Countries that adopt AI fast will win economically, says George Osborne

Governments around the world talk up ambitious plans to bring AI into the public sector, but in practice very few countries have actually deployed the technology. George Osborne, head of OpenAI's division for working with countries, believes the states that move faster than their rivals will gain a huge advantage. That advantage will show up in economic growth, in the quality of services delivered to citizens, and in how efficiently every government body operates.

Whoever adopts AI first wins the global competition

George Osborne is a former UK Chancellor of the Exchequer and a seasoned politician with deep experience in economic policy. He now leads OpenAI's work with national governments around the world. He is firmly convinced that bringing AI into the public sector is not just another digital transformation. Instead, he sees it as a genuine competitive battle between countries, one that will shape the world order and economic dominance for decades to come. States that move faster than others will gain both economically and through substantial improvements in public services and citizens' living standards.

Osborne repeatedly stresses that many governments already fully recognize how critical AI adoption is, and they discuss it openly at the highest political levels and in parliaments. In practice, however, adoption has dragged on and run into many serious obstacles and bureaucratic barriers. Some countries are only drafting long-term plans. Others are already running pilots in individual agencies, but there are still no tangible, visible results. The difference in how fast these plans get executed will be the deciding factor for the world's economic and political future.

Economic potential and social benefits

Countries that bring AI into the public sector faster than others could gain a whole range of economic and social advantages:

• Significantly faster economic growth, driven by higher productivity across all government institutions and authorities
• Better public services and drastically fewer bureaucratic delays for citizens and small businesses
• Major foreign investment flowing into the national tech sector and innovative startups
• Tens of thousands of new high-paying jobs in IT and adjacent high-tech fields
• Greater competitiveness in global markets and a stronger position and influence on the global political and economic stage

This matters especially as global economic competition between major powers and regional leaders intensifies. The pace of adopting new innovations and integrating AI into the public sector will determine which countries lead the next decade. For every state, then, this is not a routine technology task but a critical question of national security and long-term economic sovereignty.

Real obstacles to adoption

The reality, however, is far more complicated and messy than the ambitious plans suggest at first glance. Government bureaucracies have historically been extremely conservative, budgets for new technology are tightly limited, and existing legislation consistently lags behind what the technology can do. Institutional inertia and people's deep attachment to old, proven ways of working are the main brake on AI adoption in the civil service.

To integrate AI successfully, governments need more than large capital investments in hardware and specialized software. They also need comprehensive retraining of public-sector staff, a complete overhaul of existing business processes, and, above all, a radical shift in organizational culture across every government institution. A transformation on this scale requires political will at the very top of the state and long-term strategic planning.

What this means

Osborne is essentially describing a race between countries: whoever integrates AI into public administration faster and more effectively will win the economic and political competition of the coming decades. Russia, the US, China, Europe, and other global leaders all, without exception, need not just to speed up but to switch into an all-out sprint. Standing still today means inevitably falling behind more dynamic competitors, both economically and politically.