Sir Peter D. Gluckman is conscious of the several failures of the last decade but puts faith in “track 2” multilateralism. He argues that science diplomacy must be nimbler to address the problems of tomorrow.
In 2012, Najmedin Meshkati emphasized the role of engineering diplomacy. Today, with challenges that transcend borders and involve complex systems, including the plight of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant, he is even more convinced of its necessity.
Authors explore the concept and implementation of “neurorights” in relation to the development of invasive and non-invasive brain-computer interface technologies at both the transnational and national level, particularly Chile's case.
Through collaborations among diplomats, scientists, and engineers, authors envision artificial intelligence (AI) paired with emerging human augmentation technologies significantly improving the bandwidth, speed, and optimality of diplomacy.
According to the author, the United Nations is the premier, inclusive, and ideal forum where universally agreed-upon norms in the areas of emerging technologies can be created.
As debate increases on establishing a new component of the National Science Foundation to help translate scientific research into national solutions, authors focus on the role of international cooperation and coordination.
If science diplomacy is to be an effective tool for using scientific knowledge to accomplish concrete objectives related to emerging technologies, then the immediate task is to specify clearly the objectives sought and the means for achieving them.
Creating opportunities for life scientists to participate in diplomacy is crucial. In this article, authors identify a set of guiding principles for future programs that aim to grow the next generation of global biosecurity diplomats.
