1 / 16

Policy Scenarios for the Longevity Dividend

Policy Scenarios for the Longevity Dividend. Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics Eudoxa. Scenario Planning. Making Scenarios of Life Extension. Driving factors. Speed of progress Kind of intervention Cost Psychology/sociology

ashley
Télécharger la présentation

Policy Scenarios for the Longevity Dividend

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Policy Scenarios for the Longevity Dividend Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics Eudoxa

  2. Scenario Planning

  3. Making Scenarios of Life Extension

  4. Driving factors Speed of progress Kind of intervention Cost Psychology/sociology Belief it is possible Research environment Finance Opposition groups Supporting groups International issues Crises Technological singularity

  5. Driving factors Speed of progress Kind of intervention Cost Psychology/sociology Belief it is possible Research environment Finance Opposition groups Supporting groups International issues Crises Technological singularity

  6. LE seen as impossible or hard LE seen as likely Fast progress “Tipping Point” “Star Trek” Slow progress “Sinking Feeling” “Hype” The Scenarios

  7. “Sinking Feeling” • LE problematic research goal, little support from the public. • The messiness of the mammalian body wear out hopeful interventions. • Researchers blame lack of funding.Public (and funding bodies) prefer toinvest in more promising fields. • General view of life extensionsomewhat negative. • Other technologies?

  8. “Tipping Point” • Public perceptions of LE are pessimistic, but research makes a breakthrough. Society is suddenly faced with a dramatic shift it was not prepared for. • Research solve problem after problem, individually with little effect but eventually covering enough. • Sensation, surprise, worry • Polarized opinion • Previous demographic stakeholders • First impact financial • Gradually reduced polarization aspractice develops.

  9. “Hype” • LE is believed to be imminent and worthwhile, but the actual research is progressing slower than expected. • Early impressive successes • “War on ageing” and “Ageing Race” • Longevity projects, LE partnerships industry-academia-healthcare • Longevity studies departments on everycampus, gerontotechnology buzzword. • Change investment in future • Scandals, inefficiency, bubbles

  10. “Star Trek” • LE is progressing, and the public is aware of it. • Steady stream demonstrations, treatments for particular aspects of ageing, eventually signs of limiting or reversing the accumulation of damage. • Even partial treatments improve health and lifespan. • Uncertainties stimulate market for longevity and mortality bonds. • Experimentation with institutions • Greying of society “trendy” • Developing ways of paying forworthwhile treatments.

  11. What learned • Importance of appropriate expectations. • We need metrics • Can researchers manage expectations? • Uncertainties: • The type of intervention matters • Willingness to pay for health span • Institutional change • Reproduction • Other factors: • Variability increasing • How handle disasters? • Need to get rid of institutional rigidities sensitiveto demographic and longevity shifts

  12. CERN

  13. Concerns for policy • What we know we know • What we know we don’t know • What we don’t know we don’t know • What we don’t know we know

More Related