What Is the National Academies' Role in AI Progress and Safety Discussions?

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine serves as an independent, objective adviser on AI progress and safety — not as a regulator or technology developer. Its role is to convene experts, produce evidence-based reports, and inform policymakers and the public so that AI can advance without stifling technological progress. This page explains what that role looks like in practice and how to use the Academies' AI-related output.

What the Academies actually do on AI

The Academies describe themselves as "at the forefront of efforts to better understand what these advances in AI mean for researchers and society at large." Three functions follow from that positioning:

• Convening: bringing together researchers, industry, and government to frame shared questions about AI capabilities and risks.
• Advising: issuing independent, objective advice intended to shape sound policy and inform public opinion.
• Communicating: publishing feature stories, reports, and statements that translate technical developments for non-specialist audiences.

The stated goal is to support discussions of AI progress and safety — specifically, how AI "can be pursued safely without stifling technological progress." That framing matters: the Academies treat safety and progress as a combined problem rather than a trade-off to be resolved in one direction.

How AI work fits the broader mission

The Academies' mission is to drive progress for society by providing independent, objective advice across science, engineering, and medicine. AI sits at the intersection of all three:

Because AI touches each domain, the Academies' AI commentary tends to appear alongside work in computing, biomedicine, and national research priorities rather than in an isolated AI program.

Where AI recommendations show up in practice

One documented example of how Academies advice propagates: NASA announced it would begin preliminary design and technology development for the PRIMA far-infrared telescope — the first of a new class of telescopes recommended by a 2020 National Academies decadal survey that identifies scientific priorities for astronomy and astrophysics. The decadal survey process is the same mechanism through which the Academies set and communicate long-range research priorities, including in computing and AI-adjacent fields.

For AI specifically, the visible output includes feature stories and statements rather than a single standing committee page. The Academies' AI feature story is dated Sep 24, 2026, and addresses concerns about safe pursuit of AI advances.

Who this is useful for

• Policymakers and staff looking for independent framing of AI safety questions before drafting or evaluating legislation.
• Researchers who want to understand how AI advances are being interpreted for policy audiences.
• Journalists and public commentators needing an authoritative, non-commercial source on AI progress and risk.
• Institutions seeking a model for expert convening on contested technology questions.

If you need binding rules, enforcement, or technical standards, this is not the right source — the Academies advise; they do not regulate. If you need a defensible, consensus-oriented synthesis of what is known and what questions remain, it is.

How to engage with the material

1. Start with the AI feature story on the Academies site to see how they frame progress and safety together.
2. Check the news and announcement stream for new editions of guidance — for example, the Academies released a new edition of a widely used guide to responsible research (Sep 17, 2026), and Neil Shubin presented an updated On Being a Scientist (Sep 24, 2026). Both are relevant to how research communities handle emerging technologies.
3. Look for decadal surveys and consensus studies in the fields AI touches; these are where recommendations that later appear in agency plans originate.
4. Read for scope and conditions, not just conclusions — Academies reports typically state what the evidence supports and where uncertainty remains.

Scale of the effort

In 2025, over 20,000 volunteers, Academy members, and staff contributed to the mission of helping policymakers and the public understand and find solutions to complex problems. Separately, more than 7,300 local, state, and federal transportation leaders met with business leaders and researchers through Academies-linked convenings — an indication of how the institution operates as a meeting ground rather than a single-voice authority.

Common misreadings

• "The Academies set AI policy." They provide advice; policymakers decide.
• "Their AI work is a single report." It is an ongoing stream of stories, statements, and studies across science, engineering, and medicine.
• "Safety and progress are opposed." The Academies' stated aim is to pursue safety without stifling progress — a both-and framing.

Bottom line

The National Academies' role in AI is to be an independent, objective convener and adviser: framing what AI advances mean for researchers and society, and giving policymakers and the public a shared evidence base for deciding how to move forward safely. Use their AI feature stories, statements, and consensus studies when you need credible synthesis; look elsewhere for enforceable rules.