Almost six in ten UK adults believe the country is not well prepared for artificial intelligence’s effect on jobs and the economy, despite growing support for using the technology to improve productivity and public services.
A survey of 2,000 adults commissioned by ICS.AI found that 58% considered Britain unprepared, while 49% said the government was not moving quickly enough to manage large-scale technological change.
The company’s State of AI 2026 report examines attitudes towards adoption, regulation, employment, economic growth, and the use of AI in public services.
Economic pressures remained more immediate than concern about AI itself. The cost of living was named as the largest current concern by 71% of respondents, an increase of seven percentage points over six months. War was selected by 16%, while 13% named AI.
Looking further ahead, 29% regarded recession as Britain’s largest long-term challenge and 20% selected the declining availability of opportunities for young people entering the workforce.
Respondents were nevertheless increasingly willing to associate AI with economic and service improvements. Some 22% identified growth and higher productivity as the technology’s largest opportunity for the UK, followed by better healthcare outcomes at 16% and faster, more accessible public services at 15%.
Almost half, at 48%, said they would prefer AI-enabled public services where the technology produced faster outcomes. Regular use was already reported by 40% of respondents at work and 46% in their personal lives.
Martin Neale, chief executive and founder of ICS.AI, said: “Britain has the talent, research capability and ambition to become a global AI leader, but our findings suggest that despite recent government initiatives, the public doesn’t believe we’re moving quickly enough. People aren’t asking us to slow down on AI, in fact, quite the opposite.
“They want AI that helps grow the economy, improves public services and creates opportunities, but they also expect clear leadership and responsible governance. If Britain wants to compete internationally, we need to accelerate adoption while ensuring AI is deployed safely, transparently and in ways that genuinely improve people’s lives.”
Trust remained the leading policy preference. Almost half of respondents, at 49%, said the priority should be ensuring that AI was trustworthy and well regulated. Domestic development was selected by 24%, while 20% prioritised affordability and effectiveness.
Two-thirds supported restrictions on AI tools for people under 16, rising to 72% among women. Generative systems can produce persuasive content, collect personal information, and provide responses that users may interpret as authoritative, placing children among the groups most exposed to weak controls.
ICS.AI is proposing a Sovereign AI Charter intended to establish common principles for responsible adoption. It also plans to explore a national action group involving technology companies, policymakers, public bodies, and industry organisations.
Sovereign AI can include control over data, computing infrastructure, procurement, security, intellectual property, standards, and the ability to maintain essential systems without excessive dependence on overseas providers.
Britain has strong research institutions and a growing supplier base, but it competes with countries able to invest substantially more capital in computing infrastructure and model development. Public policy must therefore determine which capabilities require domestic control and where international partnerships provide better value.
Adoption remains uneven among smaller companies. An AI trust gap is slowing use among SMEs, with concerns over data security, accuracy, cost, legal responsibility, skills, and measurable returns.
Support for faster adoption can coexist with demands for stronger safeguards. Organisations can deploy systems quickly in well-defined administrative tasks while applying stricter controls to decisions involving employment, benefits, health, finance, policing, or children.
A charter would need to translate broad principles into procurement requirements, accountability, evaluation, and remedies where systems fail. Its influence would depend on whether large buyers and suppliers adopt it and whether it complements existing regulation rather than adding another overlapping framework.
Public confidence is likely to depend on visible outcomes. Faster services and improved productivity could strengthen support, while inaccurate decisions, poor security, unexplained automation, or weak routes of appeal would reinforce concerns that the country is unprepared.
The survey captures a public that neither rejects AI nor accepts adoption without conditions. People appear willing to use the technology and support its expansion, provided responsibility, transparency, and practical benefits remain visible.
You must be logged in to post a comment.