Doctoral Dissertation Research: Governing the Uncommons: The Impact of Technological Change on International Law

近年来，法律难以跟上技术变革步伐的说法已成为一种修辞。新技术带来了社会效益，但也带来了意想不到的潜在危害。在国际法的背景下，这尤其令人不安，因为军事技术突破可能会破坏关于谁欠谁什么的多边共识。令人费解的是，即使有强大的政党有强烈的动机推动改革，旧的法律往往对颠覆性的技术变革坚不可摧。当新技术出现时，为什么只有一些国际法律规则需要重新制定？美国必须越来越多地与中国和俄罗斯等其他国家竞争，它们的伙伴关系需要解决全球性问题，但它们对国际法的看法和解释可能在重要方面存在差异。了解抑制技术争议并使国际合作更有可能的因素，对于在21世纪维持和平与前瞻性的世界秩序至关重要。这项研究旨在了解新技术如何扰乱国际法律平衡，以及如何调整或取代法律规则以解释这些变化。这个项目包括两个部分。首先，它强调了一些历史案例，在这些案例中，国家能够预测有问题的地平线军事技术，并衡量可能达成“预期”协议的条件。其次，在技术突破令国际社会“惊讶”的情况下，什么时候可以非正式地修改现行法律，而不需要进行代价高昂的全面体制改革？从本质上讲，后一个方面是对法律过时的研究。该项目利用新颖的实验、定量、博弈论和档案方法为这些问题提供实证牵引。研究结果可作为决策者在技术不确定性日益增加的环境中设计持久的国际协定、军备控制框架和其他机构的路线图。它们有助于为军事利益、网络、外层空间、人工智能等领域新兴技术的持续辩论提供信息，在这些领域，国际“道路规则”仍然存在问题。该奖项反映了美国国家科学基金会的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

The idea that law struggles to keep pace with technological change has in recent years become a trope. New technologies convey social benefits but also unexpected potential harm. This is particularly troubling in the context of international law, where military technological breakthroughs can disrupt multilateral consensus about who owes whom what. Puzzlingly, old laws are often robust to disruptive technological change, even when there are strong incentives for powerful parties to push for overhaul. When new technologies emerge, why do only some international legal rules require reinvention? The US must increasingly contend with other countries like China and Russia whose partnership is required to address issues of a global nature but whose vision for and interpretation of international law may differ in important ways. Understanding the factors that dampen technological controversy and make international cooperation more likely will be critical for the maintenance of a peaceful and forward-looking world order in the 21st century.This research seeks to understand how new technology upsets international legal equilibria, and how legal rules can be adapted or replaced to account for these changes. The project entails two parts. First, it highlights historical cases in which states were able to predict problematic horizon military technologies and measures the conditions under which “anticipatory” agreements are possible to achieve. Second, in cases where technological breakthroughs “surprise” the international community, when can extant law be informally adapted without the need for costly and complete institutional overhaul? In essence, this latter aspect is a study of legal obsolescence. The project leverages novel experimental, quantitative, game theoretic, and archival methods to provide empirical traction on these questions. Findings could serve as a roadmap for policymakers in designing durable international agreements, arms control frameworks, and other institutions in environments of increasing technological uncertainty. They can help inform ongoing debate over emerging technologies in domains of military interest, cyber, outer space, artificial intelligence, and others, where international “rules of the road” are still in question.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.