As much of the world is plagued by crises and conflict, reversing decades of hard-fought progress, the Pact for the Future reads like a product of bygone times. The existing gap between ambition and reality seems particularly significant in the realm of science, technology, and digital cooperation. One would think that the speed at which modern technologies are developing, as well as the magnitude of potential disruptions for societies, are incentivizing governments to cooperate. However, quite the opposite is happening, and the world is moving towards a new reality in which bipolarity and political forces are dictating economic and technological activities – much to the detriment of developing countries and marginalized communities writ large.
Skepticism and distrust in emerging technologies are both a cause and an effect of a world in disarray. Popular hostility in the United States towards China has grown substantively, with influential voices citing Beijing’s use of intellectual property (IP) theft or forced handover of technology from US companies as the illicit means by which the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has caught up with the West. Furthermore, many decision-makers in Washington believe that China’s rapid progress threatens the United States’ traditional leadership role. Resentment that is fueled, in large part, by the fact that globalization and China’s growing economic role have coincided with a decline in American middle-class living standards and public fatigue with US global engagement. On the other hand, Chinese interlocutors hold the opinion that Washington is using these allegations, as well as a toolkit of economic statecraft, to push down the country and deny China its rightful place in the world. When elephants fight, it’s the grass that suffers, meaning that increased tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers not just undermine global cooperation on science, technology, and innovation but reverse decades of global poverty reduction, dismantle economic interconnectedness and make the achievement of the sustainable development goals less likely.
That is despite the promise that AI and other emerging technologies hold for social progress. While advanced economies may have seen the greatest gains so far from tech integration, poorer societies won’t be able to leapfrog into much more advanced stages of development without using them. Hence, the Pact for the Future is right to highlight the importance that within societies, no ethnic, racial, or minority group should be disadvantaged, and ideally, new technologies are going to be a tool for reducing class divisions instead of intensifying them. Paving the way for such an uplifting process, cooperation within and among countries at a global, national, and sub-national level would be necessary. Yet despite everyone allegedly sharing the same positive goals and principles – as it is visible in UN documents – actual international cooperation on mutually agreed upon regulatory tech frameworks remains a distant hope, not least because the global governance system is under immense pressure. That is why private sector and civil society initiatives will need to step up.
One of these private-public partnerships is housed within the Stimson Center, namely our Responsible AI Fellowship Program that we are executing together with Microsoft’s Office of Responsible AI. Through it, a wide array of stakeholders from developing countries are gathered to discuss emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, evaluate the technology’s impact around the world, and propose responsible ways forward. Together, we seek to understand how AI-related harms and benefits may manifest themselves in various social, cultural, economic, and environmental contexts, and identify technological as well as regulatory solutions that can help mitigate risks and maximize opportunities – much in line with the proposed actions in the Pact for the Future.
The stakes to get this technological revolution right could not be higher, as AI and other emerging technologies– in combination with big data – are already transforming public and private sector production and consumption in both developed and developing countries. The results are more powerful than the impact of digital technologies in the past, with even bigger benefits for education, health care, public safety, and other services. However, of equal or perhaps even greater importance, is the discussion around tech disruption that may bring serious harm, especially for marginalized communities, as the speed and scale of technological development is already outpacing regulation and governance efforts. For example, while AI and big data can certainly “scale fast” and be a net positive, there is no doubt that they can also reinforce over-concentrated and authoritarian power structures – dangers that have become increasingly real and obvious.
To ensure that stakeholders can innovate and use emerging tech responsibly, cross-boundary collaboration among experts, tech developers, and consumers will be essential – especially in a development context. And while international governance structures, despite their actors’ best intentions, seem temporarily incapable of doing so, other actors need to step up in order to provide an international platform for the identification of tech-related challenges, seek ways to effectively mitigate existing problems, and connect stakeholders on the ground directly with those who innovate and develop new technologies.
Chapter 3: Ambition vs. Reality
By Julian Mueller-Kaler
Emerging Technology
As much of the world is plagued by crises and conflict, reversing decades of hard-fought progress, the Pact for the Future reads like a product of bygone times. The existing gap between ambition and reality seems particularly significant in the realm of science, technology, and digital cooperation. One would think that the speed at which modern technologies are developing, as well as the magnitude of potential disruptions for societies, are incentivizing governments to cooperate. However, quite the opposite is happening, and the world is moving towards a new reality in which bipolarity and political forces are dictating economic and technological activities – much to the detriment of developing countries and marginalized communities writ large.
Skepticism and distrust in emerging technologies are both a cause and an effect of a world in disarray. Popular hostility in the United States towards China has grown substantively, with influential voices citing Beijing’s use of intellectual property (IP) theft or forced handover of technology from US companies as the illicit means by which the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has caught up with the West. Furthermore, many decision-makers in Washington believe that China’s rapid progress threatens the United States’ traditional leadership role. Resentment that is fueled, in large part, by the fact that globalization and China’s growing economic role have coincided with a decline in American middle-class living standards and public fatigue with US global engagement. On the other hand, Chinese interlocutors hold the opinion that Washington is using these allegations, as well as a toolkit of economic statecraft, to push down the country and deny China its rightful place in the world. When elephants fight, it’s the grass that suffers, meaning that increased tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers not just undermine global cooperation on science, technology, and innovation but reverse decades of global poverty reduction, dismantle economic interconnectedness and make the achievement of the sustainable development goals less likely.
That is despite the promise that AI and other emerging technologies hold for social progress. While advanced economies may have seen the greatest gains so far from tech integration, poorer societies won’t be able to leapfrog into much more advanced stages of development without using them. Hence, the Pact for the Future is right to highlight the importance that within societies, no ethnic, racial, or minority group should be disadvantaged, and ideally, new technologies are going to be a tool for reducing class divisions instead of intensifying them. Paving the way for such an uplifting process, cooperation within and among countries at a global, national, and sub-national level would be necessary. Yet despite everyone allegedly sharing the same positive goals and principles – as it is visible in UN documents – actual international cooperation on mutually agreed upon regulatory tech frameworks remains a distant hope, not least because the global governance system is under immense pressure. That is why private sector and civil society initiatives will need to step up.
One of these private-public partnerships is housed within the Stimson Center, namely our Responsible AI Fellowship Program that we are executing together with Microsoft’s Office of Responsible AI. Through it, a wide array of stakeholders from developing countries are gathered to discuss emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, evaluate the technology’s impact around the world, and propose responsible ways forward. Together, we seek to understand how AI-related harms and benefits may manifest themselves in various social, cultural, economic, and environmental contexts, and identify technological as well as regulatory solutions that can help mitigate risks and maximize opportunities – much in line with the proposed actions in the Pact for the Future.
The stakes to get this technological revolution right could not be higher, as AI and other emerging technologies– in combination with big data – are already transforming public and private sector production and consumption in both developed and developing countries. The results are more powerful than the impact of digital technologies in the past, with even bigger benefits for education, health care, public safety, and other services. However, of equal or perhaps even greater importance, is the discussion around tech disruption that may bring serious harm, especially for marginalized communities, as the speed and scale of technological development is already outpacing regulation and governance efforts. For example, while AI and big data can certainly “scale fast” and be a net positive, there is no doubt that they can also reinforce over-concentrated and authoritarian power structures – dangers that have become increasingly real and obvious.
To ensure that stakeholders can innovate and use emerging tech responsibly, cross-boundary collaboration among experts, tech developers, and consumers will be essential – especially in a development context. And while international governance structures, despite their actors’ best intentions, seem temporarily incapable of doing so, other actors need to step up in order to provide an international platform for the identification of tech-related challenges, seek ways to effectively mitigate existing problems, and connect stakeholders on the ground directly with those who innovate and develop new technologies.
Recent & Related