A normatively grounded hybrid model of AI governance: insights from the teaching of Leo XIV

Counts differ because each database indexes a different set of publications. We treat OpenAlex as the canonical count; Google Scholar is not shown (no API, and crawling it violates its ToS).

Debates on artificial intelligence (AI) governance focus on legal regulation, risk management, institutional accountability, and the division of responsibilities between the state, market, and other social actors. However, the anthropological and social assumptions underlying governance models remain underexplored, particularly in relation to the risk of erasing human dignity amid the growing technocratisation and algorithmisation of social life. The study analyses Leo XIV’s reflections on AI governance. This article adopts a conceptual and comparative approach. It is based on a close reading of the encyclical Magnifica Humanitas and a systematic comparison of the framework for AI governance articulated in the document with dominant AI governance models identified in the literature. This study reconstructs an implicit hybrid model of AI governance grounded in eight principles: (1) human dignity, (2) the common good, (3) the universal destination of goods, (4) social justice, (5) solidarity, (6) subsidiarity, (7) shared responsibility, and (8) transparency/accountability. The Tower of Babel – Nehemiah heuristic demonstrates that contemporary AI governance can be understood as a fundamental tension between two logics: one oriented toward centralisation, control, and exclusion, and another toward participation, distributed responsibility, and the protection of human dignity. As an additional contribution, the study operationalises the proposed model through the example of AI-assisted allocation of social benefits, translating its normative principles into concrete governance requirements. Leo XIV’s reflections not only align with a hybrid governance model but provide a normative corrective to both state-led and market-led models by prioritising relational human dignity and shared responsibility over centralised control. The study develops a Leo XIV-informed, normatively grounded hybrid model of AI governance that extends beyond the exercise of agency over technology to fostering a more just and inclusive social order in which technology enables human flourishing.