AI Regulation, Skills Erosion And The Governance Gap

Earlier this month (June 2026), the Word Economic Forum (WEF) published a report focusing on the future of entry-level roles in a world of AI. Highlighting growing concern around AI’s impact on “economic resilience and social stability”, the report demanded that policymakers consider the implications of AI on junior positions and work to establish incentives, regulatory standards and funding structures to protect these roles.

In terms of business benefits, the temptations of AI are clear

According to a survey conducted by Morgan Stanley, organizations using AI report productivity gains of more than 11% on average – often alongside headcount reductions. WEF’s 2025 Future of Jobs Report indicated that 41% of employers are planning workforce reductions where automation is possible. In competitive markets, the temptation to streamline processes is strong.

However, some types of work exist not because they are the fastest option, but because regulation requires them. Structured reviews, formal attestations and due diligence may look slow, but also protect stakeholders. If firms remove or automate these safeguards without proper oversight, they risk weakening the systems that markets rely on.

AI is moving faster than the rules designed to govern it

Results from the upcoming Verdantix 2026 global corporate sustainability survey show that most firms have significant concerns related to the adequacy of their internal AI governance systems and expertise. Agentic AI makes governance questions more urgent still: Deloitte reports that only 21% of organizations have mature governance frameworks for autonomous AI systems. McKinsey notes that 80% of firms have already experienced risky behaviour from AI agents.

Regulation can preserve human expertise – and should protect entry-level roles

Regulation needs to do more than set safety and transparency standards. It may mean mandating human involvement in high-stakes processes or restricting AI use where independent judgement is essential.

Crucially, it should also protect training pathways. If junior staff no longer carry out basic research, drafting, testing or review work, they will not build the judgement needed to challenge AI later. Businesses will therefore end up with senior people managing systems that too few employees truly understand.

The question is not whether AI will replace certain tasks; it already is. However, if AI makes junior and repetitive entry-level work redundant, while experienced professionals manage AI agents from above, a gap may be created that will be hard to close. Law and governance have stepped in before to protect public trust – they must do so again before the expertise needed to govern AI is lost.

For more information on AI governance frameworks, read Verdantix Strategic Focus: AI Governance Controls For Climate Finance Vendors and watch Verdantix Mind The AI Governance Maturity Gap.

To find out more about how sustainability leaders are interacting with AI, read Verdantix Strategic Focus: How AI Is Reshaping Sustainability Teams and watch out for our upcoming Global Corporate Survey 2026: Sustainability Budgets, Priorities And Tech Preferences.