Trial Measures for Science and Technology Ethics Review
📑 Legal hierarchy: Level 3 · Departmental rule | Issuance: MOST-led, ten-ministry joint issuance (MOST / MOE / MIIT / MARA / NHC / CAS / CASS / CAE / CAST / CMC S&T Commission) | Effective: 2023-12-01 | Character: hard law
⚠️ Hierarchy note: This instrument is a departmental rule, jointly issued by ten ministries. It is not a State Council administrative regulation. “Trial” (试行), like “Interim” (暂行), reflects the legislator’s decision to reserve room for adjustment — it is not a hierarchy marker. See Index of Chinese Rules.
English Summary
Section titled “English Summary”The Trial Measures for Science and Technology Ethics Review, issued jointly by ten ministries led by MOST on 2023-09-07 and effective 2023-12-01, establish China’s framework for ethics review of R&D activities. For AI, the Measures require (i) the establishment of ethics review committees at research institutions performing “sensitive” R&D, (ii) review of projects on a negative list (“审查清单”) that explicitly includes autonomous decision-making AI with significant safety/ethics risks, algorithms capable of steering public opinion, and large-scale generative models with certain characteristics, and (iii) expert ethics review — a precursor oversight layer sitting above the CAC’s filing-based regime.
Overview
Section titled “Overview”This is China’s first cross-ministerial implementing rule for science-and-technology ethics review. Its key roles in AI governance:
- A pre-emptive review layer: CAC’s algorithm filing (备案) is a pre-launch review, whereas science-and-technology ethics review operates at the project-initiation stage.
- List-based approach: Article 25 sets out an “expert re-review list of science-and-technology activities.” AI-related entries include:
- research and development of algorithmic models, applications, and systems with the capacity to shape public opinion and mobilize society;
- research and development of automated decision-making systems for scenarios involving safety or human-health risks;
- research and development of human-machine fusion systems with significant psychological or emotional impact on human subjects.
- Internal institutional committees: research institutions shall establish science-and-technology ethics (review) committees; review → file with the competent S&T authority.
Core Provisions (selected)
Section titled “Core Provisions (selected)”Article 4 · Principles of Ethics Review
Section titled “Article 4 · Principles of Ethics Review”- Promote human well-being;
- Respect the right to life;
- Uphold fairness and justice;
- Reasonably control risks;
- Maintain openness and transparency.
Articles 9–10 · Internal Institutional Committees
Section titled “Articles 9–10 · Internal Institutional Committees”Units conducting ethically sensitive R&D shall establish a science-and-technology ethics (review) committee. Committees shall have at least seven members, including members from different disciplines, external ethics / legal experts, and not fewer than two external members.
Article 25 · Expert Re-review List
Section titled “Article 25 · Expert Re-review List”Key areas:
- Involving human life and health;
- Involving data and algorithms: algorithms with capacity to steer public opinion, automated decision-making for safety / health scenarios, and human-machine fusion systems with strong psychological or emotional impact;
- Synthetic biology, neuroscience, gene editing, and the like.
Articles 27–31 · Process
Section titled “Articles 27–31 · Process”- institutional self-review → listed projects submitted for expert re-review → filed with the competent S&T authority;
- material changes trigger fresh review;
- periodic follow-up review.
Relationship with AI-Specific Rules
Section titled “Relationship with AI-Specific Rules”- Precedes CAC filing: ethics review at the project-initiation stage; CAC filing at the pre-launch stage.
- Generative AI Interim Measures: do not expressly cite these Measures, but “large model + capability frontier” projects in fact engage Article 25.
- TC260-003: technical-level assessment vs. ethics review — different layers, but potential intersection.
Enforcement
Section titled “Enforcement”Primary authority: the MOST-led Ethics Committee Office; sector regulators coordinate within their mandates.
Penalties:
- failure by institutions to establish an ethics review committee: order to rectify, public reprimand, refusal to approve projects;
- non-compliant R&D: termination of projects, clawback of funding, pursuit of institutional and individual responsibility.
Source Text and Translations
Section titled “Source Text and Translations”| Language | Source | Link |
|---|---|---|
| Chinese (original) | MOST | most.gov.cn |
| English | DigiChina / Carnegie analysis | https://digichina.stanford.edu/ |
Version History
Section titled “Version History”| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2023-04 | Draft for public comment |
| 2023-09-07 | Joint issuance by ten ministries |
| 2023-12-01 | Effective |