media to form pressure groups, want to regain
territory from the government and take more
initiatives and sometimes provide services or
products themselves (supply energy for them-
selves, crowdfund local initiatives or new social
startups). The consequences are not always
predictable, or desirable. With this transformation
comes friction, uncertainty, instability, shifting val-
ues and social unrest. Rapid development also
sets public values adrift, and people demand new
ones.
The promise of a bright fu-
ture?
Friction is valuable in a period of transformation;
struggle, change, insecurity, failing fast, ambi-
guity, new beginnings - these are essential for
moving to the next phase in development. There
are no quick fixes, no magic bullets, and nothing
lasts forever. Since things break easily (like trust),
we need to co-create systems that build on trust.
People are trying to do this now with blockchain
technologies – at least they are experimenting
with blockchain to test if it can establish new
stability in trust-based systems. Due to ICT de-
velopments and the use of social media, society
can move from centralized to decentralized much
quicker than we could imagine even 10 years
ago. The transition to networks can be seen in
many different activities; examples of distributed
network are the production of electricity (23) in
smart grids, the collection of knowledge in large
arrays, and the use of AI in diagnosing disease.
New forms of democracy are being developed:
Liquid democracy (24) is just one interesting
example. With the help of smart technologies,
block-chain and networked distribution systems,
democracy in its present form can be trans-
formed into something new, better suited to the
societal challenges of today and tomorrow. (25)
When a new generation contributes actively to
these conversations, many voices are raised and
relevant perspectives for a new social contract
can be experimented with and explored. Students
across Europe going on strike for climate raise
questions about more than climate change alone
– questions about the resilience of our societal
institutions and systems, and our ability to take
action when needed. With the strong growth
in smart citizen movements, both at local and
(inter)national level, the possibilities to express
ideas about inclusion, contribution and gender, ra-
cial, and generational equality have already had a
direct and fruitful influence on how governments
address citizens’ concerns. Modern ICT, smart
use of social media and easy access to inter-
net-based platforms make it possible for people
to make their voices heard and their ideas known.
This is especially true for the young. But not ex-
clusively: a new generation of seniors, brought up
as Baby Boomers, will use this too, while woman
of all ages are joining the public conversation.
There are possibilities to improve representa-
tive democracy, but also to subvert it (think of
Cambridge Analytica); there are forceful ways
to create new forms of participatory democracy,
but also distract or deny it; to broaden the range
of people who can co-create such opportunities,
or have access to them, or limit this access.
There will be opportunities for all members of
a society to make meaningful contributions to
decision-making, but will they trust the system
enough to do so?
We need a broad conversation about new soci-
etal contracts, and we also need examples to
show that they could work, and what it takes to
make them work. For the short term, the first les-
sons learned from the sharing economy(26), the
maker’s movement, “the 100 mile diet”(27), show
that there are many ways forward. For the middle
and long term, we need imagination, courage,
rethinking – and lots of experimenting.
To start the conversation: what issues could a
new societal contract consider? Here are six pos-
sible pointers as starting points:
A new look at democracy. Perhaps something
along the lines of ‘liquid democracy’, ‘reimagined
democracy’(28), ‘Carbon Democracy’(29), or con-
cepts yet to emerge.
Universal basic assets (UBA) (30) – a fundamen-
youth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_pyramid. (2018-08-13)
22 Ola Olsson, det nya samhällskontraktet (2013), Ekonomisk Debatt 4/2013.
23 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4678120/ and also https://ay14-15.moodle.wisc.edu/prod/pluginfile.
php/79470/mod_resource/content/1/smart%20distribution.pdf (2018-08-13).
24 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delegative_democracy and https://medium.com/@memetic007/liquid-democra-
cy-9cf7a4cb7f. (2018-08-13)
25 https://www.democracy.earth/ and https://www.amsterdam.nl/bestuur-organisatie/meedenken/ruimte-initiatief/ see
also https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/5990/2168126.
pdf (2018-08-13).
26 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharing_economy (2018-08-13).
27 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_100-Mile_Diet (2018-08-13).
28 https://www.civicus.org/documents/reports-and-publications/reimagining-democracy/democracy-for-all-en.pdf
29 See for example https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2015/dec/29/carbon-democracy-political-power-in-
32 HF |
April 2019
HF | Human Futures 33