Usual cities dominate AI readiness, but more are rising
Hiroshi Watanabe via Getty Images
By
Chris Teale
Traditional tech hubs like Silicon Valley, New York City and other major metro areas are still leading in AI, according to the Brookings Institution. But more are showing promise and could catch up.
Competition is heating up among cities and states as they vie for leadership on artificial intelligence, through investing in their workforce, infrastructure and business development, among other things.
It’s created nationwide hype and excitement. But a new study from the Brookings Institution has found that the usual U.S. tech leaders are poised to also be leaders on AI adoption, although researchers found there are numerous other cities emerging as AI centers who are making focused investments.
The cities of San Francisco and San Jose in California’s Silicon Valley are the undisputed “AI Superstars,” Brookings found, with major metro areas like New York City, Washington, D.C., Chicago and Austin, Texas, among those who are not far behind as what they called “Star AI Hubs.” But many more cities can be thought of as “Emerging AI Centers” or “Focused AI Movers,” the research found, as they make targeted investments in the technology and ramp up hiring in the space.
“It remains a highly concentrated early-stage industry dominated by the Bay Area,” Mark Muro, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and a co-author of the report, said in an interview. “But I think it's fair to say that there's quite legitimate diffusion of the elements of success. Places are thinking about talent development specifically attuned to this technology. There's clearly a lot of university related innovation work and, in some places, significant adoption by companies.”
When it comes to the secondary tier of cities looking to make an impact on AI, Muro pointed to the Sun Belt in the south of the United States as an area that is showing surprising strength. A lot of that, he said, is down to the area’s colleges and universities investing in AI-related degrees, classes and courses, as well as other training opportunities for students.
It means a lot of “newer metros that maybe aren't well known for a tech presence, but have been building that up, and now are all over this,” Muro said.
“Having a strong investment in AI as a technology means funding flowing to universities, funding flowing to tech hubs and other kinds of research centers across the country,” Muro explained. “If you look at our story of diffusion, it often surrounds university activity, both for training professionals, but doing research that is sometimes tuned to regional verticals and industries.”
And while there are many cities that will play a role in building AI readiness in the U.S., Muro said it is unlikely that many will ascend to the upper echelons of being an “AI Superstar.” In part, that is because some metro areas will naturally attract more AI-related jobs, and more research money for their higher education institutions. Some may also be constrained by a lack of infrastructure and the compute power needed for AI.
It is not realistic to think that every city can be a superstar, Muro said, “but we should act as if many can.”
“We believe that there is a lot of scope for opportunity, maybe more so than people understand,” he said. “We come up with, I would say, 40 or 50 places that are pretty formidable. We give up too quickly in the United States, because we're so bedazzled by the Bay Area phenomena, or the Boston phenomena, or Seattle, and we think that's enough.”
Supportive policy is needed at both the state and federal level, Muro said, to help metro areas take full advantage of AI. Federally, even a “basic platform” could suffice, he said, rather than the 10-year moratorium on state regulation of AI that died during the recent budget reconciliation process.
Identifying their priorities for the technology, working out which industries will be disrupted first and being deliberate about training their workforce properly are ways states can prepare, and they should support those aims through policy, Muro said. Taking inventory of what they already have is critical too, he added, while approaching innovation on a regional basis might be helpful too as it allows jurisdictions to pool their resources, share best practices and pull in the same direction.
States and cities must also think carefully about how their existing industries will be disrupted by AI, the report warned. Previous research suggests that the generative AI revolution will be felt in the country’s largest metro areas, and adapting will be another measure of a place’s competitiveness.
“The more success there is, the greater the adoption, the more disruption there will be, too,” said Shriya Methkupally, a senior research assistant at Brookings and a co-author of the report. “That will become a point of competitiveness for other places as well. Does this place know how to ensure this is a positive growth experience for all kinds of communities?”