(First of two parts)
Digital solutions and artificial intelligence (AI) lie at the core of many responses coming both from Government and civil society groups to address the recent corruption scandals and the public clamor for genuine transparency in the budget process. For instance, Senate Bill No. 1506, or the Citizen Access and Disclosure of Expenditures for National Accountability (or the CADENA Bill) builds on the use of blockchain technology and digital portals to ensure transparency and accountability in the budget making and monitoring processes. It was reported to be on a fast-track lane for approval, having passed third reading at the Senate in December last year. Two weeks ago, the Executive’s economic managers also unveiled what they call “Big Bold Reforms,” most of which expectedly focused on streamlining processes to promote ease of doing business, relying largely on a digitally-transformed the bureaucracy. Then, just a few days ago, the President was also reported to have signed the National Digital Connectivity Plan with a vision towards a Digitally Connected Philippines.
It is thus not surprising that these conversation highways will land — indeed, MUST land — at some point on some fundamental questions: How do we ensure that our power system will have the capacity to support a Digitally Connected Philippines? What does this digital transformation mean for our power system? What impact does AI have on the way the different components of our power systems (grid and off-grid) work? What form (or forms) of power infrastructures do we need to realize and sustain these reforms to generate positive transformation?
Today, discussions around the impact of AI on power have been focused largely on smart grids, advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) and data centers — all presenting opportunities to pursue economic progress and with issues that are valid and deserve proper attention.
We will need, however, to push the debates beyond these current limits if we are to truly seize this opportunity in history to forge a better future for our country.
In April last year, I had a chance to share publicly some of my reflections on this topic at the Meralco Power Academy’s Giga Summit 2025. I shared at the summit some learnings I gathered from a small experiment I did, asking a generative AI tool the question: “How do you make power rates affordable in Metro Manila, Philippines?” The responses provided by the AI tool (consistently, I must say, in two iterations) sparked some interesting conversations and a couple of snickering from the audience.
Over the recent holidays, I was able to reflect more deeply on these questions as I finished reading Richard Susskind’s How to Think About AI: A Guide for the Perplexed. I have been following the work of Professor Susskind for some time, as he is among the pioneers in the space of legal technology and the impact of AI on professions since the 1980s. His latest book challenges the reader to confront the imminent reality that “balancing the benefits and threats of artificial intelligence — saving humanity with and from AI — is the defining challenge of our age.”
Let me share just five points to consider as we pursue this collective discourse on powering our country’s future in a digital economy.
1. We need to imagine differently. One of the basic principles in public policy (and in any problem-solving exercise, actually) is to ensure that you are asking the right question or that you are being clear about the problem you would like to solve before you start formulating solutions. As we begin to fashion a future that is digitally connected and AI-intensive, this exercise becomes more complex, and the scenarios become more nuanced.
Take the case of data centers. As the Government positions the Philippines to be the location of choice for data center investors and developers, we need to make sure we are asking the right questions to craft the policy. If we focus only on increasing the country’s generation capacity to ensure that data center locators will have sufficient power supply for their operations, we are likely to miss the various dimensions of the challenge, such as, proper siting, appropriate power sourcing, optimal operating or business lifecycle, and rate allocation design, among others — all of which need to be considered in crafting the policy on data center hosting. It is not simply a matter then of addressing the impact on demand, although that in itself is already a daunting task. As Susskind notes in respect of the impact of AI in planning, the “bigger question perhaps is the extent to which AI systems will have changed civilization and humanity by 2050.”
In other words — and this, in my view, is the first challenge posed by AI on public policy — we need to try to exceed the limits of our imagination, to project the demand on our systems (not just in megawatts or megawatt-hours) to behave and operate differently. With AMI and smart grids that can allow real time information on power consumption and rates, for example, will monthly power billings still be relevant? We will need to envision the impact of AI in a world that will no longer function as we know it because the use of AI itself would have changed it. Paraphrasing Susskind, we need to be able to conceive a paradigm of a power system that is different from the one where we all operate in today.
2. Our values — crystalized, articulated and reinforced — will matter more than ever. I spent quite some time on this point during the Giga Summit as the importance cannot be sufficiently underscored. This is true not just on a national or local government level, but for any organization that will be digital at its core. Those who are not clear on their values will render themselves irrelevant and inconsequential.
If we are not clear or aligned on the values that underpin the use of AI, the danger is that the existing ills that AI use seeks to address will just intensify. Inequalities may worsen and incumbencies (both political and economic) may just be fortified. It is true that AI can hasten and make more efficient the resolution of disputes or any exercise of arriving at judgment. It does not, however, guarantee a just result. It is possible, then, that dispute resolution or policy making – made more efficient with the use of AI but anchored on the wrong set of values or in the absence of a set of values accepted by the community – will just make it faster to arrive at an unfair, unjust or inequitable result. Efficiency in decision making is certainly desirable, but it is not necessarily the only value that matters in a just and equitable society.
(To be continued.)
Monalisa C. Dimalanta is a senior partner at Puyat Jacinto & Santos Law (PJS Law). She was the chairperson and CEO of the Energy Regulatory Commission from 2022 to 2025, and chairperson of the National Renewable Energy Board from 2019 to 2021.
