Comparative approaches are rarely utilized in futures studies despite the distinctive nature of different policy problems. Issues like climate change, infrastructure investments, and governance of emerging technology are frequently grouped under the umbrella of the “long-term problems” without adequate consideration for their distinct spatial and temporal attributes. To address this research gap, this paper presents a framework to systematically compare long-term policy problems, such as the risks of climate change and artificial intelligence (AI). I conduct a comparative analysis of the risks of climate change and AI—both widely regarded as pivotal questions of our time—focusing on how they differ across eight attributes that affect their governance: scientific certainty, spatiality, temporality, linearity, path dependence, accountability, capacity to address and the costs involved. The findings suggest that climate change involves a more evident intergenerational conflict between generations than risks of AI and might therefore be a more challenging long-term governance problem. Yet, both problems risk triggering irreversible lock-in effects, specifically in extreme scenarios such as crossing climate tipping points or misaligned advanced AI systems. Mitigating these uncertain lock-in effects requires precautionary governance measures, highlighting the potential of comparative approaches at the intersection of foresight and policy analysis.
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Long-Term Governance Problems: Risks of Climate Change and Artificial Intelligence","authors":"Atte Ojanen","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.203","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Comparative approaches are rarely utilized in futures studies despite the distinctive nature of different policy problems. Issues like climate change, infrastructure investments, and governance of emerging technology are frequently grouped under the umbrella of the “long-term problems” without adequate consideration for their distinct spatial and temporal attributes. To address this research gap, this paper presents a framework to systematically compare long-term policy problems, such as the risks of climate change and artificial intelligence (AI). I conduct a comparative analysis of the risks of climate change and AI—both widely regarded as pivotal questions of our time—focusing on how they differ across eight attributes that affect their governance: scientific certainty, spatiality, temporality, linearity, path dependence, accountability, capacity to address and the costs involved. The findings suggest that climate change involves a more evident intergenerational conflict between generations than risks of AI and might therefore be a more challenging long-term governance problem. Yet, both problems risk triggering irreversible lock-in effects, specifically in extreme scenarios such as crossing climate tipping points or misaligned advanced AI systems. Mitigating these uncertain lock-in effects requires precautionary governance measures, highlighting the potential of comparative approaches at the intersection of foresight and policy analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ffo2.203","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142868623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Rui Pedro Gonçalves, Matthew J. Spaniol, Nicholas J. Rowland, Niels Gorm Malý Rytter
This paper is primarily based on experientially derived insights about building a bot with artificial intelligence (AI)–in this case, chat generative pre-trained transformer (ChatGPT)–to prepare students to engage in strategic conversations during foresight fieldwork. The motivation of the exploratory process outlined in this paper is the pedagogical concern of sending students into the field sufficiently prepared to meet the expectations of external stakeholders. The authors explore a in-class prompt engineering exercise to create a “chief operating bot” (COB) to simulate a C-suite executive. The student-faculty team input hand-selected, industry-specific, company-generated documentation, and, after asking ChatGPT to “roleplay” the COO, the student queries this COB in an exploratory fashion embedded in a contained, consequence-free learning environment. The audience for this paper is faculty responsible for overseeing student engagement experiences like fieldwork, as well as department heads and school deans looking to promote new tools and advance novel applications of AI in their units. The authors explore ways to enhance student readiness for scenario fieldwork based on an exercise drawn from van der Heijden's clairvoyant question, which we refer to colloquially as the “crystal ball thought experiment.” The authors, upon reflection, conclude that the COB can valuably supplement–but not fully replace–face-to-face interactions with a COO. Broadly, leveraging AI to create interactive tools like COBs has the potential to transform business education by bridging academic preparation with real-world demands, enhancing student readiness, advancing AI-assisted curricula, and contributing to strategic planning and regional development.
{"title":"Reflections on Building an Artificial Intelligence Bot to Prepare Students to Engage in Strategic Conversations During Foresight Fieldwork","authors":"Rui Pedro Gonçalves, Matthew J. Spaniol, Nicholas J. Rowland, Niels Gorm Malý Rytter","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.202","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.202","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper is primarily based on experientially derived insights about building a bot with artificial intelligence (AI)–in this case, chat generative pre-trained transformer (ChatGPT)–to prepare students to engage in strategic conversations during foresight fieldwork. The motivation of the exploratory process outlined in this paper is the pedagogical concern of sending students into the field sufficiently prepared to meet the expectations of external stakeholders. The authors explore a in-class prompt engineering exercise to create a “chief operating bot” (COB) to simulate a C-suite executive. The student-faculty team input hand-selected, industry-specific, company-generated documentation, and, after asking ChatGPT to “roleplay” the COO, the student queries this COB in an exploratory fashion embedded in a contained, consequence-free learning environment. The audience for this paper is faculty responsible for overseeing student engagement experiences like fieldwork, as well as department heads and school deans looking to promote new tools and advance novel applications of AI in their units. The authors explore ways to enhance student readiness for scenario fieldwork based on an exercise drawn from van der Heijden's clairvoyant question, which we refer to colloquially as the “crystal ball thought experiment.” The authors, upon reflection, conclude that the COB can valuably supplement–but not fully replace–face-to-face interactions with a COO. Broadly, leveraging AI to create interactive tools like COBs has the potential to transform business education by bridging academic preparation with real-world demands, enhancing student readiness, advancing AI-assisted curricula, and contributing to strategic planning and regional development.</p>","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ffo2.202","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143116248","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Waste crime is a pressing concern for the waste and resource industry as it is undermining investment, growth and jobs within the industry and threatening the natural environment. However, there is little knowledge of the scale of the problem, the types of criminality and motivations involved, and the precise nature of crime. Environmental regulators are building foresight capabilities to better understand the effect of current and future changes in markets, in technology and in the legislative environment on waste crime and associated behaviours. At the heart of this paper is the question: how can horizon scanning be adopted by environmental regulators to shape decision processes and build resilience to waste crime? We report our efforts to build a toolkit and guidance for conducting horizon scanning, aimed at supporting environmental regulators, investigators and intelligence analysts to build an understanding of—and interpretation of the consequences of—behavioural, market, technological and pollution trends in the waste sector. A review of the academic and grey literature provided insights to organisational approaches and design principles for public sector horizon scanning. Outputs guided discussion at a stakeholder workshop with waste regulators, criminal intelligence and industry professionals to explore institutional challenges and to agree broad design principles for a horizon scanning process. The toolkit supports environmental regulators in applying horizon scanning to policy and wider operational and delivery-focused challenges; learning how to: (1) spot weak signals and emerging trends quickly, (2) examine the evidence around potential threats and opportunities for the future, and (3) take action on strategically important issues to minimise the impact of crime on the environment, society and business. The paper sets out further research needed to integrate horizon scanning with data analytics (e.g., predictive and hotspot analyses) to challenge assumptions about the patterns of change, based largely on historical trends, and to better manage these so there is greater adaptability to current and future trends.
{"title":"Using Horizon Scanning to Build Policy Resilience: Case of Waste Crime","authors":"Kenisha Garnett, Alister Wilson, Edith Wilkinson","doi":"10.1002/ffo2.201","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.201","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Waste crime is a pressing concern for the waste and resource industry as it is undermining investment, growth and jobs within the industry and threatening the natural environment. However, there is little knowledge of the scale of the problem, the types of criminality and motivations involved, and the precise nature of crime. Environmental regulators are building foresight capabilities to better understand the effect of current and future changes in markets, in technology and in the legislative environment on waste crime and associated behaviours. At the heart of this paper is the question: how can horizon scanning be adopted by environmental regulators to shape decision processes and build resilience to waste crime? We report our efforts to build a toolkit and guidance for conducting horizon scanning, aimed at supporting environmental regulators, investigators and intelligence analysts to build an understanding of—and interpretation of the consequences of—behavioural, market, technological and pollution trends in the waste sector. A review of the academic and grey literature provided insights to organisational approaches and design principles for public sector horizon scanning. Outputs guided discussion at a stakeholder workshop with waste regulators, criminal intelligence and industry professionals to explore institutional challenges and to agree broad design principles for a horizon scanning process. The toolkit supports environmental regulators in applying horizon scanning to policy and wider operational and delivery-focused challenges; learning how to: (1) spot weak signals and emerging trends quickly, (2) examine the evidence around potential threats and opportunities for the future, and (3) take action on strategically important issues to minimise the impact of crime on the environment, society and business. The paper sets out further research needed to integrate horizon scanning with data analytics (e.g., predictive and hotspot analyses) to challenge assumptions about the patterns of change, based largely on historical trends, and to better manage these so there is greater adaptability to current and future trends.</p>","PeriodicalId":100567,"journal":{"name":"FUTURES & FORESIGHT SCIENCE","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ffo2.201","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142868425","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}