AI Success Is More Than GPUs: How Low-Resource Communities Can Lead Through Deployment
A recent Global Council article notes that many countries are still grappling with foundational challenges: limited digital infrastructure, constrained STEM education access, and policy frameworks lagging behind the technologies they’re meant to govern. These are real and pressing concerns—but they do not preclude meaningful leadership in AI.
But all hope is not lost. While training state-of-the-art models requires immense compute power and capital, the deployment of AI—turning models into usable systems—is an equally critical frontier. And in this area, low-resource communities may be uniquely positioned to innovate. In short–tackle higher-level challenges to AI progress.
The history of the car offers a useful analogy. When cars were first introduced, their success didn’t hinge on perfect engines. It came from societal adaptation. We paved our trails into roads to accommodate wheeled vehicles. We created traffic laws, driver’s licenses, and insurance to manage the risks. Crucially, we didn’t demand cars be perfectly safe—we changed the environment to make cars usable, even with known dangers.
AI systems—whether agents, robots, or software—will likewise remain imperfect. The opportunity lies in shaping environments that can accommodate these limitations. That’s less a technical challenge and more a political and institutional one: adjusting workflows, liability frameworks, and governance models to support automation at scale.
Low-resource communities may have more flexibility and urgency to make these adjustments. Just as Kenya leapfrogged traditional banking systems with M-Pesa—using mobile infrastructure to deliver widespread financial access—there is now potential to leapfrog in AI deployment. When the alternative is no system at all, adopting “good enough” AI can bring transformative change.
Rather than competing in the capital-intensive race to build foundation models, low-resource nations can focus on enabling environments for AI systems: adapting regulation, testing deployment frameworks, and piloting automation in high-impact sectors like health, agriculture, and education.
Progress in AI isn’t only measured in FLOPs and fine-tuning. It’s also measured in how seamlessly these tools integrate into real lives. The ability to reimagine institutions, not just algorithms, may prove to be the more powerful lever—and one that’s well within reach.
---
Concrete Steps Toward AI-Readiness in Low-Resource Settings
Low-resource communities don’t need to wait for GPU clusters to participate in the AI era. They can act now by focusing on the legal, institutional, and cultural foundations that enable effective deployment. Three particularly impactful interventions include:
1. Safe-Harbor Laws Innovators need clarity, not carte blanche. Clear safe-harbor laws—especially in priority sectors like healthcare, agriculture, and logistics—can define the legal boundaries within which AI systems can operate. Without such frameworks, the fear of litigation for minor or inevitable errors can paralyze progress. Safe harbors aren’t about reducing accountability—they’re about enabling experimentation with predictable consequences, so that AI solutions can be tested, improved, and adopted at scale.
2. Public Procurement for AI Pilots Governments and NGOs can serve as early customers for locally relevant AI solutions. By commissioning pilots—say, an AI triage assistant for rural clinics or a crop monitoring tool for smallholder farmers—they help create an ecosystem of trust, local data, and real-world feedback. This not only de-risks innovation but also addresses public needs directly, without waiting for commercial markets to mature.
3. Public Discourse on the Cost of Inaction Too often, AI debates focus solely on the risks of deployment, without acknowledging the risks of delay. The alternative to AI adoption is not a perfect, equitable human-run system—it’s persistent scarcity, overburdened workers, and systemic stagnation. Historically, major social progress followed increases in automation and productivity rather than vice versa. Relieving human labor through technology has repeatedly opened the door to inclusion, education, and political reform. Low-resource communities should engage in public dialogue that recognizes this: delaying automation may entrench inequality more than deploying imperfect AI ever could.
By moving swiftly on regulation, procurement, and public narrative, low-resource communities can turn constraints into strategic advantages. The future of AI will be shaped not only by who builds the models, but by who boldly reimagines how to use them.