Robert Jervis's System Effects (1997) shares a great deal with game theory, complex-systems theory, and systems theory in international relations, yet it transcends them all by taking account of the role of ideas in human behavior. The ideational element inserts unpredictability into Jervis's understanding of system effects. Each member of a ?system? of interrelated actors interprets her situation to require certain actions based on the effects these will cause among other members of the system, but these other actors' responses to (...) one's action will be based on their own perceptions of their situation and their interpretations of what it requires. These ideas are fallible, but we cannot predict the mistakes people will make if the errors are based on information we do not have or do not interpret in the same way they do. Not only members of a system but social-scientific observers and policy makers are ignorant of others' information and interpretations, and therefore are as likely to err in their behavioral predictions as are members of the system. Thus, Jervis's book raises serious questions about how to evaluate policies directed toward producing positive system effects. The questions are unanswerable at this point, but they might be susceptible to analysis by an ambitious form of political theory. (shrink)

Technology policy needs to be receptive to different social needs and realities to ensure that innovations are both ethically developed and accessible. This article proposes a new method to integrate social controversies into foresight scenarios as a means to enhance the trustworthiness and inclusivity of policymaking around Artificial Intelligence. Foresight exercises are used to anticipate future tech challenges and to inform policy development. However, the integration of social controversies within these exercises remains an unexplored area. This article aims to bridge (...) this gap by providing insights and guidelines on why and how we should incorporate social controversies into designing foresight scenarios. We emphasize the importance of considering social controversies, as they allow to understand non-mainstream perspectives, re-balance power dynamics, de-black box technologies and have accountable policymaking processes that are open to listening different social needs. Building on empirical research, we present a step-by-step method that involves identifying the key policy challenges and relevant controversies related to an emerging technology, deconstructing the identified controversies, and mapping them onto future scenarios to test policy options and build policy road mapping. Furthermore, we discuss the importance of strategically engaging involved stakeholders, including affected communities, civil society organizations, and experts, to ensure a comprehensive and inclusive perspective. Finally, we showcase the application of the method to popAI, an EU-funded project on AI use in law enforcement. (shrink)