At the same time, concerns are growing that advances in AI may replace existing jobs, and generative AI is no exception. There are already cases in which workers—including programmers, interpreters, designers, and call center agents—have been laid off or have seen job opportunities reduced due to the introduction of generative AI. While this is fundamentally a structural issue that must be addressed at the national and societal level, it is also an area in which individual organizations should reflect on their own responsibilities. When an organization introduces generative AI, it should engage in consultation with the activists or staff who have been performing the relevant work. Generative AI may prove more limited than expected in replacing existing tasks, and where it does replace tasks to some extent, it may require adjustments to existing roles and responsibilities. For civil society organizations with limited financial resources, generative AI can make certain tasks feasible that were previously unaffordable, or it can serve as a means of reducing costs. However, as noted under the second principle, even if reliance on generative AI appears efficient in the short term, organizations must carefully consider whether such reliance truly helps to maintain and strengthen the expertise and capacities of activists and the organization as a whole. 3) Scope of this Policy This policy applies to cases in which our organization uses external, commercial generative AI services. Where the organization develops Generative AI Guide for Civil Society