Determination of Public Goals in Times of Volatility and Complexity

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this text is to critically analyse the traditional approach to the formulation and application of legal rules, arguing that they are outdated and insufficient for addressing the complexities and
dynamics of modern society and technology.
Design/Methodology/Approach: Employing a qualitative research methodology, the paper adopts a case study approach, focused mainly on the practices of the legislature in determining public goals. The analysis identifies themes and patterns related to different practices regarding the determination of public goals and their impact on the legislature. The findings are discussed in relation to the theoretical framework established both in the literature review and this paper. The paper concludes with a summary of the findings, practical implications, and suggestions for future research.
Findings and Practical Implications: Although technology nowadays plays a central role in human life, legislative public goals are still determined statically, reflecting a traditional Newtonian mechanistic perspective grounded in the principle of causality. Looking ahead, the paper speculates on potential scenarios. It suggests that the balance between nature, technology, law, and humanity requires careful management to ensure a harmonious but flexible co-existence. In the realm of complex legal issues, certainly can, to some extent, be maintained through an array of innovative methods. These include results- and procedure-oriented approaches to interactions between individuals and collectives, a legal system informed by feedback mechanisms and thresholds, the use of collective intelligence, the anticipation of adverse scenarios, and the implementation of adaptable norms. Such methodologies are intrinsically better equipped to navigate the unpredictability and complexity of modern legal challenges than traditional legalistic frameworks.
Originality: The paper integrates insights from various disciplines, including law, system theory, and technology studies. This interdisciplinary approach offers a more comprehensive understanding of the intricate interplay
between nature, technology, and law, a perspective often neglected in more narrowly focused studies. The originality of the paper lies in challenging existing forms of regulation and proposing new regulatory approaches grounded in the evolving nature of facts and associated rights and obligations of individuals and groups.