What Does the Future of Democracy Look Like?

Nearly 60 researchers and artists funded by Kone Foundation gathered in early October to discuss what the future of democracy might look like. The event explored the current state of democracy and its possible directions from many different perspectives.

As part of Kone Foundation’s Is Democracy Eroding? funding programme, we organised a meeting on 1 October that brought together representatives of projects funded through the programme’s thematic calls, along with other Kone Foundation–funded researchers and artists, to reflect on the state and future of democracy.

Fittingly, the event took place on the Finnish Day of Civic Participation – which is also the European Day of Foundations and Donors. During the day, we delved into different aspects of democracy through presentations and small-group discussions. The day’s conversations revealed shared concerns and major challenges, but also hopefulness and new ideas about how democracy might evolve.

It was clear that the future of democracy is neither fixed nor black and white: there are many alternative paths ahead. Yet several key themes repeatedly emerged across the discussions.

Beyond Election Buzz: Many Forms of Democratic Participation

Participation is the lifeblood of democracy. During the discussions, many noted that democratic participation cannot be reduced to elections and party politics alone. These institutional forms of participation play an essential role in democratic societies, but democracy should also make space for other ways of taking part.

“Voting is not the only way to practise democracy.”

Such ways might include new forms of activism, grassroots initiatives in one’s own neighbourhood, workplace or university, or engaging in public debate across different platforms.

Participation, however, must be genuine: superficial consultation processes, “dialogue-washing” and other forms of token democracy can undermine trust in democratic institutions.

“If one has no opportunity to influence things in one’s workplace or at the university, how can it be expected that people will have the resources or enthusiasm to engage more broadly in society?”

Digitalising Democracy in the Age of Algorithms

Technological development and the digitalisation of society are deeply intertwined with the future of democracy. New digital tools can increase participation and engagement for some, while leaving others further excluded from the digital world.

“Nowadays, it’s difficult to even be a citizen if you can’t use a smartphone.”

Social media and AI tools are increasingly entangled in ways that reshape both participation and decision-making. Digital platforms can spread information and knowledge, bring people together and offer opportunities to be heard. At the same time, they create customised bubbles, monetise people’s data, and shape societies to follow the logic of algorithms.

Participants noted that technology does not automatically guarantee inclusion. It cannot solve questions of social inequality or fix structural flaws in society. Often, the digitalisation of services is driven more by economic and efficiency logics than by citizens’ actual needs.

“We know that often the people who need different services the most have the least access to them.”

From Public Information to Content Bubbles

Open and free communication is a cornerstone of democracy. Yet digitalisation is transforming the media landscape as well. The media’s role as a public intermediary and “fourth estate” is changing, and the shared public sphere is breaking apart..

Participants pointed out that traditional media has become increasingly dependent on multinational technology companies and their algorithms to reach audiences. The logic and content styles of social media seep into traditional outlets, and the lines between online influencers and independent journalism is blurring.

“Some people see the same guidelines meant to ensure good journalistic practice as a form of content and opinion control.”

Readers are increasingly treated as consumers whose attention, clicks and money are contested. Audiences splinter as people retreat into different platforms and channels. At the same time, media ownership continues to concentrate and cross national borders, which can narrow the diversity of news and perspectives.

Concern about declining media literacy surfaced throughout the discussions. Weak (media) literacy undermines democratic civic competences and makes people more vulnerable to propaganda and conspiracy theories.

“Do subscription-based models drive polarisation? Does media become a luxury product?”

Imagining a New Democracy

Participants also reflected on which values and characteristics are central to democracy. There is no single vision of what democracy should be. Like all ideas, democracy must be localised.

At the same time, democratic values and principles can also be used to serve authoritarian aims or even to undermine democracy itself. The rule of law, human rights and international agreements can all be broken democratically. Is this the real crisis of democracy?

“Democracy is a software that needs to be updated.”

For democracy to renew itself, we need the ability to imagine something new – to reach for something that does not yet exist. Democratic innovations can arise outside familiar institutions and established practices. In the discussions, collective imagination was seen as a crucial skill for the evolution of democracy.

Maintaining and renewing democracy also requires actively defending democratic rights, building community, and engaging in dialogue – even when it does not lead to quick action or immediate change. It is important to offer alternatives to hopelessness and social cynicism.

“We need collective imagination, not just policy learning.”