AIHow Artificial General Intelligence Could Affect the Rise and Fall of Nations
Visions for potential AGI futures: A new report from RAND aims to stimulate thinking among policymakers about possible impacts of the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI) on geopolitics and the world order.
A new reportfrom RAND aims to stimulate thinking among policymakers about possible impacts of the development of artificial general intelligence (AGI) on geopolitics and the world order by highlighting potential future scenarios for AGI’s governance and its effects on global power dynamics. In this report, the authors focus on a variety of impacts — some of which are perhaps unlikely but significant — arising from AGI’s development and deployment that could fundamentally alter the existing geopolitical order.
To drive thinking about these potential world-changing impacts, the authors develop eight illustrative scenarios based on the extent of centralization of AGI development and its geopolitical outcomes. These scenarios cover AGI impacts that empower the United States, that empower U.S. competitors, that cause a significant geopolitical shift, and that result in an interruption in the development of AGI.
These scenarios are designed to demonstrate how the extent of centralization in AGI development is a crucial determinant of the geopolitical outcomes that might materialize. In more-centralized scenarios, either the United States or an adversary could gain significant advantages, whereas decentralized development might lead to a multilateral governance model or even geopolitical destabilization if nonstate actors become significantly more powerful because of the development of AGI.
Key Findings
Several critical factors consistently emerged as determinants of future AGI geopolitical landscapes
· The degree of centralization stands as perhaps the most crucial factor in AGI development. Highly centralized development favors established powers with substantial resources; decentralized paths may empower multiple actors but increase proliferation risks. Export controls, research funding allocation, and international governance frameworks are potential levers that may affect the relative centralization of AGI development.
· The relationship between states and private industry emerges as another key determinant. Scenarios featuring close public-private partnerships yield different outcomes than those with minimal coordination. Experts consistently emphasized that neither states nor corporations alone can effectively govern AGI development: Balanced cooperation is essential.
· Even when geopolitical factors align favorably, the inherent difficulty of ensuring that AGI systems reliably pursue human-compatible goals creates significant risks. Mitigation of this risk often requires international cooperation designed to restrict AGI access for dangerous actors and address potentially catastrophic loss of control over AGI systems.
· The economic and social disruptions from AGI deployment create significant difficulties for managing the technology’s development. The ability of societies to adapt to rapid automation, information manipulation, and potential job displacement influences whether the ultimate outcome strengthens or weakens existing power structures.
