GCRI seeks to develop risk-reduction solutions that are informed by scholarship and work well in practice.
Ultimately, what matters is not the risk itself, but the opportunities that exist to reduce the risk. A risk can be very large, but if there is nothing that can done about it, then it is better to focus elsewhere. Furthermore, successful risk reduction requires understanding the risk itself, the proposals for reducing the risk, and the real-world context in which the proposals would be implemented. Some proposals work well in theory but fail in practice because important constraints or other factors were not taken into account. Given the goal of actually reducing the risk, it is essential to address the risk as it actually exists, not as it might ideally exist in scholarship on the risk.
The development of successful, real-world risk reduction solutions is GCRI’s most important goal. As a think tank, GCRI is positioned to bridge the gap that sometimes exists between the world of scholarship and the world of policy and professional practice. Furthermore, our risk management and social science backgrounds provide tools for understanding the real-world nature of decision-making. We recognize that important decision-makers often do not share our beliefs and values about global catastrophic risk. Therefore, we endeavor to develop solutions that work from their perspective, not ours.
Featured Publications
Seth D. Baum. Futures 72, 2015, pp. 86-96, DOI 10.1016/j.futures.2015.03.001.
Arguments for focusing on global catastrophic risk are frequently based on an ethical concern for the far future. This paper considers that many people do not agree with the far future argument, and that risk reduction strategy must proceed accordingly.
Additional Publications
Seth D. Baum, 2018. Countering superintelligence misinformation. Information, vol. 9, no. 10 (September), article 244, DOI 10.3390/info9100244.
Steven Umbrello and Seth D. Baum, 2018. Evaluating future nanotechnology: The net societal impacts of atomically precise manufacturing. Futures, vol. 100 (June), pages 63-73, DOI 10.1016/j.futures.2018.04.007.
Seth D. Baum, 2017. Reconciliation between factions focused on near-term and long-term artificial intelligence. AI & Society, DOI 10.1007/s00146-017-0734-3.
Seth D. Baum, 2017. On the promotion of safe and socially beneficial artificial intelligence. AI & Society, vol. 32, no. 4 (November), pages 543-551, DOI 10.1007/s00146-016-0677-0.
Seth D. Baum, David C. Denkenberger, and Joshua M. Pearce, 2016. Alternative foods as a solution to global food supply catastrophes. Solutions, vol. 7, no. 4, pages 31-35.
Seth D. Baum, 2015. Confronting the threat of nuclear winter. Futures, vol. 72 (September), pages 69-79, DOI 10.1016/j.futures.2015.03.004.
Seth D. Baum, David C. Denkenberger, Jacob Haqq-Misra, 2015. Isolated refuges for surviving global catastrophes. Futures, vol. 72 (September), pages 45-56, DOI 10.1016/j.futures.2015.03.009.
Seth D. Baum, David C. Denkenberger, Joshua M. Pearce, Alan Robock, and Richelle Winkler. Resilience to global food supply catastrophes. Environment, Systems, and Decisions, vol. 35, no. 2 (June), pages 301-313, DOI 10.1007/s10669-015-9549-2.
Seth D. Baum, 2015. Winter-safe deterrence: The risk of nuclear winter and its challenge to deterrence. Contemporary Security Policy, vol. 36, no. 1 (April), pages 123-148, DOI 10.1080/13523260.2015.1012346.
Seth D. Baum, 2014. The great downside dilemma for risky emerging technologies. Physica Scripta, vol. 89, no. 12 (December), article 128004, DOI 10.1088/0031-8949/89/12/128004.
Seth D. Baum, Timothy M. Maher Jr., and Jacob Haqq-Misra, 2013. Double catastrophe: Intermittent stratospheric geoengineering induced by societal collapse. Environment, Systems and Decisions, vol. 33, no. 1 (March), pages 168-180, DOI 10.1007/s10669-012-9429-y.
