Impact of Advanced Information & Communications Technologies on the Governance of the State: A Workshop Facilitators Stephen Fanjoy & Peter MacKinnon Management Advisors Monday March 18, 2019 12:00 – 17:00 University of Ottawa Telfer School of Management Desmarais Building Room 4165 55 Laurier Ave E
18
Embed
Impact of Advanced Information & Communications ... · IoT, IoMe Science Behavioural Psychology Social Psychology ... smart cities • A state actor has targeted Australian political
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Impact of Advanced Information & Communications Technologies
• Information and communications technology (ICT) is increasingly pervasive and powerful • Serves mostly commercial interests
• Changes human values, behaviour, minds
• Democracy requires humans and ICT • ICT is hackable and insecure
• Humans are hackable
• Democracy is hackable and insecure
• We’re in deep trouble…
(Unless…)
7
General Approach
• March 18th Workshop • To develop realistic scenarios across the three timeframes with
respect to the impact of Advanced Information & Communications Technologies on the governance of the state
• Address the Challenge Questions • Provide a Plenary Session report on each scenario along with any
related comments
• Spring Workshop (to be scheduled)
• Analyze & synthesis the scenarios based on an overview provided by Steve & Peter
• Develop a group consensus on backcasting best case, worst case and most likely case scenarios
• Identify leverage points in each scenario • Additional group comments • Peter & Steve to develop a Workshop Report for group comment • We have an opportunity to publish our report
Approach for Today’s Workshop
• We will apply the Foresight Process as outlined in the February 25th presentation by Jack Smith and posted on the FSN website
• Here are the steps we will move through:
• Identify Key Lens from which to view the problem being addressed (i.e., labels for the orthogonal axes)
• Review Initial Challenge Questions & modify/adjust • Identify what drives the Challenge Questions • Identify possible Disruptors & Wild Cards • Populate scenarios using orthogonal axes approach • Report scenarios to Plenary session
Challenge Questions for Developing Scenarios
1. What are the emerging threats to governance of the state posed by advanced ICTs?
2. What are the emerging benefits to governance of the state posed by advanced ICTs?
3. What disruptors are possible WRT using advanced ICTs to impact the governance of the state?
4. What wild cards are possible WRT using advanced ICTs to impact the governance of the state?
Overall Objectives
• We will create working groups based on the number of attendees with each group ideally comprised of 4 to 5-persons
• Each working group will: • Follow workshop instructions • Establish a rapporteur and breakout session chair • Develop at least one scenario per each timeframe • Document & report on each Scenario to the Plenary
• Note that 2100 is the target date for meeting the Paris Accords regarding climate change, therefore you may wish to consider what is the role of advanced ICTs in coping with climate change from the nation state perspective throughout the 3 time intervals
Address Each Scenario: Step by Step
• Input: identify what is going on?
• Analytical: describe what seems to be happening?
• Prospective: speculate on what might happen?
• Interpretive: synthesize what is most likely going to happen?
Workshop Instructions
Workshop Instructions
• Address the Challenge Questions by developing scenarios for each of the three timeframes using the axes labels provided (see next slide)
• Identify key drivers that shape each scenario
• Identify disruptors & wild cards per each scenario
• Identify up to 4 or 5 critical uncertainties
• Add additional insights based on group discussion and consensus
• Document scenarios in chart form
• Report scenarios to Plenary Session
Selecting Orthogonal Axes: Examples
Autocracy Democracy
ICT Usage - Benevolent
ICT Usage - Malevolent
Autocracy Democracy
ICT Usage - Open
ICT Usage - Closed
Selecting Orthogonal Axes: Examples (2)
Autocracy Democracy
ICT Actors - State
ICT Actors - Individual
Autocracy Democracy
ICT ?
ICT ?
Next Step - Breakout
• Any questions or comments?
• Logistics & timeline for reporting to the Plenary
• Form working groups
• Next: • Break ~ 25 minutes
• Break-out Session ~ 120 minutes
• Break ~ 30 minutes
• Plenary Session ~ 40 minutes
• Summary & Next Steps ~ 20 minutes
Selected Further Reading
• CSEC/CCCS/CSIS • Cyber Threats To Canada's Democratic Process
• Who Said What? The Security Challenges of Modern Disinformation
• GoC Elections Canada • Chief Electoral Officer on Breach of Personal Information
Involving Cambridge Analytica and Facebook • Election Security