Highlights

Collaboration and networks

At CAISA, we collaborate with the public sector, industry, and civil society on a wide range of current projects that bridge the gap between research and real-world practice. We also establish networks that bring together researchers and stakeholders to exchange knowledge, share experiences, and advance the responsible development and application of artificial intelligence.
Are you interested in entering a strategic or professional partnership? Or would you like to learn more about our existing collaborations and networks? You are always welcome to contact us.

Please use the contact form via the button below, and we will get back to you as soon as possible.
Contact us for collaboration

Current collaborations

CAISA x Statistics Denmark
CAISA x Statistics Denmark

CAISA has received a grant of DKK 45 million from the research reserve for a collaboration with Statistics Denmark. The partnership aims to strengthen both research in responsible artificial intelligence and the infrastructure that enables such research through two key initiatives:

  • The first initiative will modernize Statistics Denmark’s infrastructure for AI research, allowing researchers to work securely with complex data sources and train large AI models on Danish register data.
  • The second initiative will generate new knowledge on the responsible use of AI algorithms, ensuring they meet requirements for fairness, transparency, and trust - while maintaining their functionality over time.
CPH Tech Policy Committee
CPH Tech Policy Committee

The CPH Tech Policy Committee brings together researchers and professionals from the public sector, industry, and civil society to address key challenges in technology and digital policy, grounded in the latest research.

The committee works to connect Danish experiences with international best practices and to foster new, long-term global partnerships.

Tech Policy Youth Committee
Tech Policy Youth Committee

The Tech Policy Youth Committee (TPYC) is a student-led initiative that brings together engaged students to discuss and influence the future of technology policy. The committee explores critical topics including digitalization, welfare, mental well-being, cybersecurity, geopolitics, disinformation, inequality, and the green transition.

As a member, you become part of an active network, participate in meetings and events, and collaborate with key stakeholders from civil society, industry, and the public sector. the tech Policy Youth Committee aims to amplify young people's voices in debates on digitalization and technology, contributing to a more inclusive and equitable digital future.

Tech Policy Youth Committee's logo
Strategic initiative for artificial intelligence (AI)
Strategic initiative for artificial intelligence (AI)

CAISA is part of the Danish government’s strategic initiative for artificial intelligence (AI) and one of four new initiatives aimed at advancing responsible AI. The other initiatives include:

  • The Digital Taskforce for Artificial Intelligence, established in collaboration with KL and Danish Regions
  • The development of a platform to accelerate secure and transparent Danish language models
  • The provision of Danish text data as open-source resources
CPH Tech Policy Committee

The CPH Tech Policy Committee brings together researchers and professionals from the public sector, businesses and civil society to discuss challenges in technology and digitalisation policy based on the latest research. The Committee works to bring Danish experience into dialogue with international practices and create new, lasting global partnerships.

CPH Tech Policy Youth Committee

The CPH Tech Policy Youth Committee is a student-run committee that brings together engaged students to debate and shape the technology policy of the future. The Committee works on issues such as digitalisation, welfare, psychological well-being, cyber security, geopolitics, disinformation, inequality and the green transition.

As a member, you become part of an active network, participate in meetings, events and cooperate with key actors from civil society, business, and the public sector.

CPH Tech Policy Youth Committee works to strengthen the voice of young people in the debate on digitalization and technology, thus contributing to a fairer and more inclusive digital future.

Strategic efforts for artificial intelligence

CAISA is part of the Government's Strategic Action for Artificial Intelligence and one of four new initiatives to help pave the way for responsible artificial intelligence. The other initiatives are:

Heading 1

Heading 2

Heading 3

Heading 4

Heading 5
Heading 6

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consisttetur adipiscing elite, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad mínimo 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 fuat nulla pariatur.

Block quote

Ordered list

  1. Item 1
  2. Item 2
  3. Item 3

Unordered list

  • Item A
  • Item B
  • Item C

Text link

Bold text

Emphasis

Superscript

Subscription

  • The Digital Task Force for Artificial Intelligence, established in collaboration with KL and Danish Regions
  • Establishing a platform that promotes the development of safe and transparent Danish language models
  • Making Danish text data available open source
Eventos
Read more
newness
Read more
Research
Transparency of AI-generated content when AI is the norm

Through six interventions from leading European scholars in their field, this research brief examines the challenges of governing AI-generated content in an information environment where such content is rapidly becoming the norm. Drawing on interdisciplinary perspectives, the contributions assess the effectiveness and limitations of emerging AI transparency governance, particularly labelling requirements under the EU AI Act and the forthcoming Code of Practice on marking and labelling of AI-generated content. While transparency labels are normatively important for informing users about content provenance, research suggests that labelling alone is unlikely to mitigate manipulation, restore trust, or empower citizens. The research brief therefore argues for a broader transparency ecosystem that combines labelling with governance infrastructure, organisational accountability, and ongoing research to develop adaptive, evidence-based approaches to AI transparency.

Read more
Eventos
Read more
newness
AI-seminar på Marienborg

Kunsting intelligens er rykket helt ind i kernen af dansk politik. Under regeringsforhandlingerne på Marienborg i april 2026 blev forhandlingerne midlertidigt sat på pause, så toppolitikere kunne deltage i et seminar om AI og dets betydning for samfundet.

‍

Her bidrog CAISA's centerleder Rebecca Adler-Nissen sammen med professor Abraham Newman (Georgetown Univeristy) med forskningsbaserede perspektiver på AI's rolle i geopolitik, økonomi og demokrati. Deres oplæg adresserede blandt andet, hvordan kunstig intelligens påvirker sikkerhed, arbejdsmarked, uddannelse og Europas strategiske position.

‍

Ifølge TV2 var der stor interesse blandt politikkerne, som engagerede sig i spørgsmål om både teknologisk udvikling og samfundsmæssige konsekvenser. Rebecca Adler-Nissen fremhævede selv den høje grad af engagement og efterspørgsel på viden om AI's betydning på tværs af politikområder.

‍

CAISA's deltagelse understreger centerets rolle i at bringe forskningsbaseret viden ind i politiske beslutningsprocesser og bidrage til en ansvarlig udvikling af AI i samfundet.

Read more
Research
Read more
Eventos
Read more
newness
Read more
Research
Digital Suverænitet: Fra begreb til strategisk ramme

This brief is currently only available in Danish.

Summary (Translated)

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.

Read more