CONSULTING · TRACK C · AI ECONOMICS & STRATEGIC FORESIGHT
A structured economic case, built before a government commits to it
A staged advisory engagement for governments, multilateral programmes and institutions weighing an AI or digital-transformation decision: foresight scoping, a structured economic impact assessment, and an optional retainer to keep the case current as the programme moves.
Engagement structure
Foresight scoping, structured assessment, advisory retainer
Method
Structured economic impact assessment
Delivery
Singapore-based, international delivery on request
Requires
A defined policy, programme or investment decision
Led by
Dr. Jayarethanam Pillai, Ph.D. Public Policy & Economics, ANU
Also drawn on for
The AI Strategic Foresight workshop
Overview
Most government AI initiatives stay pilots because nobody built the case to scale them
Fifty-eight percent of AI initiatives across the EU public sector are still at the planned, pilot or in-development stage, according to the OECD's 2026 Digital Government Outlook, which cites a separate Deloitte survey finding that fewer than a third of government and commercial GenAI experiments alike ever reach full production. The OECD's own diagnosis is not a technology gap. It is that governments cannot measure a pilot's value, outcome or cost well enough to justify scaling it, so cheap, easy pilots accumulate while the harder, more expensive scale-up decision keeps getting deferred.
That is a structured economic impact assessment problem, not an engineering one, and it is the same discipline this track applies to a single decision: a policy, a programme, an investment, assessed the way an accreditation review assesses an institution, a checkable argument built before the decision is made rather than a narrative defending it afterward. A minister or a programme office that cannot say what a pilot actually cost, delivered, or would cost to scale is the exact starting position this track is built to move an organisation out of.
A corporate governance audit and a bounded engineering build both answer to a company. This track answers to a different kind of client entirely: a government, a multilateral programme office or a university weighing a policy, an investment or an institutional decision that a board-level control framework was never built to assess.
This track is institutional and policy advisory: a structured economic case for or against a government, multilateral or university decision. It is not enterprise AI governance certification or bounded-scope systems delivery. A corporate buyer preparing for a board or an audit is better served by the Governance & Assurance track; an organisation with a defined operational problem to build is better served by the Engineering & Delivery track.
Why this track
I facilitate the AI Strategic Foresight workshop myself, and for years before that I did the same structured economic assessment for the United Nations Development Programme across Asia and for Aboitiz Data Innovation's own client engagements, where I directed a team of fifteen data scientists across financial services, energy and logistics. A 3.5-hour session can teach the method. It cannot carry a ministry or a multilateral programme office through an actual investment decision, which typically takes months and survives more than one change in political attention.
This track exists for that longer engagement: a government, a university or a development agency assessing whether an AI or digital-transformation programme is economically and institutionally sound, built on the same discipline I used to help lead the American University of Central Asia's business school to AACSB accreditation, the first in the Central Asia region, and to assess AI's role in peace and stability with the Social Cyber Institute. I would rather tell a minister plainly that a programme's business case does not hold together than help design a favourable slide for it, and that is the standard this track is built to.
Capabilities
What gets drawn on, not necessarily in this order
The three stages below are the sequence. These are the specific pieces of work inside it.
-
Structured economic impact assessment
A checkable, structured argument for or against an AI or digital-transformation investment, built the same way as a peer-reviewed accreditation submission, not a confident narrative.
-
AI & digital-transformation policy review
Assessing a ministry's or agency's AI or transformation policy against what it can actually deliver, not against what a vendor briefing claims.
-
Institutional capability & accreditation-grade governance
Frameworks drawn from leading a business school through AACSB, AMBA and CEEMAN accreditation, applied to an institution's own AI governance maturity.
-
Technology impact assessment
Structured assessment of an AI or technology programme's effect on peace, stability and economic outcomes, developed with the Social Cyber Institute.
-
Cross-national programme design
Advisory drawn from UNDP engagements across Asia and academic leadership spanning Central Asia, the Gulf and the United States.
-
Grant & donor funding strategy
More than three million dollars in grant and donor funding secured and directed across an academic career, applied to structuring an institution's own funding case.
Engagement structure
Three stages, not one open-ended retainer
Each stage is scoped and priced on its own. An organisation can stop after any one of them.
- 01
Foresight scoping
Defining the decision in question, a policy, a programme, an investment, and the stakeholders whose sign-off it actually needs, before any analysis starts.
- 02
Structured economic impact assessment
The same discipline behind the AI Strategic Foresight workshop, extended into a full assessment: a checkable argument for or against the decision, with what has not been proven yet stated plainly rather than smoothed over.
- 03
Advisory retainer
Government and multilateral programmes move slower than a single assessment, and outlast one minister's or one director's tenure. A retainer keeps the assessment current as the programme, and the political attention behind it, actually moves.
Track record
Institutional advisory work already delivered, not proposed
-
AI & Strategic Foresight Consultant, UNDP
Advises the United Nations Development Programme across Asia on AI and policy foresight, including a government knowledge-sharing session with Mongolian officials on AI for national development and an invited keynote at the accompanying Data and AI Conference in Ulaanbaatar.
-
Director, Data Science Consulting, Aboitiz Data Innovation
Led a team of fifteen data scientists across financial services, energy and logistics engagements for the Aboitiz Group's data and analytics practice, 2022 to 2024.
-
AACSB accreditation to acceptance, American University of Central Asia
Led the School of Entrepreneurship and Business Administration to AACSB accreditation acceptance, the first in the Central Asia region, then went on to complete AMBA and CEEMAN accreditation as well.
-
Technology impact assessment, Social Cyber Institute
Structured assessment of AI's role in peace and stability, conducted with the Social Cyber Institute as part of a practice sitting at the intersection of AI, economic policy and institutional strategy.
Fifty-eight percent of AI initiatives across the EU public sector are still at the planned, pilot or in-development stage.
OECD, 2026 Digital Government OutlookWho this is for
Institutional buyers, not corporate ones
- Government ministries and agencies assessing an AI or digital-transformation policy before it reaches a minister's desk or a budget committee.
- Multilateral and development-agency programme offices needing a structured, checkable case for or against a technology investment, not a confident narrative.
- Universities and research institutions assessing their own AI governance, curriculum or accreditation decisions against an accreditation-grade standard.
Led by
Dr. Jayarethanam Pillai
Ph.D., Public Policy and Economics, The Australian National University · Led AACSB accreditation to acceptance, first in Central Asia · MIT-certified in AI product design
AI economist and founder of Praxora Lab, advising the UN Development Programme on AI and policy foresight and teaching as a professor of practice at Golden Gate University. Two decades spanning academic leadership, including deanships at business schools in Central Asia and the first successful AACSB accreditation in the region, alongside economic policy analysis and technology impact assessment across Asia, Central Asia and the United States.
Read the full profile ›From the practice
Recent writing on strategy
Published research and frameworks this track's assessments are built on, not marketing copy written after the fact.
-
The productivity gap: why companies must fix their systems before scaling AI
Most organisations use AI frequently but few have scaled it company-wide, and the gap comes down to architectural debt, not appetite.
-
Is your business ready for AI? Start with these five questions
A diagnostic framework for identifying whether a business is actually positioned to operationalise AI tools, not just experiment with them. The same framework the Executive Programme is built on.
-
Why large enterprises are deploying AI at scale but measuring it incorrectly
Common measurement frameworks target the wrong layer of the technology stack, missing the business outcomes that actually matter.
Common questions
Before you enquire
-
Is this the same as the AI Strategic Foresight workshop?
No. The workshop is a 3.5-hour session applying the method to one live decision in the room. This track is the staged version of the same discipline, extended across the months a government or institutional decision actually takes, with an advisory retainer to keep the case current as it moves.
-
Who is this for?
Governments, multilateral programme offices, universities and NGOs assessing a policy, programme or investment decision. It is not built for a corporate buyer; see the Governance & Assurance or Engineering & Delivery tracks for that.
-
What does this cost?
Scoped at engagement, once the decision in question and the stakeholders behind it are understood. We have not published a rate card for this track. Ask directly and we will give you a straight answer on structure and range before any commitment is made.
-
Is this the same work Dr. Pillai does for UNDP or Aboitiz?
The same discipline, not the same engagement. His UNDP and Aboitiz work is cited here as evidence of the practice, contracted and delivered under those organisations' own terms. A Praxora Lab engagement is scoped and contracted separately.
-
Can a corporate buyer use this track instead of Governance & Assurance?
No. This track is built for a government, multilateral or institutional decision, not a corporate AI management system. If your organisation needs a governance posture a board can sign or a regulator can inspect, the Governance & Assurance track is built for that instead.
-
Who actually leads the engagement?
Dr. Jayarethanam Pillai personally, drawing on the same UNDP advisory role, Aboitiz data-science directorship and accreditation leadership stated on his speaker profile.
Investment
Scoped at engagement
Each of the three stages above is priced on its own once foresight scoping has established the decision in question and what assessing it actually requires. We have not published a rate card for this track. Ask directly and we will give you a straight answer on structure and range before any commitment is made.
