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

近年来，认为法律难以跟上技术变革步伐的观点成了一种比喻。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，这尤其令人担忧，军事技术突破可能扰乱关于谁欠谁、谁欠什么的多边共识。令人费解的是，旧法律往往对颠覆性的技术变革具有很强的抵抗力，即使强大的政党有强烈的动机推动改革。当新技术出现时，为什么只有一些国际法律规则需要重新发明？美国必须越来越多地与中国和俄罗斯等其他国家抗衡，这些国家的伙伴关系是解决全球性问题所必需的，但它们对国际法的愿景和解释可能在重要方面存在差异。了解抑制技术争议的因素，使国际合作变得更有可能，对于维护21世纪和平和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来应对这些变化。该项目包括两个部分。首先，它突出了一些历史案例，在这些案例中，各国能够预测有问题的地平线军事技术，并衡量在何种条件下可能达成“预期”协议。第二，在技术突破“令”国际社会感到“惊讶”的情况下，现行法律何时才能在不需要进行代价高昂的彻底机构改革的情况下得到非正式的调整？从本质上讲，后一方面是对法律过时的研究。该项目利用新颖的实验、定量、博弈论和档案方法来为这些问题提供经验上的牵引力。研究结果可作为政策制定者在技术不确定性日益增加的环境中设计持久的国际协议、军备控制框架和其他机构的路线图。他们可以帮助为军事利益、网络、外层空间、人工智能和其他领域正在进行的关于新兴技术的辩论提供信息，在这些领域，国际“道路规则”仍然存在疑问。这一奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力优势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.