Imagine a bustling city with cars zooming past, pedestrians crisscrossing streets, and buses navigating tight corners. Now strip away the traffic lights, road signs, and pedestrian crossings. Chaos ensues — not because the drivers lack skill, but because there’s no common framework to guide their actions. This metaphor aptly captures the ongoing debate between regulation and liberalisation, particularly in the context of emerging technologies.
In a world driven by artificial intelligence (AI), blockchain, quantum computing, and decentralised finance, the absence of clear governance is not freedom — it is an open invitation to mayhem.
READ I Investors eye gains as Dalal Street meets Trump 2.0
Exponential pace of innovation
The pace of innovation today feels almost cinematic, with breakthroughs happening faster than we can comprehend. AI writes symphonies, diagnoses diseases, and even pens poetry. Cryptocurrencies promise decentralised financial utopias, while quantum computing teeters on the edge of rendering current encryption systems obsolete. However, with great power comes even greater risk.
Who ensures that AI doesn’t perpetuate bias or that blockchain isn’t a haven for money laundering? The attraction of liberalisation, often sold as a catalyst for creativity and economic growth, conceals a troubling agenda: evading accountability and prioritising profit over people.
Regulation vs liberalisation
The regulatory regimes grapple with a paradox. Technology evolves at breakneck speed, but governance limps behind. Regulators are often criticised for stifling innovation, yet the absence of timely intervention can lead to catastrophic consequences. Consider the unchecked spread of cryptocurrencies that fuelled Ponzi schemes or the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where personal data was weaponised against democracy itself. These are not hypothetical risks — they are real-world disasters born of regulatory inertia.
Emerging technologies do not exist in isolation. AI affects privacy, fairness, and even the fundamental definition of labour. Blockchain intersects with financial systems, environmental concerns, and governance. Meanwhile, quantum computing threatens to destabilise global cybersecurity frameworks. Each of these technologies presents immense opportunities, but their disruptive potential also carries profound ethical and societal implications. Left unregulated, the risk is not merely economic — it is existential.
Myth of liberalisation-driven success
Advocates of liberalisation often point to Silicon Valley’s success story, claiming that minimal oversight breeds innovation. What they fail to mention is the environmental degradation caused by unregulated tech production or the gig workers left without safety nets. Reduced government intervention might create unicorns, but it also amplifies inequality, undermines trust, and risks systemic failures.
The 2008 global financial crisis serves as a stark reminder of how liberalisation can lead to catastrophe. In the years preceding the crisis, financial institutions operated with minimal oversight. Deregulated mortgage lending practices and unchecked financial innovation created a housing bubble of unprecedented scale. When the bubble burst, the lack of safeguards turned a localised problem into a global economic meltdown, wiping out trillions of dollars and plunging millions into poverty. This failure highlights the perils of unbridled liberalisation.
The global nature of emerging technologies complicates regulatory oversight further. Cryptocurrencies, for instance, have thrived in jurisdictions with lax rules, enabling regulatory arbitrage. Companies leapfrog borders, exploiting gaps in oversight while dodging collective accountability. The result? A fragmented landscape that undermines trust and creates uneven playing fields.
The way forward lies not in dismantling regulatory frameworks but in reimagining them. Instead of binary debates—regulation versus liberalisation—we need governance that is agile, collaborative, and principles-driven. Regulatory sandboxes, for example, offer a promising middle ground, allowing innovators to test their ideas within monitored environments. Policymakers must engage with technologists, ethicists, and civil society to craft adaptive, forward-looking rules that encourage creativity without compromising safety.
Government oversight as an enabler of progress
More importantly, we must shift the cultural narrative. Regulatory oversight is not the enemy of progress—it is its enabler. Effective governance provides the trust and stability that innovation needs to thrive. It ensures that technologies serve humanity rather than exploit it and that the benefits of progress are shared equitably.
This forces us to confront a critical question: What kind of society are we building? One that values efficiency over equity, or one that demands progress with purpose? The answers will shape not just our technological future but the essence of who we are as a collective.
Progress without boundaries is like a river without banks—it may flow freely, but it risks flooding everything in its path. Regulatory oversights are not chains; they are the scaffolding upon which innovation can rise safely and sustainably. In a world hurtling forward on the back of exponential technologies, the question is not whether to regulate but how to do so with wisdom, foresight, and integrity.
Liberalisation may promise freedom, but without rules, innovation risks spiralling into chaos. Effective governance is not a barrier—it’s the foundation for sustainable trust in a rapidly changing world. As we confront the unknowns of emerging technologies and evolving consumer landscapes, regulatory oversight stands as the bridge between potential and purpose.
Srinath Sridharan is a strategic counsel with 25 years experience with leading corporates across diverse sectors including automobiles, e-commerce, advertising and financial services. He understands and ideates on intersection of finance, digital, contextual-finance, consumer, mobility, Urban transformation, and ESG. Actively engaged across growth policy conversations and public policy issues.