The article Because of AI: Why we need to rethink democracy appeared first in the online magazine BASIC thinking. With our newsletter UPDATE you can start the day well informed every morning.
Artificial intelligence is changing markets, societies and therefore power. It is forcing democracies to act faster and more strategically than ever before. If AI becomes more capable of learning, democracy must also become capable of learning. Could anticipatory democracy help?
Around the world, the question is no longer whether artificial intelligence (AI) will change our society, but rather how quickly and to what extent. Democratic processes are also affected by this.
AI and Democracy: Legal Framework and Anticipatory Approaches
To deal with this, several legal “frameworks” have now been created, including the European Union’s “AI Regulation”. “AI Principles” of the OECD and the “Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law” of the Council of Europe. The latter in particular aims to anchor AI design to protect democracy and the rule of law.
Democracy has not been a rigid concept in the past, but has always adapted. Given the enormous developments in AI, the question arises as to how democracy can remain relevant. One idea is so-called anticipatory democracy.
The term means embedding long-term planning, evidence-based action and citizen participation more deeply into democratic processes – precisely because AI accelerates change and political responses may increasingly lag behind.
Definition: What is anticipatory democracy?
Anticipatory democracy describes a way of government and government in which systematic foresight, structured participation of stakeholders and learning control are integrated into the democratic decision-making processes.
The background to this idea is that reactive action is no longer sufficient when AI influences social dynamics almost in real time. Anticipatory democracy therefore requires thinking about tomorrow’s effects today, for example:
- Which political decisions have which side effects?
- Which technologies could affect our democratic system?
- What risks arise from AI-powered disinformation or public debates that are automated by algorithms?
- How can democratic legitimacy be secured when AI systems generate decision suggestions or influence public spaces of opinion?
Essentially, it’s about making political processes, such as legislative procedures, more sustainable – not through “an” additional technology, but through a new way of governing with an eye on speed, complexity and uncertainty.
Origin and development
The idea of anticipatory democracy is not new but dates back to the 1970s. Back then, futurologists such as Alvin Toffler (in the book “Future Shock”) and Clement Bezold were committed to thinking about citizens not just as reactors, but as co-creators of the future. The idea behind it was that democracy had to think in the longer term and, in particular, take technical and social developments into account.
Since the 1990s and 2000s, so-called “foresight programs” have been established in various countries: in Finland with the “Committee for the Future”, in the United Kingdom through the government’s Foresight Office or regionally in various citizen participation formats. In Germany too, considerations are being made about the future, for example by the Science and Politics Foundation.
With the transition to the digital age and the emergence of AI models such as “Large Language Models” (LLMs), which gave the public previously unknown access to prepared information, this approach of “new thinking for the future” gained new relevance: AI is not only changing individual policy areas, but entire government systems.
Effects of anticipatory democracy in the age of AI
In view of the acceleration of design processes through AI, in my opinion three dimensions are important. The first is institutionalized foresight. Governments and parliaments, as places of state decision-making, need foresight institutions that pick up trends, risks and opportunities, particularly from AI developments, at an early stage, observe them and translate them into strategic considerations:
- How is generative AI changing the public debate?
- How does it affect labor markets?
- How does it change frameworks of legitimacy?
The second dimension is that of collective intelligence. Committees of citizens, digital deliberation (i.e. participation of citizens in discussions using digital platforms) and multi-professional expert committees can help to bring not only technical facts, but also value- and society-related questions (“What do we want as a society?”) to the fore – especially when AI expands decision-making spaces.
The third dimension is that of iterative governance. AI-supported scenario analyses, pilot projects (“real labs” or “sandbox systems”) and collection of evidence make it possible to understand decisions not as static and unchangeable, but as a kind of “breathing” hypotheses that are tested, evaluated and adjusted.
In the interaction of these three dimensions, anticipatory democracy becomes the answer to the speed and complexity created by AI because it makes political action and governance more proactive, reflexive and adaptive.
Opportunities for a new understanding of democracy
I think it has become clear: Anticipatory democracy offers exciting opportunities for societies because, in the face of AI-accelerated upheaval, it can identify warning signals earlier, expand scope for action and increase the participation of citizens in democratic processes.
As a result, it can strengthen trust in institutions and the state itself if politicians make transparent the assumptions, models and uncertainties they work with. This is particularly important at a time when AI affects public spaces of opinion such as social media channels, data flows and algorithmic filters.
Limits of anticipatory democracy
However, there are also limitations that should not be ignored. If the foresight of events is determined solely by experts and thus replaces political debates, democracy loses its real participation. Rather, it becomes a mere shell.
And if AI results are adopted without public and ethical discussion, the political decision risks losing its democratic legitimacy. In addition, anticipatory governance requires institutional and technological adjustments such as data infrastructure, methodological diversity, and competence building.
And finally, one more thing should be kept in mind: speed must not lead to participation, control and transparency falling by the wayside. These limits are not insurmountable – but they must be known and addressed.
AI and Democracy: Looking Ahead
I think anticipatory democracy is an idea worth pursuing. One thing is becoming increasingly clear: the previous approaches to co-decision, including in the parliamentary democracy of the Federal Republic of Germany, do not have the speed that is now required through the use of AI.
On the other hand, anticipatory democracy is not a replacement for the existing democratic order, but rather an extension of it in the AI age. It does not ask the question whether AI is socially relevant – that is rather a prerequisite – but rather how democratic systems should react to this relevance. Anyone who designs today bears responsibility – not just for the now, but for tomorrow.
Due to the change caused by AI, democracy not only needs responsiveness, but also foresight in the form of learning control. In this sense, anticipatory democracy becomes an upgrade to the current order. It then combines political responsibility with scientific reflection, participation with strategy and future thinking with participation.
Also interesting:
- Why Germany needs a “state operating system”.
- “Here is your dead grandpa”: How Deathbots are supposed to digitize grief
- Smart contracts: Will Germany miss the next innovation?
- This human ability is most important when dealing with AI
The article Because of AI: Why we need to rethink democracy appeared first on BASIC thinking. Follow us too Google News and Flipboard or subscribe to our newsletter UPDATE.
As a Tech Industry expert, I believe that the rise of AI presents both opportunities and challenges for democracy. On one hand, AI has the potential to enhance democratic processes by increasing efficiency, transparency, and citizen engagement. For example, AI can be used to improve election monitoring, analyze public opinion data, and personalize political communication.
However, AI also raises concerns about the potential for manipulation, bias, and infringement on privacy rights. The use of AI in political campaigns, for example, can lead to the spread of misinformation and the targeting of vulnerable populations. Additionally, the collection and analysis of vast amounts of data by AI systems can raise questions about who has access to this information and how it is being used.
In light of these challenges, it is crucial for policymakers, technologists, and citizens to rethink the role of democracy in the age of AI. This includes ensuring that AI systems are designed and deployed in a way that upholds democratic values such as transparency, accountability, and fairness. It also requires rethinking the ways in which citizens engage with political processes and ensuring that they have the knowledge and tools to navigate the complexities of AI-driven decision-making.
Ultimately, the integration of AI into democratic systems presents an opportunity to reimagine and strengthen democracy for the digital age. By addressing the challenges posed by AI and harnessing its potential for positive change, we can build a more inclusive, responsive, and resilient democratic society.
Credits