Enhancing Global Partnerships..

Education

An educated population can fuel innovation, foster inclusive and equitable growth, and find solutions to our greatest challenges to harness the opportunities of the future.

Soft skills should have a more prominent place in instruction, in order to increase adaptability

These soft skills should be developed early, in basic education, and then later refined at colleges and universities - as well as, ideally, during lifelong learning as an adult. By providing a strong base of soft skills, an educational system can serve as a catalyst not only for an increased adaptability to future jobs, but also for a generally improved quality of life. However, shifting demand for skills across industries will require that curricula be updated and adapted on a regular basis - because they are naturally informed by the evolution of labour markets.

Equal opportunity in life requires equal access to a basic education

Fewer than 10% of countries have laws that help ensure full inclusion in their education systems, according to a UNESCO report published in 2020 - and 40% of the poorest countries have failed to support “learners at risk”. While many countries are able to provide adequate primary education, many more struggle with quality and availability; this has been particularly concerning in sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, North Africa, and parts of Southeast Asia, according to the World Economic Forum’s Global Human Capital Report. According to UNICEF, more than 175 million children worldwide have not been receiving pre-primary education, and inequality in terms of access remains high particularly among the poor and disadvantaged.

Providing greater access to a basic education is essential for advancing the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. One widely shared, persistent barrier to providing a broadly accessible, adequate basic education is cost. According to UNESCO’s review of the UN’s Millennium Development Goals (precursors to the SDGs targeted to 2015), an additional $22 billion would be needed every year in order to meet basic education targets for 2030. And, according to a UNESCO report published in 2020, 41% of countries were not conducting meaningful surveys on individual education characteristics such as disabilities - or making related data available. This underlines an acute need for new financing and data collection models, particularly in developing countries. Technological innovation is one means to help address the issue, especially when it comes to children in rural areas and those regularly migrating with their parents.

Education typically ends at an early stage of life, to the detriment of workers and employers

While nearly 84% of the world’s talent under the age of 25 is being “optimized” through education, that figure falls to 45% for those over 25, according to the World Economic Forum’s Global Human Capital Report. In order to better engage people over 25 in gaining new skills, the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning has recommended the development of national qualifications frameworks, and providing lifelong learning through community centres. Skills decline when they are not used, as noted in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Survey of Adult Skills; accurately mapping the typical skills lifecycle is key for estimating the points at which people will likely have a need to refresh their competencies - whether with the aim of simply changing careers, re-entering the workforce after caring for a family member, or following an extended illness.

Better integrating literacy and basic skills programs into national education agendas can lead to an improved quality of life. Many developing countries have made significant progress in terms of increasing investment in education for young people, though education systems around the world continue to emphasize the front-loading of learning at an early stage of life - leaving older generations with educational attainment only as an increasingly faint memory. Ideally, education systems can thrive thanks to a fundamentally strong public sector. However, by working together with the private sector, governments and educators could potentially develop more necessary infrastructure for providing learning and training opportunities to workers at all stages of their careers.

The pandemic highlighted the need to be able to deliver instruction in new and more compelling ways

Even prior to the pandemic, technological innovation was changing the ways educational materials are generated, educational content is distributed, material is engaged with by learners, and educational outcomes are evaluated.

As the education sector is both highly sensitive to change and a central pillar in the economy, better data collection could help ensure effectiveness. In addition to the delivery of education, more innovation is also required in terms of school curricula. UNICEF has advocated for balancing hard skills such as reading, writing, and math with soft skills such as problem-solving and creativity; in addition, instruction should no longer necessarily take place through front-of-class teaching, according to recent research. Pedagogy is a field ripe for innovation, especially when it comes to personalized learning. However, research has also highlighted that new learning tools do not always enable engagement with hard-to-reach groups - and it is critical that the drive for related innovation is matched by the monitoring of its effectiveness. Funding needs to be be strategically allocated to trials, and any successes can be scaled up in the future. Greater public-private collaboration aimed at expanding this opportunity could also be beneficial - since governments cannot necessarily directly influence every classroom, they should instead focus on setting the right conditions for future-proof curricula and more innovative formats.

Technical and vocational training is often unjustly neglected by education systems

Employers have long been warning of widening gaps between the skills in demand and those that workers actually have - while governments have touted a need to foster more technical talent if countries want to be globally competitive. Closing gaps between the skills in demand and those that workers actually have promises to only become more complex, as skills requirements change at an accelerating pace - particularly in emerging technology fields. This calls for greater collaboration between the public and private sectors - in particular, more needs to be done to better balance the goals and desires of policy-makers, politicians, and educational institutions with those of entrepreneurs and investors. There is a need to better understand the linkages between these sometimes disparate interests, and ways they can be combined to serve people, the environment, and broader economies in healthier and more complementary ways.

Accurate, timely career guidance can help successfully transition young people from their school years to employment, by ensuring that they understand their true options based on real labour market data and demand. Proactive career guidance can also help circumvent the gender stereotyping and socio-economic opportunity gaps that often hold young people back from choosing certain occupations. In general, technical and vocational training is underutilized - and often unjustly neglected by education systems as a second-best option. Such training and education can be a key driver of economic growth, by providing many of the skills required for jobs that will have genuine staying power in future labour markets. Technical qualifications may be best designed through collaboration between employers and industry groups, and particular attention should be paid to fostering their evolution based on sets of mutually agreed-upon standards.

Digital skills are essential, but real digital fluency means applying ethical considerations to technical achievement

Technology has provided a crucial lifeline by linking people to loved ones and work - in ways that make it clearer just how digitized the near future will be. The hybrid forms of collaboration that have emerged as we move towards a new normal bring their own challenges, and may aggravate existing inequalities. To thrive in a contemporary workplace, young people need to develop digital fluency and science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) skills from an early age. Real fluency starts with basic digital literacy - and adds an ability to apply critical thought and ethical considerations to using and developing technology, or dealing with data. The ethical use of technology should be embedded throughout an education and lifelong learning, to prepare people of all ages to deal with the thorniest related issues.

Properly matching STEM skills with a solid ethical grounding requires investment, though the benefits in terms of increased digital fluency can clearly exceed related costs. That is certainly true for businesses hiring young people equipped with fluency who are less likely to build artificial intelligence and other systems that result in litigation or scandal. Girls and women are particularly underrepresented within STEM disciplines, and it is crucial to find ways to proactively increase their engagement during secondary and tertiary education.

Future of the Environment

Biodiversity is probably not top of mind if you live in a city. There’s so much going on. Getting on the subway, rushing to work, coordinating your life. It can be hard to remember that we are biodiversity, too. Nevertheless, if you like humans and humanity, if you care about the miracle that is us, our living conditions deserve some love.

Global energy investment is poised to rebound post-pandemic, but more must be directed at the clean energy transition

Amid growing political interest in infrastructure investment as a means to boost productivity and create jobs, the appeal of sustainable infrastructure has long seemed poised to grow. However, there have been troubling signs; a political shift in the US in recent years, for example, resulted in the withdrawal of money promised to the United Nations-backed Green Climate Fund (the US has since promised to make good on its funding pledges). The continued, healthy expansion of sustainable infrastructure will require a new architecture of public-private investment, supported by overseas development assistance, government spending, and sovereign wealth funds.

Much of the interest in green bond issuance has been driven by China, as the Bank of China and the Shanghai-based New Development Bank began issuing their first green bonds in 2016. However, investment in renewable energy technology has disappointed recently, according to the International Energy Agency. Policies and investments are not consistently moving in the right direction. While there were record renewable power capacity additions in 2022, the year also saw the highest levels of fossil fuel subsidies ever, as many governments sought to cushion the blow of high energy prices for consumers and businesses. Global investments across all energy transition technologies reached a record high of USD 1.3 trillion in 2022, yet fossil fuel capital investments were almost twice those of renewable energy investments. With renewables and energy efficiency best placed to meet climate commitments - as well as energy security and energy affordability objectives – governments need to redouble their efforts to ensure investments are on the right track.

The loss of natural habitats is a driver of zoonotic diseases like COVID-19

The world has reached a tipping point. Simply conserving nature and critical ecosystems will no longer be enough to avert catastrophic climate change and a mass extinction. Humanity needs to bring back what has been lost, by restoring degraded ecosystems - in order to achieve the goals outlined in the Paris Agreement. Restoring forests, peatlands, and mangroves (and other natural solutions) can provide more than a third of the greenhouse gas mitigation needed by 2030. And, by halting and reversing the degradation of land and the ocean, we can prevent the loss of one million endangered species. Scientists say restoring just 15% of ecosystems in priority areas and thereby improving habitats can cut extinctions by 60%. Restoration is also key to human prosperity and well-being; vibrant ecosystems provide the food, water, health, and security that a growing global population needs more of every day. Halting the decline of ecosystem services (such as climate control or oxygen production) could prevent the loss of $10 trillion in global income by 2050 - currently, some 2.3 billion people suffer from ecosystem degradation, which undercuts their access to safe food and water.

Restoring ecosystems is critical for global health. The loss of natural habitats is a key driver of zoonotic diseases such as COVID-19, for example, and forest restoration and better farm practices could reduce the pollution of water supplies in 81% of the world’s cities. Adding urban trees can blunt the impacts of pollution and excessive heat, while boosting mental and physical well-being. More than 115 countries have included ecosystem restoration as part of their commitments to the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals, covering roughly one billion hectares - an area larger than China. However, the status of actual implementation is uncertain (ecosystem restoration must follow strict guidelines to avoid monocultures and invasive species, and to ensure that local communities benefit). The United Nations General Assembly has declared the years 2021 through 2030 the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Led by the UN Environment Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organization, the UN Decade is designed to prevent, halt and reverse the degradation of ecosystems worldwide. It will draw together political support, scientific research and financial muscle to revive millions of hectares of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.

Pesticides have threatened global food security, and ‘dead zones’ are being created in the ocean

Chemicals are an integral part of our lives. They can improve health, supply the food we need, and when managed well they can be truly invaluable. But when poorly managed, hazardous chemicals and waste threaten human health, biodiversity, and fragile ecosystems. The World Health Organization has estimated that contamination resulting from the use of even a relatively small group of chemicals claimed roughly 1.6 million lives in 2016 alone. In addition, research has shown that pesticides are contributing to the loss of pollinators such as bees, and in turn threatening global food security - while excessive agricultural use of phosphorous and nitrogen has created “dead zones” in the ocean. The resulting financial costs amount to tens of billions of dollars annually. According to the second edition of the Global Chemicals Outlook published by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the chemical industry will reach about $10 trillion in value by 2030 - the challenge will be ensuring this growth is a net positive for humanity and the planet. The good news is that governments, investors, retailers, and consumers are increasingly working to make it so.

Companies are advancing their standards beyond mere compliance and sustainable supply chain management, for example, while entrepreneurs are tapping into more sustainable innovation. Meanwhile consumers are driving demand for safer products and production, and adding to a growing realization that we have to rethink current business models. Hazardous substances generated from toxic chemicals have been banned from production and usage in several countries, which has in turn brightened the growth prospects of green chemicals as alternatives. Green and sustainable chemistry is being applied across the entire lifecycle of chemicals, including their design, manufacture, application, and disposal. The demand for green alternatives is particularly high in the textile industry, which is one of the major end-users of chemicals, and their continued evolution will be critical for a chemicals industry constantly in search of expanding markets and growth. Businesses, governments, and civil society organizations have all played important roles in exploring the full potential of sustainable chemistry, through initiatives such as the International Sustainable Chemistry Collaborative Centre (ISC3) and the European Technology Platform for Sustainable Chemistry (SusChem).

Science suggests breaking the destructive link between economic growth and natural resource use is possible

Natural resources underpin the global economy, as biomass, fossil fuels, metals, minerals, arable land, and water supply everything from the food we eat to the buildings we live in. These resources are also a bridge between economic activity and climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, and poor health. As the global economy and population have expanded, the use of natural resources has more than tripled over the past five decades - with dire consequences for the environment and human health and well-being. According to the International Resource Panel’s report Global Resources Outlook 2019, the extraction and processing of materials including metals, minerals, fossil fuels and biomass are responsible for half of all global climate change, more than 80% of water stress and land-related biodiversity loss, and a third of all air pollution. According to IRP estimates, barring drastic change, global resource consumption will double by 2060. This rate of growth would not only be catastrophic for the climate and for biodiversity, it would also further undermine notions of fairness and equality - as these resources would be used up inordinately by high-income countries, while related negative impacts are primarily absorbed by the less fortunate.

The average person living in a high-income country consumes 60% more natural resources than their counterpart in an upper-middle-income country, and more than 13 times that of a counterpart in a low-income country. In every type of economy, the decoupling of natural-resource use (and related environmental impacts) from economic growth and human well-being is necessary to transition to a more sustainable future.

Some ‘planetary boundaries’ within which humanity can thrive have already been crossed

Human activity has placed the environment under extreme stress. In 2009, an international group of scientists proposed the concept of “planetary boundaries,” within which humanity can continue to thrive for generations. Already, four of the nine boundaries have been crossed - even though neglecting to remain within these limits, which are tied to factors like climate change, freshwater use, and chemical pollution, can result in irreversible environmental damage. Roughly 400 billion metric tonnes of carbon have been released into the atmosphere due to the consumption of fossil fuels since 1751, and half of these emissions have occurred since the late 1980s, according to the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center. Meanwhile water stress is exacting a heavy toll; the UN Food and Agriculture Organization estimated in 2020 that available freshwater resources had declined globally by more than 20% per person over the preceding two decades, and an estimated four billion people may live in countries with physical water scarcity by 2050. Barring significant change, the world could face a serious water deficit by 2030 affecting sanitation and health, energy generation, and agriculture.

Ocean acidification, a harmful process that increases as greater amounts of carbon dioxide are absorbed from the atmosphere, is a mounting concern for the tourism and fishing industries - and is poised to accelerate as the ocean’s ability to absorb carbon dioxide declines. Overfishing is also a concern; according to figures published by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization in 2016, nearly a third of global fish stocks had already been overfished, and illegal fishing was removing about 26 million metric tonnes of seafood - valued at nearly $23 billion - per year. According to figures published subsequently by the FAO, the percentage of global fish stocks deemed within biologically sustainable levels fell from 90% in 1974, to just 65.8% by 2017. The stresses that have accumulated on the environment and on natural resource security have become so great - with most of the resulting impact yet to fully play out - that many academics now report that human activity, mass extinctions, and extensive pollution have demarcated a wholly new epoch for Earth, dubbed the “Anthropocene.”

Environmental dangers threaten economic growth and viability, and can trigger violent conflict

The World Economic Forum’s Global Risks Report has underlined a series of interconnected environmental risks, related to extreme weather events, climate change, and water crises. These are all closely tied to other categories of risk; changing weather patterns or water crises, for example, can trigger or exacerbate geopolitical and social issues like domestic or regional conflict, not to mention involuntary migration - particularly in politically-fragile areas. A lack of effective management of the ocean, the atmosphere, and climate systems generally can therefore have local as well as global consequences, which extend well beyond the environment. While non-environmental risks have typically flared and then subsided as conditions have varied, or as the international community has mobilized to contain them, environmental issues consistently remain among the top global risks from year to year. This points to a systemic problem, and responding effectively has proven to be a challenge. While the Paris Agreement on climate change was ratified in 2017, for example, as of 2021 countries were still generally considered to be falling short on related commitments.

Even if countries do deliver on their Paris Agreement commitments, the United Nations Environment Programme has estimated that the world will still warm by as much as 3.2°C compared with pre-industrial levels - far above the targeted ceiling of 2°C. Meanwhile the impacts are spreading. According to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre, an annual average of 25.3 million people were displaced by climate- or weather-related events between 2008 and 2016, and the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters has estimated that 96 million people were affected by natural disasters in 2017 alone. Entire communities have already had to be relocated or plan to relocate amid rising sea levels. A World Bank report suggested that water stress may trigger extreme societal problems in regions such as the Middle East and the Sahel - where water scarcity could affect as much as 6% of local GDP by 2050. The same report projected that water availability in cities could decline by as much as two-thirds between 2015 and 2050, due to climate change and increased competition within the energy and agriculture sectors.

Media, Entertainment

& SPORTS

Digital content of every type can deliver value that goes beyond the monetary, by serving as a social glue. The use of digital platforms to effectively distribute everything from streamed matches to social messages. This is having a direct impact on the molding of cultures and societies.

The vast amounts of user data generated daily for media industry consumption create regulatory challenges

There are hundreds of millions of photos and videos published on Instagram, a significantly higher number of published tweets, and an even far greater number of YouTube video views on a daily basis. Governing this content only becomes more difficult as the ease with which anyone can create and share it increases. While trending hashtags and engaging content might enable users to reach a wide audience, they can also spur calls for closer regulation - the inflammatory misinformation posted online prior to the riot at the US Capitol on 6 January 2021 is a case in point. Despite repeated urgent requests for the removal of such content prior to the riot, it has only relatively recently received greater scrutiny on mainstream platforms. Live video streaming has also exposed wrongdoing - such as when Philando Castile was shot by a policeman in the US in 2016 as his girlfriend filmed. Facebook has used artificial intelligence as well as human moderators to try to combat the spread of violent content and fake news, and its efforts (along with those of other online platforms) will be crucial as people increasingly go to the internet for their news and information.

Governments have taken varied approaches to regulating content. After bombings in Sri Lanka in April 2019 left nearly 300 people dead in churches and hotels, that country’s government moved swiftly to temporarily ban social media sites and services including Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp, Snapchat and Viber - in an effort to curb the spread of inflammatory misinformation. In China, the country’s roughly 1,900 newspapers, 2,600 radio stations and 9,000 magazines are all owned by the government, and operate under the watchful eyes of 2 million people employed as censors. Whether regulation is applied by governments or popular platforms themselves, a respect for legitimate free speech is critical. Net neutrality, the principle that any lawful content should be made readily available online without bias or interference from an internet service provider, has become a hotly-debated topic - as governments could theoretically allow service providers to inhibit content presenting controversial viewpoints, while content providers could start paying for preferential treatment for their own sites and services. While efforts to restrict net neutrality gained traction in the US during the Trump administration, India approved regulations in 2018 that support net neutrality and bar any type of online data restriction.

It is crucial to be able to assign accountability for the accuracy of online content during crises

Inaccurate or misleading online content can be deadly. According to the 2021 Edelman Trust Barometer, 70% of respondents with “good" information hygiene said they would take a COVID-19 vaccine within a year’s time, compared with just 59% of those with "poor" information hygiene. By enabling just about anyone to create and widely distribute content, it has made it increasingly difficult for social media companies to balance the need to fact-check with the need to preserve freedom of speech. These companies must try to distinguish between people mistakenly sharing misinformation and those being maliciously deceptive. More than half of the respondents surveyed for a report published by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism and the University of Oxford in 2018 said they were concerned about what is real on the internet - with the highest percentage registered in Brazil (85%), and the lowest in the Netherlands (30%). As the COVID-19 pandemic persists, and new and troubling variants are discovered, people everywhere are relying as much as possible on credible news outlets for helpful information.

Journalists have a particular responsibility to adapt to this new era of communication. Not least, because their work is at risk of being drowned out by cacophony - and because they themselves are at risk of being manipulated into spreading disinformation, according to a report published by UNESCO in 2018. Journalism must distance itself from information that might interest the public, but is not in the public interest. For many industries the road to rebuilding trust will be long, however, due to the growing potential to abuse technology and a lack of clarity on how best to regulate technology companies. For example, while some celebrated Google’s announcement that it would acquire wearable device maker Fitbit, serious concerns were also raised about Google’s new access to significant amounts of personal health data - which could theoretically be linked to personal search data for advertising purposes. Advancements in artificial intelligence and “deepfakes” - manipulated video representations of people produced by sophisticated AI - have only created additional challenges as the public struggles to separate truth from fiction.

Tension is mounting between the need to improve media quality and the responsibility to protect privacy

The increased ability to generate and analyse massive amounts of data has triggered a need to pay closer attention to principles governing its use. There have been several high-profile cases highlighting the need to be more cognizant of responsible data use; the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal, for example, involved millions of personal data points being harvested for targeted political advertising and showcased the need for transparency with users about who has access to their data - and how it is being used. In 2019, Twitter had to apologize for using personal information including phone numbers and email addresses for tailored advertisements, and Amazon came under pressure that same year, when it was revealed that thousands of company employees were listening in on the voice requests people regularly make to Amazon’s Alexa home assistant devices, in order to help train artificial intelligence algorithms as part of a process dubbed “data annotation.” While this technique is commonly used by other technology giants, most customers have no idea that it is occurring - and they are liable to provide personally identifiable information during the process that could be misused.

A number of different international institutions and agencies have attempted to articulate best practices for responsible data use. In 2018, representatives of the European Council and European Parliament agreed on implementing the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) as the bloc’s primary law governing how companies must protect data collected from European Union citizens. Some of the key related principles include requiring peoples’ consent to process their personal data, anonymizing data collection for the purposes of privacy protection, providing notification in case of a data breach, putting in place security safeguards when transferring data across borders, and appointing data protection officers to oversee GDPR compliance. Meanwhile in the US, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) went into effect in 2020 as a means to increase consumer privacy rights. The legislation grants people the right to know about all of the data collected on them by businesses, the right to deny the sale of that information, to delete any of that data they have posted, and to take legal action against businesses that were careless in protecting the data.

The pandemic impacted business models based on live events, and boosted demand for online diversion and education

COVID-19 forced live entertainment events of all types to rethink the design of gathering spaces for crowds - and to endure postponements and cancellations that for the US sport industry alone were resulting in losses of as much as $93,000 per minute by May 2020, according to economic modelling firm Emsi. However, the pandemic has also spurred higher demand for streaming entertainment, and for more educational services delivered via the internet; the online learning service Coursera has seen increased demand from businesses and universities in virtual courses, and has made many free for the significant portion of the global population forced to stay home due to social-distancing restrictions. Even in normal periods, the digital democratization of content creation and distribution has the potential to improve many aspects of life - if properly curated. For some people, opportunities to monetize content shared on social media have increased, giving rise to “influencer marketing.” According to research firm IDC, digital advertising spending on social media channels is expected to increase by 129% between 2017 and 2022, to $231 billion, as more companies try to tap influencers.

Despite loosened restrictions that have enabled some live sporting events to take place, questions remain about the pandemic’s long-term impact on the industry. For example, Major League Baseball’s 2020 World Series, which took place in the US in October 2020, drew 30% fewer TV viewers over the course of six nights than the prior year’s event. Some organizations, such as the Chinese Basketball Association, are increasingly looking to virtual reality as a means to maintain and monetize fan engagement - a trend that may well outlast the pandemic. Digital content of every type can deliver value that goes beyond the monetary, by serving as a social glue. Cancer patients and survivors, for example, have formed online support groups, and research published in the journal New Media & Society found that playing video games frequently as a family promotes closeness. Web search queries and social media posts can also serve as leading indicators to forecast disease outbreaks, by combining them with traditional public health data sources. In terms of disaster and crisis-response management, organizations can use of content posted by people affected by disasters to identify where best to deploy resources.

Entertainers and athletes can play a significant role in addressing inequality and other social ills

The media spotlight provides a significant means to pursue social activism. Athletes in particular have taken advantage of their visibility to raise awareness of issues including racial injustice; for example, 2020 US Open winner Naomi Osaka received extensive coverage for her decision to wear face masks throughout the tennis competition that bore the names of unarmed black people killed by police (Osaka said her intention was to spark a conversation). Notably, Osaka’s corporate sponsors continued to support her - and to support in turn the broader racial justice movement. As more athletes leverage their media reach for similar purposes, fewer sport franchises and sponsors will be able to remain neutral (Washington, D.C.’s National Football League franchise, for example, finally yielded to pressure to change its racially insensitive name in 2020). The need to foster greater social cohesion has perhaps never been greater, as the world struggles to emerge from a devastating pandemic that has laid bare many inequalities and shortcomings. The extent to which media personalities and platforms choose to play a constructive role in this could have lasting consequences.

A decentralization and democratization of media has enabled people to more freely create and distribute content to inform, or to misinform. This content plays a pivotal role in shaping the social fabric, as media outlets both facilitate healthy discussion about issues and spread dangerous lies. Ultimately, social media has the potential to further awaken our collective conscious about inequality related to race, gender, and wealth - and to foster a more active dialogue about mental health that could pave the way to increased acceptance and understanding. The impact of media on mental health in particular has been a source of growing concern. An experiment conducted by neuroscientists from the University of Southern California and Southwest University in Chongqing, China found that Facebook stimulates the same section of the brain activated by gambling and substance abuse, and overuse of social media has been linked to feelings of anxiety, depression, and social isolation. While COVID-19 has increased the use of social media, it has also, thankfully, boosted general interest in outdoors activity. For many people, physical activity including sport can be a means of forming social bonds and boosting self-esteem.

Media, entertainment, and sport businesses are trying to harness the benefits of the technology, but adoption requires careful evaluation

In many ways the media industry has been at the forefront of artificial intelligence adoption. In addition to using AI algorithms to analyse viewing habits and recommend content, the technology is now increasingly finding its way into the production of content; journalists are using it to more efficiently generate things like headline alternatives and summaries, particularly for data-driven items like financial earnings stories and sporting event results. For advertisers, AI can be used to optimize placement and targeting at scale. However, AI has also democratized content production and distribution in ways that increase the risk of spreading mis- and disinformation at unprecedented speed and scale. According to the results of a survey conducted by Ipsos in 29 countries in 2023, anxiety about being unable to distinguish between real and AI-generated content, and about what people might do to exploit that uncertainty, has increased. 64% of respondents in Germany said they think AI is making it easier to generate very realistic fake news, and more than half in the US think AI will make mis- and disinformation worse.

The entertainment industry has utilized AI to create more realistic (and potentially cost-effective) visual effects for films and television, to assist in music creation, and to create more intelligent and realistic non-player characters and voices for videogames. The industry’s adoption of the technology has not been devoid of controversy, however. AI’s burgeoning capacity helped to make it a primary point of contention between striking Hollywood writers and producers in 2023, and the agreement ultimately reached between the two sides put AI in the hands of writers to assist them and augment their creativity - rather than in the hands of studios, which will not be able to generate entire scripts using AI before having a human polish them for final use, or treat AI-generated content as source material for a film adaptation. The sports industry is also finding its way forward with greater use of AI - for everything from analysing athlete performance and honing training regimens to help prevent injury, to creating more personalized content for fans including highlight reels and statistical analyses. AI can also be used to help with crowd management at sporting events, in ways that improve safety.

People have demonstrated a desire for more online content, and for branding that aligns with a social conscience

Athlete and celebrity activism has clearly impacted consumer behaviour. Former National Football League quarterback Colin Kaepernick, for example, drew international attention for kneeling during the national anthem to protest police brutality and for his views on systemic racism - and then saw his value to corporate sponsor Nike surge. Nike’s CEO was quoted in the media describing the company’s decision to proactively align with Kaepernick and his social causes as an acknowledgement of the value of empowering athletes’ expression. Ice cream giant Ben & Jerry’s has also partnered with Kaepernick on a non-dairy dessert, with a portion of proceeds going to Kaepernick’s Know Your Rights Camp initiative (which has a stated mission of “advancing the liberation and well-being of Black and Brown communities”). The allure of Kaepernick-related branding underlines a broader shift in consumer behaviour, as people increasingly favour companies with a social conscience. One related challenge, however, is ensuring that corporations are not merely posturing - and are demonstrating meaningful support. People are also increasingly embracing a more transient media identity. They no longer necessarily consider themselves mere audience members - and no longer want one-size-fits-all experiences decided upon by corporations.

The growth in demand for tailor-made content means distributors must constantly vie for attention, and users now often find themselves overloaded with subscriptions. People all over the world now subscribe to paid streaming services, and there will likely be a growing interest among these users in seeing manifestations and representations of themselves in content - which could be aided by responsibly leveraging user data. COVID-19 and related mobility restrictions have triggered a sharp increase in online media consumption, as customers in relative isolation look to stay informed and entertained via gaming and streaming services, news, and educational content. More than half of the global population is now using the internet, according to the International Telecommunication Union, and increasingly ubiquitous connectivity promises to continue to shape consumer habits (a good deal of content is now being digested in abbreviated form on mobile social-networking apps, for example). Increasing investment in network technology such as 5G should enable even greater access to content, increasingly via smartphone and often on platforms like Facebook. Greater demand requires greater investment, however; Netflix is expected to spend nearly $20 billion on content in 2021.

Technology’s impact on the media industry has been amplified by the pandemic

The entertainment industry was overwhelmed as COVID-19 spread, and live concerts, comedy clubs, theatres, and other entertainment venues around the world progressively went dark. However, the pandemic also boosted demand for internet-based alternatives. Streaming services in the US added tens of millions of new users within the first few months of 2020, according to estimates, and the decision by entertainment giant Warner Bros. to premiere its 2021 films on streaming service HBO Max as well as in theatres underscored the transformation of entertainment consumption. The music industry has also sought to adapt, with virtual live concerts; Songkick, for example, offers people the ability to purchase live-streamed virtual concert tickets. In addition, eGaming and eSports each saw sharp growth in 2020, with eSports expected to become at least a $1.5 billion global industry by 2023, according to reports. Even prior to the pandemic, artificial intelligence and augmented and virtual reality were affecting the ways we communicate, behave, learn, and work - and the digital portion of the global media and entertainment industry’s income had already been projected to easily surpass 50% by 2022, up from less than 37% in 2013, according to PwC.

Blockchain has also played a role in transforming media, by enabling companies to more accurately monitor content assets and measure the impact of digital advertising. However, AI may promise the most serious industry disruption thanks to pattern recognition and predictive analytics. As users produce increasing amounts of data related both to content they consume and the time they spend consuming it, marketers are using that data to try to automatically point to what they might want next; the algorithms deployed by Spotify and Netflix to suggest songs or shows are prominent examples. AI is also impacting digital print media - where content increasingly sits behind a paywall - by enabling flexible paywalls and tools to evaluate the likelihood that a reader allowed inside of a paywall for free will convert to a paid subscriber. Automated content is also increasingly common; The Los Angeles Times, for example, uses a tool to report nearly in real time on earthquakes, while the Associated Press automates short articles about corporate earnings. Sophisticated algorithms have also given us “deepfakes,” or videos designed to mislead an audience into believing a high-profile person said or did something.

Social Justice

Despite the aspirations of human rights activists and policy-makers, humanity still has not realized its collective talent potential - as significant parts of the population remain effectively excluded from disruption as a means to design workplaces that genuinely serve everyone’s needs.

Failing to address root problems like a lack of security and disease undermines the rule of law

Generations of idealists have sought to establish a global system of governance that creates the conditions necessary for peace, security and prosperity to prevail. The work of the United Nations, a manifestation of this idealism, is replicated in regional arrangements that seek collective security, and in other institutions (like customs unions) that work towards greater global cooperation through trade. Conflict is the unfortunate backdrop for many such attempts throughout history; decolonization, achieved progressively since the end of World War II, has yielded many independent countries still configured along lines drawn on maps centuries ago to delineate spheres of interest among competing colonial powers. International law has deemed these boundaries sacrosanct, despite their often random nature - which has frequently placed many different ethnic, linguistic, and religious groups under a single flag. Successful states have been able to bring communities together to create stability, while in others ethnic tensions and historic antagonisms boost the odds of violent extremism, and war, both within and beyond national boundaries. Vulnerability and a lack of security continue to undermine aspirations for peace and security.

The global arms trade and the proliferation of weapons often hasten the breakdown of the rule of law - but failures to address root problems, like disease, food and water insecurity, and a lack of meaningful employment and education, are also factors. Entrenched poverty and the competition for scarce resources create existential tension, enabling conflict to fester. Climate injustice, long suffered most acutely by those farthest from power, has boosted migratory flows - as have armed conflicts. Humanitarian actors have struggled to meet growing needs, and to engender a spirit of cooperation and collaboration, while policy-makers, activists and experts have toiled to draw sufficient attention to the climate catastrophe and the need to help ensure a better future for the planet. The UN’s Sustainable Development Goals - and specifically the related “Leave No One Behind” principle - have generated a vision of a more peaceful world; not necessarily through avoiding war or better arranging for collective security, but based on addressing basic human vulnerability alongside planetary concerns, and by redesigning underlying systems in ways most likely to yield greater stability.

The values that have underpinned commercial activity require an update

Humanity has managed to bring the planet to the brink of destruction, with devastating implications. Colonialism and an unquenchable thirst for natural resources played key roles in the now-unfolding environmental crisis, as extraction and exploitation became the norm in many parts of the world. These activities undermined indigenous cultures, and subjugated indigenous peoples - relegating them to footnotes in a supply chain. They also triggered over-consumption in wealthy countries, elevated profits over ethics, marginalized efforts to replenish resources, and curbed necessary climate action. Configuring a more just relationship between the planet and people, and between the people who have benefited from resource exploitation and those who have been marginalized as a result, is now urgently necessary. Related efforts call for effective prioritization - and a recognition of the fundamental role played by indigenous peoples as traditional environmental custodians. Assumptions that modern technology alone can solve problems like the climate crisis erroneously overlook the value of traditional knowledge, which has been progressively depleted and dismissed during the era of exploitation that brought us to this crucial juncture.

The areas of the planet that tend to most conscientiously practice sustainability are managed by indigenous custodians using traditional practices. Evicting them from their lands in the name of economic development or to form “Protected Areas” is therefore a result of deeply flawed logic. Instead, there should be more mainstreaming of their approaches, acceptance of their sovereignty, and more of an effort to seek out their advice when it comes to stemming environmental damage. Ultimately, there is a need for fundamental, systemic change in terms of demand and consumption - including the manufacturing of more durable goods, and the reduction of disposable products that contribute waste. For businesses this calls for more sustainable, less expansive supply chains. The very values underpinning commercial activity require dramatic change. A greater emphasis on environmental protection is required, and greater returns must accrue to people by way of meaningful employment and just pay levels. The effort to achieve greater equality and sustainability is a key test for humanity, and one that it cannot afford to fail.

Whether based on race, caste, religion, or gender, discrimination is rampant

Entrenched structural shortcomings have made inequality a reality in just about every part of the world. While Apartheid in South Africa was easily recognized as abhorrent, similar types of systemic bias continue to sustain patriarchy and privilege - and are either not-well-understood or wilfully ignored. These systems are often presented as meritocratic and fair, while in fact they serve to keep certain groups of people far from power and influence. Despite the aspirations of human rights activists and policy-makers, humanity still has not realized its collective talent potential - as significant parts of the population remain effectively excluded from obtaining a quality education. Structural discrimination rests on the twin pillars of prejudice and failure to prioritise systemic change. Some of the many factors at play include race in the US, caste and religion in India, sexual orientation in Uganda, gender in Saudi Arabia, immigration status in Europe, and statelessness in Haiti. Societies constructed on explicit or implicit bias require a retracing of the steps that got them there, a recalibration of historical attitudes, and more forward-looking approaches.

Prejudice is born of insecurity, and ensures that particular groups dominate. It is perpetuated by people (usually men) from dominant ethnic, racial, religious, or linguistic communities, with any departure from their “norm” treated as deviant and harmful, In previous centuries this fuelled colonization and false notions of the value of one civilization over others. This legacy is deep-seated, and continues to enable the subjugation of native populations, making their ancestral territories and resources subservient to dominant political powers. The general exclusion of women and others deemed “deviant,” such as the LGBTI community, has continued - though modernizing social norms are steadily outstripping ancient prejudices. Women’s voices are coming to the fore, as seen in the #MeToo movement, racial intermixing and immigration are reshaping societies, and widespread support exists for the types of systemic change called for by Black Lives Matter and other movements. The scale and complexity of global problems requires tapping the broadest talent pool to find solutions; relying only on a relatively small portion of the population based on its privileged identity would be foolhardy.

Festering injustice as a legacy of a poorly-understood past can act as a brake on development

Talent is measured through achievement, though achievement itself is often a result of opportunity - which is unavailable to many people. The potential economic rewards for limiting social injustice are many. Increasingly diverse societies are a reality in many parts of the world, especially in relatively wealthy countries where colonization and trade drew waves of newcomers over the years. Yet, rather than seeing this as a natural advantage (and natural consequence of historical choices based on greed and resource exploitation), many places have seen a negative, identity-based politics that encourages xenophobic tendencies emerge in response. The ostensible justification for this is often that “outsiders” pose a threat. However, this view is based sentiment instead of science. It undermines social cohesion and, in turn, shared prosperity. The intermixing of cultures and peoples over the centuries has expanded economies, buttressed international relations, facilitated commerce, and directly contributed to improving the quality of life. Festering injustice as a legacy of a poorly-understood past can act as a brake on development - and a failure to confront it can allow it to linger for generations, nurturing resentment and sowing conflict.

Better ensuring that everyone has access to a quality education can disrupt these exclusionary patterns. It can help mend fragmented societies, prevent fracturing along identity fault-lines, and boost a more diverse mix of entrepreneurs. Policies that take into account historical social injustices can knit disparate communities together, and encourage them to pursue common goals - and work towards achieving more peaceful and prosperous societies. Under revamped paradigms, success will accrue on the basis of ability, not identity. A wider range of role models will become available to inspire more diverse communities, and more energy will be harnessed to find the solutions needed for contemporary problems - whether it is a global health crisis, or a geopolitical conflagration. Ensuring such harmony could boost tax revenues, purchasing power, educational and health outcomes, and general levels of confidence in ways that spark innovation and commerce. Diverse communities will feel increasingly welcomed, and their increased engagement, commerce and trade will aid economic growth and prosperity. Sustainable development for all can ultimately overcome the fractious politics of distraction, which is based on identity and engineered to benefit the few.

The Global Goals for Sustainable Development provide clear targets for eradicating discrimination

Designing a world that both draws on energy resources in a more sustainable manner by 2030, and fosters the fairer treatment of traditionally marginalized people, would constitute a major step forward for humanity. The United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, established in 2015 as a series of targets to hit by the year 2030, include a number of people-oriented goals including eradicating poverty, ending hunger, facilitating the creation of universal health and education access, and eliminating gender-based discrimination and inequality. These provide a framework for potentially strengthening social justice, and pointing systems in a more positive direction for the long-term. Goal 16 may be the marquee goal in terms of social justice, as it calls for providing access to justice for all and for the building of effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions. However, the UN has noted that while the global homicide rate declined between 2015 and 2018, and nearly 130 countries have adopted right-to-information or freedom-of-information laws, the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic has posed a serious threat to global peace and security.

Ultimately, it is the “Leave No One Behind” principle that ties the goals in their entirety to a social justice agenda. According to the UN, the principle represents an unequivocal commitment among all member states to eradicate poverty, end discrimination and exclusion, and reduce inequalities and vulnerabilities. The potential value in putting this principle into practice is obvious: it means recognizing the people who have traditionally been ignored. Related efforts can be augmented by other goals targeting greater energy innovation, more sustainable cities, and decent wages and employment. Enhancing social justice by re-imagining urban areas - expected to be home to nearly 70% of the global population by the year 2050 - is crucial. Similarly, ensuring that fair work conditions are available to everyone, and not just individuals from dominant socio-economic classes, is key. The goals also provide a means to better recognize the role of indigenous people as traditional environmental custodians - and to draw inspiration from their traditional knowledge to generate innovative solutions for climate change impact mitigation, sustainable energy, maintaining biodiversity, and establishing genuinely circular economies.

The same platforms that can bring us together are often used to foment division and violence

Technology can be harnessed to better promote human rights and sustainability. The growth of the Black Lives Matter and Fridays for Future movements have demonstrated this - though it also requires new ways of thinking. Digital rights need to become as much of a priority as more traditional civil and political rights, and to be built on the same process of restructuring institutions to create greater inclusion. The post-World War II vision of systemic, change-oriented responses to the deprivation of rights has become a cornerstone of legal systems, and the idea that the state should uphold these rights is relatively uncontested - though for the most vulnerable populations this remains purely aspirational. Every quest for social justice essentially constitutes a push for greater recognition, and access to protections for cultural and educational rights. For much of the 20th century, human rights efforts were focused on devising rules to reign in the power wielded by governments and courts. Now, corporations have come into much sharper focus - due to the significant influence they wield, not least in terms of dictating how people gain access to information (or misinformation).

COVID-19 has increased our reliance on technology for work, school, communication and creating a sense of community even during isolation. There are also plenty of examples of technology enabling the collection of personal data that is then misused, and of technology seemingly designed to foster cohesion instead pitting some groups against others while sowing hate, fear and mistrust. Future peace, prosperity and respect for individuals and communities will rely at least in part on the extent to which such technology can be responsibly harnessed and used for good, while users are protected from those who seek to exploit it solely for their own benefit. The use of such platforms to generate alternative realities, propagate violence (such as in Myanmar or the US) and undermine institutions and individuals potentially negates earnest efforts to foster unity across sometimes great distances through a shared interface and digital environment. In addition, the extent to which artificial intelligence can be used to undermine human rights and perpetuate systemic racism has is alarming; it can have a significant negative impact on people while fostering misinformation, increasing fragmentation, and risking violence.

The potential rewards for ending the mistreatment of those deemed ‘different’ are many

Power differentials based on gender, tribe, colour, ethnicity, religion, language, ability (or disability), sexual orientation, age, and nationality have all been the cause of serious injustice. While patriarchal systems continue to treat women as lesser human beings, ethnic strife remains easily stoked. Discrimination can cause considerable hardship at an individual level, by silencing and denigrating those affected. But collective discrimination that effectively targets an entire category of people can be the cause of systemic, ingrained social injustice. The formation of the United Nations stemmed directly from the Holocaust and other deadly injustices committed in the name of collective discrimination during World War II. Yet, inequality reinforced by injustice continues to be a global reality, pushing people to the margins and predetermining their life’s trajectory - whether it is laborers from South Asia toiling in the Middle East, Muslims in East Asia being subjected to inhumane treatment, or Black Americans being systematically denied the right to vote. Such destructive identity markers have and will continue to be leveled at people simply for being “different.”

The legacy of slavery and incomplete efforts to address lingering systemic racism in the US helped spawn the Black Lives Matter movement - which has in turn galvanized people around the world to confront the marginalization and persecution they face at home. While legal systems may have been constructed with equal rights in mind, the actual realization of these rights requires considerable policy support - including affirmative action measures designed to redress historic injustices and check the continued marginalization of people in public life based on perceived differences. In terms of rhetoric, at least, progress has been made towards greater inclusion. Yet, social justice will only be achieved if carefully designed safeguards are constructed to protect against the episodic use of identity markers - especially in the political sphere - to encourage majorities to stoke the politics of fear. The potential rewards of ending persecution and marginalization are many - enabling, for example, societies to benefit from the entire spectrum of human talent, and to not have to rely solely on those who happened to have been born with the “right” identity markers.

Civic Participation

Bottom-up civic participation is flourishing in many parts of the world, as technology helps bring people together in significant numbers to take direct action and at the same time, top-down forms are also gaining traction .

The average citizen is being given more decision-making power, though that may not always be a good thing

Traditionally, people in power have been cautious about participatory processes they cannot control. But the tide is turning. Decision-makers around the world, both in the public and private sectors, are becoming increasingly open to hearing public voices. Granting more decision-making power to the average person can sometimes be viewed as a less-than-optimal course of action; in some situations, it might even damage economic and political stability. One example might be public support in the US for taking a more aggressive stance on trade with China - which ended up causing problems in the same regions of the country where tariffs on Chinese goods were ultimately imposed. While giving the public more say might have drawbacks, like economic instability or misuse (the Brexit vote in the United Kingdom is another example), there is growing acknowledgment that participatory tools spread knowledge and enhance legitimacy. Opening up the political sphere is a complex, delicate process, particularly during unrest. In democracies, using executive power to impose stability can hinder progress, and simply informing the citizenry is no longer enough. Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission President, has stressed that democracy is “more than voting in elections.”

Social media influencers have considerable sway in terms of shaping public perception, and social media companies themselves, and their executives, impact public discourse through content-moderation policies and the spread of information (and disinformation). This impact resonates most notably during elections, raising the question: who should hold dominion over digital tools? The answer depends on who is doing the influencing, and on which platforms. Leading tech companies and startups in places like Silicon Valley and China are at the forefront of developing cutting-edge technologies like artificial intelligence - and their decisions related to research, development, and investment in these areas can shape public discourse. They can also command authority over user data. The private sector therefore wields considerable influence over the framing of global communication, alongside powerful nations, sometimes guided by self-interest. However, the bulk of decision-making when it comes to technology platforms should rest with those most directly impacted by resulting outcomes. It is imperative to consider the perspectives of those most affected, and amplify both effectiveness and equity. The ascent of AI-driven decision-making has only introduced more unpredictability into the equation, potentially impacting our choices in ways that are yet to be fully comprehended.

The core identity of the 21st-century citizen is intertwined with the digital landscape

Perception of the relevance of the trappings of the 21st century to the average person's daily life is far from uniform - and it is imperative to acknowledge that the concept of a “21st-century citizen” resonates more with some demographic groups than others. The current century has witnessed a hastening of the rhythm of everyday existence, and a simultaneous rise in inequality. That has occurred despite significant improvements in terms of education access and internet availability in many places, which has substantially lowered hurdles for participating in the digital public arena. For many people this arena has become essential to access information; they have not only become more willing to publicly speak up there in ways that go well beyond the mere act of voting, they also now have the capacity to do so through tailored social media channels. It is no surprise that social media platforms played pivotal roles in events like the Arab Spring that roiled politics across the Middle East more than a decade ago, the massive street protests that blanketed Hong Kong in 2019, and the gilets jaunes (“yellow vests”) demonstrations that crippled parts of France in 2020.

Social media was also crucial to the success of the “Fridays for Future” school strikes originated by Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg, which managed to get millions of people out onto the streets in 2019. The belief that citizens, including those susceptible to misinformation, deserve to wield an ever-present voice is commonly held. These people have expectations not just for political leaders but also for businesses and civil society organizations. This has inspired new ways of sharing information that empower them to influence entire industries, as they grapple with the complexities of the global economy. Artificial intelligence is playing a key role in shaping the relationship between the 21st century citizen and the digital landscape; It is increasingly integral to accessing news, knowledge, and entertainment. AI algorithms determine what information is presented, impacting worldviews and the understanding of current events. And while it is a striking facet of 21st-century citizenship, the increasingly vibrant online identity of the LGBTQI+ community may not manifest universally across all countries - though it does manage to serve as an emblem of 21st-century citizenry in places where greater diversity, inclusion, and social progress are era-defining.

As trust in traditional institutions declines, unconventional entities are reshaping the power landscape

Trust in government and traditional institutions like political parties, trade unions, and organized religion has been declining in much of the world - and alternatives are filling in the resulting gaps. Global corporations have gained greater power and influence, in particular technology companies proactively inserting themselves into political and policy-related discussions. One example of this is the series of campaigns and activities launched by Microsoft on the idea of Digital Peace, and the concept of a Digital Geneva Convention to help protect people from nation-state attacks in cyberspace. Broader corporate participation in public life is becoming increasingly mainstream, as was made clear by a statement issued in 2019 by the Business Roundtable (an organization that includes CEOs of the biggest US companies) - which advocated for the “stakeholder capitalism” concept that holds that corporations should not only aim to maximize shareholder value, but should also prioritize the interests of customers, communities, and the natural environment. Meanwhile native and indigenous communities are exerting their own, more profound influence on these shifting power dynamics, by reclaiming their cultural heritage and asserting their social and environmental rights.

By challenging dominant narratives in this way, these communities are shifting power away from corporations and governments to local communities. Decolonization is therefore an ongoing process, aimed at increasing the recognition of the multiplicity of voices and narratives long marginalized by historical colonial powers. Citizen journalists and alternative media outlets are increasingly providing digital platforms for such previously-marginalized sources, to help them share their stories and perspectives; their counter-narratives can challenge prevailing versions while bringing attention to underreported issues. Technology has other contributions to make: advanced algorithms and computing power have converged to enable artificial intelligence to understand, learn, and perform tasks with a level of sophistication previously thought to be out of reach, helping to quickly and dispassionately analyse huge amounts of data, predict trends, and make fairer decisions. Some emerging technologies, like blockchain, may further enable decentralized governance, and potentially eliminate the need for intermediaries - in terms of both financial transactions and decision-making. This is changing how authority is distributed, and making decisions more information-driven and potentially less biased. However, it also raises questions about accountability and fairness that need to be addressed.

Legacy institutions are adapting to the complexities of the modern world

Traditional institutions are grappling with modern complexities aggravated by rising inequality, the lingering impacts of COVID-19, climate change-related catastrophes, and volatile migration patterns. Conventional governance structures inherited from past centuries, like political parties and inter-governmental negotiations, are increasingly being questioned as their efficacy seems to diminish. The bedrock of decision-making - voting - is meanwhile undermined by declining turnout, polarization, and external manipulation. The pandemic's impact catalyzed global tensions and strained the multilateral framework crafted after World War II. This underscored an imperative to reassess established paradigms, and explore more inclusive and effective modes of governance. Central to this evolution is a recognition of the importance of multi-stakeholder approaches; these not only accommodate a more diverse array of voices and perspectives in decision-making processes, but also cultivate a greater sense of collective ownership and shared responsibility. By harnessing the insights of governments, civil society groups, corporations, and the broader public, modes of governance can become more comprehensive - and result in holistic solutions that resonate with all segments of society, as decision-making processes themselves add new dimensions of inclusivity and collective responsibility.

Emerging avenues of global collaboration, exemplified by initiatives like the Internet Governance Forum, and endeavors aligned with UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, indicate a will and a need to reshape traditional power dynamics. Through extensive digital coordination, civic-participation movements can become more inclusive - exemplified by the French Citizens’ Convention for the Climate, which inspired similar processes elsewhere. Other countries taking inspiration from the French model organized their own citizens' conventions (or assemblies) on climate change; the United Kingdom, for example, launched a Citizens' Assembly on Climate Change in 2020. At the European level, the Conference on the Future of Europe, a groundbreaking participatory process, was institutionalized by the European Commission. More recently, the commission adopted the EU's initiative related to Web 4.0 and virtual worlds, largely inspired by direct follow-up to proposals originated by that conference. Such examples showcase the power of deliberative governance; as particular platforms such as Avaaz and Change.org progressively bridge the gap between informed citizens and decision-makers. This gradual yet steady integration of deliberative governance signals an evolving paradigm in decision-making at all levels.

From fake news to political incivility to a lack of representation, there is a vicious cycle of mistrust

The exclusion of particular populations from decision-making has become a pivotal factor in the erosion of trust. This denial of representation and voice fosters a deep-seated skepticism of authority - and among traditionally marginalized groups like young people and women, there's now a palpable sense of political disengagement that points to an urgent need for more inclusive governance taking into account diverse perspectives and experiences. Meanwhile a perception of political incivility - of elected representatives defying the very laws they are in office to uphold - is further eroding trust. An apparent disregard for established norms engenders disillusionment, contributing further to the trust deficit. The media's role in shaping related perceptions cannot be understated; negative, divisive portrayals of certain social groups have a cascading effect that contributes to a climate of suspicion and unease. That in turn perpetuates a distancing of communities from the institutions meant to serve them. COVID-19 only amplified these challenges, by demonstrating the potentially deadly impact of false information, and by further weakening social cohesion in many parts of the world to the point of making traditional representative democracy appear to have reached its limits.

The major factors driving this breakdown include the mismanagement of the pandemic, related economic crises, and political instability. Growing global inequality, coupled with the emergence of a large middle class in the Global South that has mounting consumer and lifestyle expectations, have further stressed social cohesion. All of this contributes to a breakdown of trust in political systems and politicians, in Western democracies and authoritarian regimes alike. One way to tackle this problem is to try to come up with new and creative ways of making decisions. In many places, for example, people would like to have more opportunity to vote directly on issues through initiatives and referendums. Another approach involves "deliberative democracy," where people affected the most by a decision come together in an organized way to talk about it. Instead of simply more people participating, it's about having meaningful conversations among those most directly impacted. While people might have once been (mostly) satisfied with being represented by elected legislative representatives and administration officials who are (at least theoretically) working on their behalf, they now place more trust in their peers and in themselves - rather than in institutions.

Technology can increase public engagement, but it has an ugly side to it

The isolation caused by COVID-19 underlined our collective need to ensure digital participation is a core element of modern education. By empowering learners with digital skills both during health crises and in relatively stable periods, societies can nurture more informed and engaged dialogue. But digitalization can also disrupt deliberative decision-making - and open new avenues for populism and manipulation. “Civic techs,” or technologies that enable constructive political engagement, are maturing. Even if they do not enable the same kind of dialogue as a live assembly, they benefit from substantial public input. For example, France’s three-month-long “Great National Debate,” commenced in 2019 in response to widespread protests, garnered nearly two million online contributions. The Multilingual Digital Platform of the Conference on the Future of Europe is another example; it gave every European Union citizen a chance to participate in any of the bloc’s 24 official languages. Citizens could both put forward their own ideas, and endorse other people’s ideas while commenting on them. Some governments have deemed digital transformation to be a key asset, as they seek to make their societies more inclusive. Estonia in particular has distinguished itself in this regard.

On the other hand, a growing reliance on online tools can aggravate inequality between the connected and the non-connected. That means holding online participatory processes can further exclude, rather than include, by widening the gap between those who can easily get online and those who cannot. COVID-19 underlined this divide - while many people were able to rely on the internet to stay informed, provide remote schooling for their children, and continue to work while maintaining social distancing, many more were not - in ways that perpetuated inequalities in decision-making. The pandemic also highlighted the basic human need for in-person meetings and social contact. Protests were perhaps the ultimate expression of this need, and though they could be potential sources of infection - and were therefore limited or banned in many instances - people around the world nonetheless took to the streets to demonstrate, and much of their surge in civic participation was due to greater access to information (both accurate and less so). One consideration stemming from this flourishing of online information is intellectual property protection. Safeguarding the rights of creators helps to foster a fair and equitable environment where participation can thrive.