Articles for category: Longtermism and the Law

Extra-Constitutional Commitment Mechanisms

The solution to many public dilemmas requires long-term effort by successive generations. Such situation arises whenever the solution to a public dilemma cannot be implemented instantaneously but is dependent on the continuous effort of future governments (and their citizens). In this post I discuss the problem of securing intergenerational cooperation, focusing on the challenge of designing long-term commitment mechanisms. I will also reflect briefly on the tension between commitment mechanisms and the democratic ideal of citizen sovereignty (allowing each generation to make its own choices).

12. August 2022

, , ,

Narrow Rules are not Enough

With continuing proliferation of increasingly capable AI systems, we will need regulation to address the associated risks. Since our ability to foresee such future risks is very limited, our best bet is to base such regulation on relatively general principles, rather than narrow rules. We think that negative human rights with their existing broad international support could form a suitable foundation both for flexible regulation and for the associated technical solutions.

11. August 2022

, ,

An Intertemporal Perspective on Intergenerational Equity

The traditional understanding of intertemporal law is not persuasive – a modified intertemporal approach to intergenerational equity is necessary. This approach would have to shift the perspective of intertemporal law from a retrospective present-past relationship to a future-oriented perspective. Instead of observing the evolutionary developments of law over time and retrospectively applying them at a certain point in the future, the new approach departs from the contemporary legal regime and attempts to anticipate its prospective evolutionary developments – with regard to intergenerational equity only.

11. August 2022

Solidarity Across Time

I want to focus on the question of what the future can do for us – a question less asked, and which may seem antithetical to the idea of responsible behaviour now, and yet which is simply a part of the idea of solidarity across time. Its practical importance is that it strengthens the relationship between the present and future and so gives a more persuasive and coherent basis for solidaristic behaviour now

10. August 2022

, ,

Paths Untaken

If the development of certain technologies, such as advanced, unaligned AI, would be as dangerous as some have suggested, a long-termist legal perspective might advocate a strategy of technological delay—or even restraint—to avoid a default outcome of catastrophe. To many, restraint–a decision to withhold indefinitely from the development, or at least deployment, of the technology–might look implausible. However, history offers a surprising array of cases where strategically promising technologies were delayed, abandoned, or left unbuilt, even though many at the time perceived their development as inevitable.

9. August 2022

, , ,

Is Legal Longtermism Common Sense?

&

The past decade has seen a growing interest in protecting future generations from risks associated with climate change, pandemics, artificial intelligence, and other potential threats. Philosophical theories have developed in parallel, and those associated with the view that one should be particularly concerned with ensuring that the long-run future goes well have been referred to as longtermism. In the context of law, these theories form the basis for legal longtermism, the set of views associated with the claim that law and legal institutions ought to protect the far future. Based on a pair of recent empirical studies we show that legal experts and laypeople alike believe that the law should protect the long-term future much more than it currently does; that legal experts believe that the law can predictably and feasibly protect the long-term future; and that these beliefs hold true across major demographic subgroups.

9. August 2022

, ,