6 September, 2024 | Caroline Böck and Matthias C. Kettemann
Tackling the challenges and opportunities of technological innovations through future studies
The investment in the disruptive field of quantum technology is growing rapidly. By 2040, it is expected that the size of this market will be worth over USD 100 billion. The technology has massive potential in the fight against climate change. Attempts are already being made to combat growing food shortage through quantum computing by optimizing crops and agricultural yields. In terms of cybersecurity, quantum technologies can guarantee full protection through a new dimension to cryptographic algorithms.
However, quantum technology also harbors major risks: it is predicted that the new mathematical algorithms on which the technology is based could decrypt all the algorithms and technical systems used to date. Drastically speaking, all phone calls could be traced; no bank account would be secure anymore, and actions from any technical device could be tracked.
The risks and opportunities of this technology, as well as other disruptive technologies such as GenAI, are clear and must be contained due to the far-reaching changes in society, politics and the economy. But who has the opportunity to enable a change or directive reference in the development of these technologies?
For us, it is clear that the responsibility lies with legislators, who, increasingly, must not only react to existing crises, but also proactively shape the future. The latter must be anticipated, and resilient solutions must be developed that have a positive effect not only in the short term, but also in the long term. The fact that the REGROUP project itself was funded by the EU to help find more resilient solutions to future (health) crises than has been the case to date shows that there is broad support for this in European legislation. This is all the truer when it comes to disruptive technological developments and their impact. But how can such futurology be integrated into democratic processes in the most meaningful and effective way? We try to find answers to this in our recent foresight paper “Mapping the future of technological innovations“.
The necessity of long-term thinking
As a preliminary step, we identify the most pressing technological challenges and opportunities that are imminent. These include changes in the nature of work and education, the intensification of political polarization, cybersecurity, the prudent utilization of global resources and climate change, as well as the impact of the aforementioned disruptive technologies.
From the perspective of two legal professionals, the question arises as to to which extent the law can influence these changes and instigate to move in a direction that is conducive to human rights, democratic principles and socio-economic progress. We established three criteria for future legislation to adhere to a prudent and effective use of the law. These include the constant observance of democratic principles and the illumination of the human rights effects of the legislative act, as well as the effective supervision and enforcement of the legal acts drafted and the so-called tragedy of the horizon. Legislators must cease to consider legislative periods and short-term solutions and instead adopt a long-term perspective, as this is the only viable approach to overcoming the impending crises.
At this juncture, the law and the existing legislative process are unable to provide a solution. It is therefore necessary to consider creative and forward-thinking solutions. The new scientific fields of “future studies” and “strategic foresight” offer potential mechanisms for this. Future studies seek to identify potential future scenarios and to develop responses to them in advance. Strategic foresight translates these responses into tangible policy structures. Although there is no uniform conceptual framework in these areas, it is nevertheless necessary to identify challenges of the future in advance and to shape the future in a peaceful, ecological and socially cohesive way.
The paper then proceeds to examine the existing mechanisms at both Union and Member State level in this area. Finally, the findings are synthesized, and conclusions and recommendations are presented for the existing EU mechanisms. These focus on the critical integration of a rights-based and intergenerational dignity-oriented foundation within the domain of future studies and strategic foresight, especially within the decision-making ecosystem on digital tools and systems. The concept of digital humanism can be employed to fulfil this function. Furthermore, a number of concrete institutionalization options are presented. We argue, for instance, that the various EU institutions should endeavor to coordinate their foresight processes more effectively. This encompasses the promotion of collaboration between the Commission’s Strategic Foresight Group and the Panel for the Future of Science and Technology (STOA) of the Parliament, as well as the EU-wide Strategic Foresight Network and other institutions.
This article highlights some of the findings in the REGROUP paper Mapping the future of technological innovations.