<mods:mods version="3.3" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-3.xsd" xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"><mods:titleInfo><mods:title>AI Risk Governance in Islamic Digital Finance</mods:title></mods:titleInfo><mods:name type="personal"><mods:namePart type="given">-</mods:namePart><mods:namePart type="family">Darmawan</mods:namePart><mods:role><mods:roleTerm type="text">author</mods:roleTerm></mods:role></mods:name><mods:abstract>Purpose – The rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into digital financial systems has created &#13;
opportunities for innovation while simultaneously generating complex governance challenges. Although &#13;
AI improves efficiency and financial inclusion, it also introduces risks related to cybersecurity, data &#13;
governance, institutional readiness and regulatory compliance. This study aims to identify and prioritize &#13;
AI-related risks in digital financial systems and examine their implications for AI governance, particularly &#13;
in the context of Islamic digital finance.&#13;
Design/methodology/approach – This study employs a quantitative approach based on a survey of &#13;
260 respondents to evaluate perceptions of AI-related risks in digital financial environments. The Failure &#13;
Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) framework is used to assess risks across four dimensions: potential &#13;
occurrence, frequency, impact and detection capability. Risk Priority Numbers are applied to rank and &#13;
classify risks, complemented by multilevel analysis at both category and item levels.&#13;
Findings – The findings indicate that the most significant risks are primarily governance-related rather &#13;
than technological. Risk management capacity, human capital constraints and Sharia compliance emerge &#13;
as dominant dimensions shaping AI risk governance. The analysis also shows that AI risk structures are &#13;
nonuniform. While aggregate-level analysis identifies governance-related risks as dominant, item-level &#13;
analysis reveals concentrated vulnerabilities, particularly cybersecurity risks, that may remain obscured &#13;
within broader classifications. The findings further suggest the presence of a governance execution gap, &#13;
where institutional awareness of AI-related risks is not always followed by effective mitigation practices.&#13;
Research limitations/implications – This study relies on perception-based survey data, which reflects &#13;
respondents’ assessments of AI-related risks rather than direct observations of technological failures in &#13;
real financial systems. Future research could extend the analysis by using case studies or institutional &#13;
data from financial organizations that implement AI technologies.&#13;
Practical implications – The findings highlight the importance of strengthening institutional capacity &#13;
through risk management frameworks, training and organizational readiness. Policymakers and financial &#13;
institutions should adopt governance approaches that integrate technological safeguards with regulatory &#13;
and ethical oversight, particularly within Islamic financial systems.&#13;
Social implications – Effective AI governance can strengthen public trust, support financial inclusion, &#13;
and enhance the stability of digital financial systems. In Islamic financial contexts, alignment between AI &#13;
systems and ethical as well as Sharia principles remains essential for maintaining institutional legitimacy &#13;
and societal acceptance.&#13;
Originality/value – This study contributes to the literature by applying FMEA to AI risk governance in &#13;
digital financial systems and by introducing a multilevel risk assessment perspective. The study further &#13;
advances understanding of AI governance by identifying governance execution gaps and emphasizing &#13;
the need to integrate technological and Sharia-based governance frameworks.</mods:abstract><mods:classification authority="lcc">Keuangan Islam</mods:classification><mods:originInfo><mods:dateIssued encoding="iso8061">2026</mods:dateIssued></mods:originInfo><mods:originInfo><mods:publisher>DIGITAL POLICY, REGULATION AND GOVERNANCE</mods:publisher></mods:originInfo><mods:genre>Article</mods:genre></mods:mods>