---
type: claim
domain: ai-alignment
description: "Democratic alignment infrastructure can scale to 10,000+ participants across 70+ countries while maintaining 70%+ cross-partisan consensus on evaluation criteria"
confidence: likely
source: "CIP Year in Review 2025, Global Dialogues program"
created: 2026-03-11
secondary_domains: [collective-intelligence, mechanisms]
---

# Democratic AI alignment scaled to 10,000+ participants across 70+ countries achieving 70%+ cross-partisan consensus on evaluation criteria

CIP's Global Dialogues program in 2025 achieved 10,000+ participants across 70+ countries in 6 deliberative dialogues, demonstrating that democratic alignment infrastructure can operate at scale while maintaining meaningful consensus. The Weval political neutrality evaluation generated 400 prompts and 107 evaluation criteria from 1,000 participants, achieving 70%+ consensus across political groups.

This represents a 100x scale-up from previous democratic alignment experiments while maintaining the consensus properties that make the approach viable. The cross-partisan consensus threshold (70%+) is particularly significant because it demonstrates that diverse populations can agree on AI evaluation criteria despite political polarization.

The scale achievement matters because it moves democratic alignment from experimental proof-of-concept to operational infrastructure. Frontier lab adoption (Meta, Cohere, Anthropic) and government incorporation (India, Taiwan, Sri Lanka) indicate the approach has crossed the credibility threshold for institutional use.

## Evidence
- CIP Global Dialogues: 10,000+ participants, 70+ countries, 6 deliberative dialogues (2025)
- Weval political neutrality: 1,000 participants, 400 prompts, 107 criteria, 70%+ cross-partisan consensus
- Frontier lab partners: Meta, Cohere, Anthropic, UK/US AI Safety Institutes
- Government adoption: India, Taiwan, Sri Lanka incorporated findings into policy

## Limitations
The gap between evaluation adoption and deployment impact remains unclear. Labs using these tools as evaluation frameworks does not necessarily mean the findings changed what was deployed. The source provides no evidence that Weval/Samiksha results altered product decisions or deployment behavior.

---

Relevant Notes:
- [[democratic alignment assemblies produce constitutions as effective as expert-designed ones while better representing diverse populations]] — extended to 10,000+ scale
- [[community-centred norm elicitation surfaces alignment targets materially different from developer-specified rules]] — confirmed at global scale
- [[AI alignment is a coordination problem not a technical problem]] — democratic infrastructure as coordination mechanism
