Governance structures are experiencing increasing levels of stress inherent in a world that is evolving rapidly toward more complexity. They are compelled to adapt. In parallel, social media becomes a key new arena for influence. The trend is irreversible and governance structures will need to adapt too. Yet, online social platforms are ill-equipped to provide healthy debates and are needing to be redesigned with governance in mind. From there, we see two trends emerging for the future of governance. First, a centralized and algorithmic-assisted governance with social media as an instrument of control. Second, an European declaration of intent which emphasises data ownership and sovereignty. In the wake of these ideals, we engage a discussion for distributed and agile human governance that aligns with this intention. However, this theoretical model is challenging to current governance structures. Whatever the outcome, it is our belief that the future of democratic governance lies in a human-centered computer interaction.

1. Facing a new threshold of complexity

Throughout the modern industrial era social systems have been structured by top-down command and control mechanics where social trust could only solidify in hierarchical vertical responsibilities. However, with the Internet came the advent of pervasive connectivity and a web of intricate relational interdependencies that challenge these traditional social dynamics. The transformation in this structural arrangement raises the question of the viability of a new social architecture where relationships could be organized with a positive dimension of horizontal trust and accountability. Both from a structural and societal point of view, it is our suggestion that governance structures are having to reinvent themselves thoroughly, if they want to successfully navigate this paradigm shift that is starting to weigh heavily on them.

Undoubtedly, the surge in connectedness that came with the Internet propelled our societies into a new threshold of complexity. In addition, the emergence and combination of disruptive technologies exponentially increase the field of uncertainty. As a result, governance structures now have to deal with a wide array of challenges - both local and global - in a world where change is the only constant and where unpredictability is the only certainty. In order to navigate effectively the waves of change that are forming, social organizations in general and governance structures in particular will need to express greater degrees of agility. Most likely, they will be forced to join transversal participatory networks and collaborate with stakeholders that will escape their traditional chains of command and control. On one hand, new societal models would need to include an improved capacity for resilience. On the other hand, they would need to exercise trust horizontally as a fundamental element of social relationships. Given that centralized social organizations have an upper limit on what they can structurally handle, it is time for them to be fundamentally re-designed for organic adaptability and individual reflexivity.

Moreover, as society transitions from the modern to the postmodern era, new values such as cultural diversity, gender equality, improved transparency and accountability emerge and have to be taken into consideration by its leadership. Indeed, this contemporary set of values exerts additional pressure on governance structures that were accustomed to performing their work behind closed doors. As such, doing business as usual is now becoming increasingly hazardous in terms of social perception. In fact, ‘social justice’ movements benefit from the social web to disrupt organizations from within by leaking out documents and practices of confidential nature. They are also able to challenge their stability and security from outside by triggering leaderless protests that become viral on networks (e.g. French ‘yellow vests’).

Unfit to cope with the multiplicity of desires and intentions that are now being expressed on social media, nested governance structures find it increasingly demanding to translate their leadership into society which - in return - does not feel adequately taken into account (e.g. Extinction Rebellion). As a result, we witness a global erosion of social trust and we may further expect a persistent trust gap between citizens and their institutions. The centralized architecture or the ‘one-to-many’ model that used to be effective in previous times is now reaching its structural limits. Democratic institutions have to factor in these new variables and take appropriate action, if they want to stay relevant in the times to come. That is to say, systemic challenges require systemic solutions.

Read more.