Article 66: Advisory Forum
Article 66 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 establishes an advisory forum to provide technical expertise to the AI Board and the Commission. The forum comprises a balanced selection of stakeholders from industry (including SMEs and start-ups), civil society, academia, and other relevant groups. Members are appointed by the Commission for a renewable period. The advisory forum is the AI Act's formal multi-stakeholder consultation mechanism — it feeds practical insight on standards, innovation, regulatory sandboxes, and emerging AI trends into the governance architecture.
Who does this apply to?
- -Industry representatives (including SMEs and start-ups) invited to serve on the advisory forum
- -Civil society and consumer organisations contributing to AI governance discourse
- -Academic researchers and technical experts providing evidence-based input
- -The Commission, which appoints members and receives the forum's advice
Scenarios
A European AI start-up association nominates a representative to the advisory forum. The representative contributes industry views on draft harmonised standards for high-risk AI systems, ensuring the standards are proportionate for smaller companies.
A digital-rights NGO participates in the advisory forum and raises concerns about the societal impact of general-purpose AI models. The forum channels this feedback into a formal recommendation to the Commission on sandbox design.
What Article 66 does (in plain terms)
Article 66 creates a structured advisory body that sits alongside the AI Board and the AI Office. Its purpose is to bring outside voices into the governance process — voices from the private sector, academia, civil society, and other stakeholder groups.
Key design features:
- Balanced composition: the Commission must ensure the forum reflects a balanced mix of industry (including SMEs and start-ups), civil society, academia, and other relevant stakeholders.
- Appointment by the Commission: members are selected through a transparent process and appointed for a renewable period, ensuring continuity while allowing rotation.
- Advisory (non-binding) role: the forum provides input and recommendations but does not have decision-making authority. The AI Board and the Commission decide how to weigh this advice.
- Broad mandate: the forum may advise on harmonised standards, innovation support, regulatory sandboxes, emerging trends, and the practical application of the Regulation.
The advisory forum is the Act's answer to the question: *how do you keep governance technically informed and democratically accountable?* Read the full paragraph structure on EUR-Lex Article 66.
How Article 66 connects to the rest of the Act
- Article 64 — Establishment of the AI Board: the Board is the primary governance body that the advisory forum supports.
- Article 65 — AI Board tasks: the advisory forum feeds advice into the Board's work programme.
- Article 67 — Scientific panel: the advisory forum and the scientific panel are distinct bodies — the forum represents stakeholders while the panel supplies independent scientific expertise.
- Article 57 — Regulatory sandboxes: the forum may advise on sandbox design and lessons learned.
- Article 40 — Harmonised standards: the forum's view on proportionality and feasibility of standards can shape the Board's opinions.
- Article 113 — Application dates: governance provisions apply in the staged timeline set out in Article 113.
Practical implications for stakeholders
If you are an industry association, civil-society network, or academic institution:
- Monitor Commission calls for expressions of interest to the advisory forum — membership offers a direct channel to influence implementation.
- Prepare position papers on standards, sandbox experiences, and emerging AI risks that the forum is mandated to advise on.
- Coordinate with your national competent authority (see Article 70) so that positions are consistent at both Union and national level.
If you are a provider or deployer:
- Track advisory forum outputs — they often signal which compliance topics the Board and Commission will prioritise next.
- Engage your trade association to ensure sector-specific concerns (e.g., SME burden) reach the forum.
Compliance checklist
- Identify whether your organisation or trade association is eligible for advisory forum membership and monitor Commission appointment calls.
- Track advisory forum outputs and recommendations for early signals on forthcoming Commission guidance and standards priorities.
- Ensure your compliance team reviews forum publications for practical insights on sandbox design and emerging risk trends.
- Coordinate positions with relevant national competent authorities designated under Article 70.
- Align internal AI governance timelines with the staged application dates in Article 113.
Understand how EU AI Act governance affects your compliance roadmap — start the free assessment.
Start Free AssessmentRelated Articles
Frequently asked questions
Is the advisory forum's advice binding on the AI Board or the Commission?
No. The advisory forum provides input and recommendations, but the AI Board and the Commission retain full decision-making authority. The forum is a consultation mechanism, not a regulatory body.
Can SMEs and start-ups participate in the advisory forum?
Yes. Article 66 explicitly requires the forum to include representatives from industry, including SMEs and start-ups, to ensure that the perspectives of smaller companies are heard alongside those of larger enterprises.
How does the advisory forum differ from the scientific panel under Article 67?
The advisory forum is a broad multi-stakeholder body (industry, civil society, academia) providing policy and practical advice. The scientific panel under Article 67 is composed of independent scientific experts focused on technical assessments — particularly for GPAI models and systemic risk.