arXiv:2605.22995v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic AI systems are increasingly proposed for social-good domains, often invoking the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a vocabulary of global benefit. Yet claims of social good do not establish accountability to the communities a system claims to serve. We present a structured survey of 112 papers on agentic AI for social good published between 2015 and 2026. We find a moral-geographic asymmetry: papers are least likely to specify geographic context in precisely the domains where local political, legal, and cultural con
The proliferation of agentic AI systems for social good, coupled with a lack of accountability frameworks, necessitates immediate scrutiny as these systems are deployed globally.
This research highlights a critical ethical and governance gap in agentic AI development, potentially undermining their intended benefits and creating new forms of algorithmic colonialism.
The focus shifts from merely developing agentic AI for social good to establishing robust mechanisms for local accountability, governance, and ethical alignment with diverse communities.
- · Ethical AI governance frameworks
- · Local communities with strong advocacy
- · Developers prioritizing responsible AI
- · Human rights organizations
- · Developers ignoring local context
- · Centralized AI initiatives
- · 'Social good' washing efforts
Increased pressure on AI developers and deployers to integrate local ethical and political considerations into their 'social good' projects.
Development of new regulatory and policy frameworks requiring explicit geographic and cultural accountability for AI systems.
A potential slowing of adoption for certain agentic AI applications until these ethical frameworks are sufficiently established and trusted by local stakeholders.
This signal links to a primary source. Continuum Brief monitors and indexes it as part of the live intelligence stream — we do not republish source content.
Read at arXiv cs.AI