5 Questions with CTG UAlbany Director J. Ramon Gil-Garcia
ALBANY, N.Y. (Oct. 1, 2025) — Center for Technology in Government (CTG) Director J. Ramon Gil-Garcia wears many hats at the University at Albany.
Gil-Garcia oversees CTG UAlbany — a globally recognized leader in digital government research known for pioneering work in information integration, smart cities, open government and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and data analytics. He also serves as professor of Public Administration and Policy at UAlbany’s Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy, along with affiliated roles as at the National Center for Digital Government at UMass Amherst, UAlbany’s College of Emergency Preparedness, Homeland Security and Cybersecurity, and at Universidad de las Américas Puebla in Mexico.
His research spans digital government, smart cities, data analytics, inter-organizational collaboration and the digital divide. In recent years, Gil-Garcia has increasingly focused on the use of artificial intelligence in the public sector, examining how AI can be harnessed to improve public services and government operations while also identifying the risks it poses to transparency, equity, privacy, and security.
Gil-Garcia was recently elected to the National Academy of Public Administration 2025 Class of Academy Fellows, one of the highest honors accorded to scholars for their contributions in the fields of public administration and policy.
A prolific author and internationally recognized scholar, Gil-Garcia has been named among Apolitical’s “World’s 100 Most Influential People in Digital Government.” His work continues to guide policymakers and public institutions navigating the challenges of technology-driven change.
What are the most serious dangers about AI in government, and how might they impact trust in public institutions?
Artificial intelligence promises multiple benefits for government and society, but it also poses important risks. In an article written with a couple of colleagues, we have called this the dark side of intelligent algorithms and cognitive machines. Some of the most important risks from our point of view are the lack of understanding of AI outcomes, biases, errors and the intentional manipulation of algorithms.
Our research highlights that the dark side is predominantly driven by political, legal and institutional aspects, but it is also influenced by data and technology. Among the data and technology risks, deep fakes and the difficulty of explaining AI outcomes are key. Ethical, moral and legal issues surrounding AI are also critical, as they can lead to human rights violations and social injustices. Overall, if not fully addressed, the risks of AI in the public sector can erode trust in government, create confusion, and exacerbate existing social inequalities.
Are there examples that stand out as models for successful AI integration in the public sector?
Yes, there are responsible ways to implement AI in the public sector. Like previous technologies, AI is not a problem itself. However, in order to integrate AI and obtain most of its benefits for all members of society, governments need to look beyond the technology tools and make necessary changes in the business processes, organizational structures, and policies surrounding specific uses of certain AI tools and techniques. For example, we are currently working with the city of Schenectady in a project using computer vision to support neighborhood revitalization.
In addition to creating the necessary sensors and algorithms, we are identifying several specific use cases and our recommendations will include potential adjustments that they may need to do to their work processes and routines as well as ways to deal with privacy and security concerns. Overall, implementing AI should consider both success factors and measures to address challenges and risks for government employees, citizens and the society as a whole.
Does the rapid adoption of AI change citizens' expectations of government services?
I think this is a very complex question. On the one hand, I agree that citizens may expect government services with characteristics similar to what they can get from their personal experience using commercial AI tools, including velocity and ease of use. However, citizens are also becoming aware of the shortcomings of AI, particularly generative AI. They now know that the responses are not always accurate, and it is on them to identify which parts of a response are true facts and which parts have been made up by the algorithm.
Therefore, I think that for interactions with government, citizens might be more cautious and have the expectations of using AI for certain purposes (e.g., obtaining some general information), but not for others. Particularly, when referring to high-stake applications such as social services and criminal justice, having a human in the loop might be the preference of most citizens.
How has your international background shaped your perspective on digital and AI governance?
In the field of digital government, we are always saying that context matters. The same technology implemented in different organizations, cultures and/or policy contexts may have very different results. However, in my opinion, having the experience of living and working in more than one country allows you to actually identify and understand some of the details of different national contexts and how they may affect the implementation and use of emergent technologies, including AI.
In addition, when studying a new technology from a socio-technical perspective it is very important to analyze multiple cases and look for aspects that could be generalizable and aspects that are context specific. Having collaborators from multiple disciplines and from different countries provides perspectives that enrich our understanding of a phenomenon and helps us to have a more comprehensive view of what is happening and what we can recommend from a practical point of view.
What’s something people might be surprised to learn about you?
I really like to try food from different countries, particularly if it is not common dishes and some of the main ingredients are not easy to find in the US. I particularly like dishes from the traditional cuisines of South Korea, Mexico, India, France, China, Spain, Ethiopia and Taiwan.
In addition, my wife and I are always looking for good international restaurants and, when we find a favorite one, we are willing to travel a couple of hours just to have a nice dinner. We just did that a couple of weeks ago. We went to a Polish restaurant in Syracuse that we think it is excellent. We highly recommend it.