without this holistic approach, there is a risk of ineffective regulation, unusable infrastructure, or a lack of capacity to develop, maintain, and apply solutions in practice, potentially undermining security, growth, or rights.