Governing tomorrow

During my recent participation in Geneva Science Diplomacy Week, organized by the Geneva Science and Diplomacy Anticipator (GESDA), I was reminded that one of the greatest challenges facing governments today is not responding to change, but anticipating it. Scientific discovery is advancing at a pace that is transforming societies faster than our institutions can adapt. Artificial intelligence is reshaping industries, biotechnology is redefining medicine, autonomous systems are changing warfare and breakthroughs in robotics, neurotechnology and quantum computing promise to alter every aspect of human life. Yet while innovation accelerates exponentially, public policy often moves incrementally.

This growing gap is precisely why science diplomacy has become one of the defining responsibilities of modern government.

Science diplomacy recognizes that many of today’s greatest opportunities and risks extend beyond national borders. Artificial intelligence, pandemics, cybersecurity, biotechnology, climate science and autonomous weapons cannot be governed by any one country acting alone. Scientific breakthroughs developed in one laboratory may affect billions of people around the world. As technology becomes increasingly global, policymaking must become more collaborative, bringing together scientists, legislators, diplomats, industry and civil society to ensure that innovation advances the common good.

Equally important is the principle of anticipatory policymaking. Throughout history, governments have largely legislated after technologies had already transformed society. The automobile came before traffic laws. The internet preceded privacy legislation. Social media reached billions before governments began addressing online misinformation and digital safety. While reactive governance may have worked in the past, it is no longer sufficient for technologies that evolve at unprecedented speed.

Artificial intelligence already assists doctors in diagnosing disease, accelerates scientific research and automates complex decision-making. Advances in biotechnology and gene editing hold extraordinary promise for curing inherited illnesses while raising profound ethical questions about the limits of human intervention. Neurotechnology is creating brain-computer interfaces capable of restoring mobility and communication, but also introducing new concerns over mental privacy and cognitive liberty. Robotics is reshaping manufacturing and health care, while autonomous weapons challenge long-standing principles of international humanitarian law. Quantum computing may eventually redefine cybersecurity by rendering today’s encryption methods obsolete.

None of these developments are inherently good or bad. Their impact will ultimately depend on the rules, institutions and values that govern them.

Anticipatory policymaking asks governments to prepare for emerging technologies before they become sources of crisis. Rather than attempting to predict the future with certainty, it identifies plausible scientific trajectories and begins building ethical standards, legal frameworks and international cooperation while these technologies are still taking shape. It is a philosophy of governance that seeks to reduce surprise rather than merely respond to it.

This was the central lesson of GESDA’s Science Breakthrough Radar, which examines scientific developments over five-, 10- and 25-year horizons. The objective is not to forecast a single future, but to help policymakers understand what may be coming so decisions made today remain relevant tomorrow. Good governance should not merely solve today’s problems; it should anticipate tomorrow’s realities.

For the Philippines, this approach is not an academic exercise. It is a national imperative.

The Philippines should not view itself merely as a consumer of technology. We must become an active participant in shaping the global norms that will govern its development and use. Science diplomacy gives developing countries a voice in conversations that will define the future of health care, agriculture, cybersecurity, education, national defense and economic competitiveness. If we are absent from those discussions, the rules will be written by others, reflecting priorities that may not always align with our own national interests or values.

This conviction has guided many of the legislative initiatives I have pursued in Congress. Recognizing the growing influence of artificial intelligence, I have advocated for a comprehensive national framework on AI governance that promotes innovation while ensuring transparency, accountability, human oversight and ethical safeguards. I have likewise filed legislation promoting blockchain technology in government, recognizing its potential to strengthen transparency, improve public trust and modernize the delivery of public services.

Yet legislation alone will never be enough.

The challenges posed by artificial intelligence, biotechnology, quantum computing and autonomous weapons demand a new generation of policymakers who are as comfortable discussing ethics and scientific evidence as they are debating law. Legislators can no longer afford to become experts only in legislation. We must also become students of science. Likewise, scientists must engage more actively with public policy so that innovation is guided not only by technical possibility but also by democratic values and the public interest.

Science diplomacy creates the bridge between these worlds. It enables scientific knowledge to inform policy, allows diplomacy to foster international scientific cooperation and helps nations develop common rules for technologies whose consequences do not stop at national borders. In an increasingly interconnected world, it has become an essential instrument of both foreign policy and national development.

The question before us is no longer whether transformative technologies will change our lives. They already have. The real question is whether we will have the foresight to govern them wisely. Science diplomacy and anticipatory policymaking offer us that opportunity. We should seize it not as observers of the future, but as active participants in shaping it.