Cybernetics and Governance are both control theories that aim to regulate systems, whether technological or social. While Cybernetics has been applied mostly in the field of natural science and business, Governance has mostly occupied the fields of social, economic and political science. The core argument centers on the phenomenon of technology convergence—where advancements such as artificial intelligence, gene editing, and robotics do not just operate in isolation but intertwine with each other and with the physical world. Striking example of this is the theoretizisation and development of the human as a technology platform, e.g. for the creation of “super-soldiers” in the US, UK, China, or Musk’s Neuralink, showcasing a novel intersection between biology and technology.

This convergence brings about significant complexities and challenges that traditional governance frameworks are ill-equipped to manage. To address this gap, I introduce the concept of “cybernetic governance,” which borrows principles from cybernetics—a field that studies systems, feedback, and control mechanisms in both machines and living organisms. Cybernetics, with its focus on feedback loops, adaptability, and self-regulation, could provide innovative strategies for governance.

This convergence is not just a simple overlay of technological domains but includes multiple layers where technology, governance, and societal norms interact and integrate. Addressing the challenges posed by this integration requires varied approaches:

1. Increasing Regulatory Variety: One approach is to enhance the variety of regulatory responses available. This means developing a broader set of tools and frameworks to address the nuances and specific challenges posed by different technologies. By diversifying regulatory strategies, governance can become more responsive and adaptable to the rapid pace of technological change.
2. Decreasing Allowed Technological Complexity Through Regulation: Another strategy involves deliberately simplifying the technological landscape through regulatory measures. This might mean setting limits on the complexity of systems that can be developed or deployed, thus making it easier to manage and regulate these technologies effectively.
3. Application of Meta-Regulation: Finally, meta-regulation represents a more flexible regulatory approach. It involves creating frameworks that guide how other regulations are designed and implemented, rather than directly imposing specific rules. This form of regulation is about setting the conditions under which technology can evolve, ensuring that it does so within acceptable ethical and societal boundaries.

These strategies highlight the need for a sophisticated, layered approach to governance that can handle the complexity of technology convergence. Approaches (1) Increasing Regulatory Variety and (2) Decreasing Allowed Technological Complexity Through Regulation are the most commonly found regulatory approaches in practice. However, they result in tighter control-mechanisms through increasing information feedback-loops and a great reduction in freedom and self-organisation. The utility of Meta-Regulation on various layers of covergence theoretically leads to the greatest degree of self-organizing systems or regulatory convergences. Such an approach might be preferable as it retains the most degree of freedom for individuals and collectives while maintaining the ethical control necessary to regulate the convergence of technology.

Adopting cybernetic principles can lead to a more adaptive governance approach. Such frameworks are crucial for effective regulation in the face of the increasing complexity seen in the integration of digital and physical systems. I use the case of enhanced soldiers to illustrate the practical implications of technology convergence and the necessity for a deeper understanding of these integrated systems to ensure security, uphold ethical standards, and develop effective regulatory norms.

In conclusion, while the adoption of a cybernetic approach to governance could potentially offer a flexible and dynamic framework capable of managing complex technological advancements, it is important to recognize that cybernetic governance is not a panacea for all governance issues. It inherently relies on feedback loops of information to allow for effective regulation of behaviours. This approach, rooted in control theory, has inherent limitations, particularly in potentially restricting individual and collective freedoms and decision-making processes, particularly when feedback loops tied to centralized structures. My proposal is therefore to apply a meta-regulatory framework that retains feed-back control within the convergence layers to ensure that control-mechanisms do not become centralized. With this particular issue of centralized control in mind, it is crucial to approach cybernetic governance with a critical eye, acknowledging both its strengths and its limitations in the broader context of governance strategies.