Provide appropriate transparency and explainability

Practical action

Publish AI use notices and keep explainability documentation for decisions about individuals.

Who does it apply to?

All AI uses; binding where UK GDPR applies.

Actors

Provider / developerDeployer / user organisation

Sectors

Cross-sector / all sectors

Use cases

AI in hiring and employmentAI in finance, credit and insuranceAI in public services

Which controls meet this duty?

Satisfies: the control, operated properly, does the work the duty asks for. Supports: it contributes but the duty needs more. Each control page lists every other duty it serves, so work done once can be counted once.

• satisfiesProcessProduct owner · at launch and on material change
  AI interaction and use disclosure notices

  Serves 18 recorded duties · evidence: AI interaction or use notice, Notice catalogue, Notice wording approval

  Public AI use notices.

• supportsProcessCustomer operations lead · once per ai system
  Decision explanation, human review and appeal route

  Serves 12 recorded duties · evidence: Adverse-decision explanation template, AI decision challenge and human review procedure, Challenge and reversal log

  Explanations of decisions about individuals.

• supportsProcessProduct or model owner · at launch and on material change
  Technical documentation, model cards and instructions for use

  Serves 14 recorded duties · evidence: Technical documentation file, Model card or deployer information pack, Instructions for use

  Explainability documentation.

Templates that cover this duty

Generated from the records. Free · no account · links emailed to your work address. This duty is cited in each file with its source reference and a link back here.

• AI Agent Registry and Permission Matrix

  Register · XLSX and DOCX · v6

• EU AI Act Article 50 Transparency Kit

  Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v32

• NIST AI RMF ↔ EU AI Act ↔ ISO/IEC 42001 Crosswalk

  Crosswalk · XLSX · v3

• AI Model Card

  Kit · DOCX and XLSX · v4

All 8 templates that cover it →

What evidence would a reviewer expect?

Framework mappings

Original editorial crosswalks. They cite clause numbers only and reproduce no standard text; confidence reflects how direct the mapping is.

See every United Kingdom duty mapped this way →

Frequently asked questions

Cite this record

AIPolicyTracker (2026). “Provide appropriate transparency and explainability (UK AI regulation framework)” [AIPT-OBL-0073, verified 26 September 2026 by Bhaskar Bhatt]. https://aipolicytracker.org/id/AIPT-OBL-0073 (accessed 27 October 2026). Data licensed CC BY 4.0.

Permanent id AIPT-OBL-0073: it never changes or gets reused, and its address keeps working if this page moves.

Cite the official text alongside it: A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, UK Government, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-regulation-a-pro-innovation-approach.

@misc{aipolicytracker2026_provideappropriatetransp,
  author       = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
  title        = {{Provide appropriate transparency and explainability (UK AI regulation framework)}},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/uk-principles-transparency-explainability}},
  url          = {https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/uk-principles-transparency-explainability},
  urldate      = {2026-10-27},
  note         = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 27 October 2026}
}

Change history

Similar obligations in other instruments

• Employers must inform workers and their representatives before using high-risk AI at work — EU AI Act, European Union
• Providers of generative AI must mark synthetic output as artificially generated in a machine-readable way — EU AI Act, European Union
• Deployers must tell natural persons that a high-risk AI system is used in decisions about them — EU AI Act, European Union
• Deployers of emotion recognition or biometric categorisation must inform exposed persons — EU AI Act, European Union
• Deployers must disclose deepfakes and AI-generated text published on matters of public interest — EU AI Act, European Union
• Deployers must explain individual decisions taken with high-risk AI on request — EU AI Act, European Union
• Frontier developers must publish a transparency report before deploying a new frontier model — California SB 53, California (United States)
• Disclose AI interaction and label synthetic content — EU AI Act, European Union