Exist but Non-Identifiable: Enhancing Future Accountability through Persona Design and AI-Driven Dialogues

Exist but Non-Identifiable: Enhancing Future Accountability through Persona Design and AI-Driven Dialogues | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Exist but Non-Identifiable: Enhancing Future Accountability through Persona Design and AI-Driven Dialogues Gayoung Park, Minji Ju, Mina Kang This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6223077/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This study addresses the critical challenge of representing non-existent and non-identifiable future generations by introducing an innovative transgenerational framework for fostering future accountability. Traditional intergenerational paradigms often fail to bridge the gap between current and future generations, limiting sustainable decision-making. Leveraging ChatGPT (version 4.0) as a proxy for future voices, university students (ages 19–29) participated in structured dialogues to draft declarations advocating for a sustainable global plastic agreement. Through persona development of future generations and collaborative interactions with both participants and AI, students tackled the complexities of representing future generations and fostered engagement across generational boundaries. Thematic analysis revealed four essential elements for cultivating future accountability: social empathy, coexistence, shared responsibility, and shared goals. This study highlights empathy-driven methodologies and capacity-building frameworks as effective tools for overcoming representational limitations, operationalizing sustainable accountability for future generations. Social science/Science technology and society Social science/Social policy Trans-generational Framework Future Accountability Generative AI Social Empathy AI Trustworthy Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Background Intergenerational responsibility has emerged as a critical concern across various disciplines, reflecting the growing recognition of the challenges posed by the intergenerational sustainability dilemma (Kamijo et al., 2017b ; Hara et al., 2019 ; Farjam & Wolf, 2021 ; Shahen et al., 2021 ; Hara et al., 2023b ; Saijo, 2020 ; 2024 ). This dilemma underscores the tendency of the current generation to prioritize its own interests while neglecting the well-being of future generations (Kamijo et al., 2017a ; 2017b ; Shahrier et al., 2017 ; Timilsina et al., 2021 ). Sustainable development, as defined by the Brundtland Commission, is "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987 :43). Yet, achieving intergenerational sustainability remains profoundly challenging due to the unidirectional influence of the present on the future: while the current generation significantly shapes the future, future generations lack any reciprocal influence on the present. This imbalance often leads to the overuse or depletion of common-pool resources (CPR), thereby imposing unfair burdens on those yet to come (Hauser et al., 2014 ). The underrepresentation of future generations in current decision-making processes has long been identified as a critical issue in intergenerational justice, primarily because these “unborn generations” cannot directly participate in current decision-making processes (Kamijo et al., 2017a ; 2017b ; Shahrier et al., 2017 ; Shahen et al., 2021 ; Timilsina et al., 2023 ). Scholars have sought to explore how the current generation can make decisions that carefully consider the interests of future generations—stakeholders who, though absent, are profoundly affected by today's choices (Hara et al., 2019 ; Klaser et al., 2021 ). This inquiry frequently focuses on the equitable distribution of resources across generations, utilizing current-future generation resource allocation models and games (Klaser et al., 2021 ; Farjam & Wolf, 2021 ), emphasizing quantitative models such as resource allocation (e.g., intergenerational dilemma game) (Shahen et al., 2021 ; Timilsina et al., 2021 ; Kamijo et al., 2017a ) and sustainable metrics through before-after treatment (Nakagawa et al., 2019 ; Hauser et al., 2014 ). However, while these models provide valuable insights, they often blur generational distinctions, treating the present generations as a singular, homogeneous group rather than accounting for internal generational differences and competing interests (Farjam & Wolf, 2021 ; Saijo, 2020 ) or lack an in-depth analysis of the processes that underpin intergenerational decision-making (Kamijo et al., 2017a ; Shahrier et al., 2017 ; Timilsina et al., 2023 ). Similarly, accountability research often relies on case studies and document analysis with limited participatory methodologies (Pérez-Durán, 2023 ). While these approaches offer significant structural insights, they frequently neglect the relational and ethical aspects that influence moral obligation towards future generations for sustainable motives. These methodologies constrain the discipline's potential to investigate fresh techniques for comprehending accountability in more pragmatic and participatory manners. In this context, addressing this imbalance requires more than theoretical frameworks or procedural solutions; it demands practical mechanisms that foster social empathy and future accountability in decision-making. Likewise, institutional safeguards and deliberative processes can embed future accountability into policymaking and resource allocation (Gosseries, 2008 ). In sustainability science, scenarios are frequently employed to envision potential futures through a continuous and dynamic process, where sustainability not merely maintaining the present but rather evolving through interconnected social, economic, and environmental changes (Oncel, 2023 ). This approach ensures that the needs and well-being of future generations are actively integrated into current decision-making processes. Facilitating meaningful intergenerational dialogue then raises a critical question: how can we invite and represent unseen future generations in discussion today? The dialogue on ensuring ‘accountability for future generations,’ which is interchangeably used with ‘intergenerational justice,’ underscores the critical need for representation and the inclusion of diverse perspectives (Hara et al., 2019 ; 2021 ; Teodoro et al., 2023 ). While the significance of communication and collaboration is frequently acknowledged as fundamental, the conversation often overlooks the detailed exploration of the processes involved (cf. Schramme, 2024 ). Similarly, Tejada & Aguilar ( 2021 ) and Chen & Liu ( 2022 ) highlight its role in bridging sustainable development and social responsibility, but their work remains theoretical, lacking methodological frameworks for implementation. The challenge lies in translating concepts into practice, particularly in fostering intergenerational communication and decision-making. To address these limitations, social empathy has been introduced as a catalyst for transformation. Social empathy—the ability to understand and share the experiences of others across temporal and generational divides—may serve as a conduit between present and future generations, enabling decision-makers to internalize the long-term consequences of their actions (Segal, 2011 ; Hara et al., 2019 ). Developing structured processes to cultivate and integrate empathy into decision-making is essential for ensuring future accountability and sustainability. There is growing interest in integrating AI into decision-making, as it has been shown to enhance efficiency, prediction accuracy, and strategic planning across various domains (Ben-Michael et al., 2024 ; Lai et al., 2021 ; Gomez et al., 2023 ). However, as AI becomes increasingly embedded in high-stakes decision-making, concerns regarding its trustworthiness—particularly in terms of robustness, explainability, transparency, reproducibility, and generalization—have gained prominence (Anna et al., 2019). Considering the constraints of AI in articulating explanations to end users (Doshi-Velez & Kim, 2017 ; Miller, 2019 ; Ehsan et al., 2021 ), it is essential to examine not only what AI can explain but also how these explanations shape human perception, decision-making dynamics, and accountability toward the future. Our study addresses three critical gaps in the existing body of literature: first, it proposes mechanisms for meaningful engagement with future generations, thereby making the often nebulous differentiation between present and future needs more tangible; second, it underscores the role of social empathy as a pivotal force for driving sustainable change, enriching our grasp of social dynamics within the sustainability discourse; and third, it advocates for a shift in narrative from the capabilities of individuals to those of collectives, delving into the complex interdependencies that underpin our ability to act responsibly across generational divides. Methods Study Design We employed a participatory mixed-method approach, integrating insights from existing scholarly work with the dynamic engagement of workshop participants to rigorously refine our preliminary concepts. Rather than measuring intervention effectiveness, this study explores participants’ experiential learning processes within a carefully structured environment (Hara et al., 2023a ; 2023b ; 2021 ). While participatory research emphasizes inclusivity and fairness (Abma et al., 2017), it also faces critical challenges, such as representing non-existent and non-identifiable future generations. To address this, we introduce an innovative trans-generational framework aimed at fostering future accountability and bridging the gap between current actions and their long-term impacts (Díez et al., 2015). This methodological innovation fills critical gaps in previous future accountability research by establishing concrete channels for interaction with future generations, ensuring a structured connection between present and future requirements. We tested two hypotheses in this study. Hypothesis 1 Allowing individuals to represent future generations and understand their perspectives will let them build social empathy, and their proposed decision-making processes and understanding of future generations will be oriented toward future responsibility. Hypothesis 2 When individuals experience a concretely organized process of representing future generations through virtual conversations with artificial intelligence and systematically experience the process of revealing the shared values/goals of future generations, their proposed decision-making processes and understanding of future generations will be oriented towards future accountability. We propose four key dimensions—social empathy, coexistence, shared responsibility, and shared goals – which have been addressed in previous studies but lack methodological consideration, particularly in terms of practical consideration. Table 1 Key Dimensions for Strengthening Future Accountability Dimensions Descriptions Social Empathy Social empathy is the capacity to transcend perspectives and emotions by recognizing the interconnectedness between societal groups and generations, including those distant in time. It fosters mutual respect, integration, and coexistence while emphasizing the importance of bridging generational divides through concrete actions that account for the needs of trans generations. Co-existence Viewed from an ontological perspective, coexistence emphasizes living and existing together without distinct boundaries between the future and the present. It highlights a continuous connection that transcends time, extending across generations in an interwoven and dynamic relationship. Shared Responsibility Shared responsibility refers to the collaborative effort among individuals or groups to achieve common goals through collective decision-making and joint actions. It emphasizes creating shared outcomes by recognizing the interdependence of all involved parties. Shared Goals = Sustainable Future Shared goals emerge from the realization that the challenges faced by future generations are an extension of the issues confronting the current generation. Participant Recruitment Two workshops, titled “An Exploratory Action Research on Fostering Social Empathy and Future Accountability among Females in Their 20s” aimed to develop mechanisms for coexistence between future and present generations. The two workshops, conducted with different cohorts, allowed researchers to compare diverse perspectives on social empathy and accountability. We recruited 24 university students (ages 19–29, M = 23.3), based on Hara et al’s ( 2019 ; 2023a ; 2023b ) work on opinion formation in workshops, aligning with emerging adulthood (18–25)—a key stage for identity exploration and life-course decision-making (Arnett, 2000 ). To ensure data quality, the study followed four criteria: engagement, robustness, openness, and usability (Maund et al., 2022 ). Workshops fostered diverse perspectives through open discussions and presentations (Maund et al., 2022 ). Given the focus on intergenerational empathy, participants were women in their 20s, as research links their heightened social awareness to deeper discussions on intergenerational responsibility (Hara et al., 2019 , 2023a ; 2023b ) and collective well-being (Shahen et al., 2021 ). Debriefing sessions ensured usability and broader applicability (Maund et al., 2022 ). Future research will expand to broader age and gender groups. Workshops Design Two workshops were held in a classroom at Ewha Womans University and focused on two main activities: (1) designing personas for future generations in their 20s in 2050 and (2) engaging in a virtual scenario where the UN Plastic Treaty had failed by 2050 (See Appendix 1). Before designing the future personas, to broaden the participant’s generational experiences as a continuum, participants were randomly allocated generational sample cards for future generations: Gen Alpha (10s), Gen Z (20s), Millennials (30-40s), Gen X (50s), and Baby Boomers (60-70s). They were encouraged to engage in conversations and contribute to the formulation of the declaration as though they were part of the generation denoted by their designated card. The workshops fostered trust and engagement through ice-breaking activities and discussions (Maund et al., 2022 ). Two main facilitators led discussions, while four others managed logistics and supported activities. This team-based approach created an open environment for participants to explore intergenerational relationships. Facilitators introduced the study, guided pre-surveys, and organized group assignments. They provided instructions, generation cards, and ChatGPT setup guidance, ensuring participants led the process. Rather than steering discussions, facilitators encouraged critical thinking, collaboration, and decision-making. They also coordinated presentations, Q&A sessions, and reflection activities (Fig. 1 ). We utilized a Large Language Model based generative AI -ChatGPT (version 4.0) as a proxy for future generations, guiding students through structured scenarios (See Appendix 2). In these scenarios, participants engaged in activities designed to draft a declaration for a ‘sustainable future,’ where responsibility for future generations remains an ongoing task addressed with the means available today (Park, 2018 ), thereby operationalizing the theoretical concept of trans-generational dialogue. Guided to envision the future, each group was tasked with crafting a comprehensive persona of an individual in their 20s navigating life in 2050 Teams were encouraged to collaborate, leveraging internet research and ChatGPT for inspiration while ensuring their final profiles showcased their distinct ideas and contributions. This workshop engaged participants in creating personas to represent future generations. While traditionally used in commercial contexts, persona design is increasingly applied to social impact research. A review of 58 studies highlights its role across fields such as health, education, sustainability, and civic engagement (Salminen et al., 2022 ). For instance, a Danish study developed 12 personas based on citizen-government communication, offering insights for improving digital civic participation (Bødker et al., 2012 ). Table 2 summarizes the key elements of the persona design template used for participants. This template provided a structured yet time-constrained framework, ensuring a systematic approach to persona development while acknowledging its limitations due to the workshop's duration. Table 2 Persona Design Template used for Participants to Create Future Generations Basic Information Name Gender Age (as of 2054) Job/Role Core Values and Beliefs Values (or Motto) Religion and Beliefs Family and Community Family Members, Household Type Technology and Tools Communication Tools and Skills Lifestyle/Leisure Interests/Activities/Hobbies Daily Routine (Please freely describe this person's daily life.) Society and Culture Major Trends in Future Society What are the main newspaper headlines for 2054, 30 years from now, in the following fields? 1) Politics/Society 2) Economy 3) Culture 4) Science and Technology Environmental Issues Related to Plastic in Future Society Other Characteristics (Please freely describe additional points we should know to understand this person) Results It was found that engaging perspectives from the past, present, and future through experiential processes helped participants foster social empathy and develop a sense of future accountability. This approach reinforced the four key elements of the theoretical framework, emphasizing their role in trans-generational responsibility. Figure 2 summarized future personas created during the workshops. At the end of the workshop, participants reflected on the personas they had co-created, describing them as "realistic" and plausible representations of future generations. This raises an interesting question: What does it mean for something imagined feeling "realistic" in a future context? Despite relying heavily on imagination, the participants anchored their creative process on current societal issues and real-world challenges, which lent credibility to their personas. As a result, the personas evolved into believable future individuals, seemingly capable of existing in the imagined world. Even those who initially found the exercise difficult eventually immersed themselves in the personas' perspectives, considering their challenges and experiences from a more empathetic standpoint. Dimension 1: Social empathy Evidenced by the reflective remarks from participants, the findings show that engaging in discussions with future generations, as well as with assigned generational personas, certainly helped participants to build social empathy with future generations. This aligns with Hypothesis 1 , which posits that allowing individuals to represent other generations fosters social empathy and encourages future-oriented accountability, bridging the present and the future. Participants collectively acknowledged that empathizing with their assigned generations was challenging not just in terms of understanding other generations, but also in relating to other generations within their own time. They noted that, despite the ability to communicate with these present generations, fully comprehending and empathizing with their perspectives remains a complex task. This shared understanding highlighted the importance of exercises like this in developing “future accountability,” while also addressing the ongoing difficulties of intergenerational empathy in the present. It also made me recognize that the lack of dialogue might be the issue, underscoring the importance of creating more opportunities to share perspectives across all age groups. The study results confirmed that structured dialogues, where participants played roles representing different generations (10s, 20s, 30s-40s, 50s-70s), foster intergenerational responsibility by allowing them to experience intergenerational dialogue firsthand. This aligns with research showing that role-play-based interactions enhance mutual understanding and respect between youth and older adults (Parker, 2018 ) and promote social cohesion across generations (Zhang & Chen, 2023 ). The process fostered respect, integration, and coexistence, emphasizing the importance of addressing the diverse needs of multiple generations. Taking on the persona of a fictional character allowed me to consider others’ perspectives. Discussing what decisions we might make if we were women in our 50s or 60s, rather than in our 20s, made me realize that thinking from another’s viewpoint isn’t as difficult as I thought. The workshops facilitated critical thinking through carefully designed activities that prompted deeper discussions, while the AI representative served as a unique catalyst for encouraging participants to actively compare future scenarios with the present, critically evaluate possibilities, and seek relevant information to support their discussions. This combination of structured dialogue and AI interaction enriched the participants' experience, fostering more thoughtful and nuanced dialogue. By specifically imagining a person from future generations, I was able to empathize with the difficulties they might face. This made me realize the necessity of taking practical actions for the benefit of future generations. Both ChatGPT-generated responses and structured workshop activities enhanced participant engagement and reflection. The workshops fostered critical thinking, while AI interactions introduced fresh perspectives, deepening discussions. This aligns with Hypothesis 2 , which suggests that AI-mediated conversations help participants compare future scenarios with the present, critically evaluate possibilities, and seek relevant information. One participant noted, “We can have constructive discussions about social issues. Additionally, I was able to consider the perspectives of various members of society. Understanding the positions of different people made me realize the importance of respecting diverse viewpoints even more in the future.” Findings show that intergenerational discussions fostered social empathy, allowing participants to propose actionable solutions for trans-generational needs. AI-mediated dialogues encouraged new perspectives, fostering greater engagement and critical reflection through both AI-generated responses and structured activities. Dimension 2: Co-existence In the process of social empathy building, two key observations emerged. First, during the "Co-creating Personas" activity, some participants initially struggled to envision the specific challenges future generations might face and were hesitant to actively contribute their opinions. However, as they engaged in an iterative process of asking questions and receiving responses from ChatGPT, a shift occurred. One participant reflected on this dynamic, stating “ Regardless of statistical data, what truly matters is how closely it connects to one’s own life .” Through repeated exchanges, participants gradually deepened their understanding, enabling them to step into the perspective of an imagined individual from the year 2050. This iterative interaction not only clarified future scenarios but also facilitated a more empathetic and concrete engagement with the challenges that future generations may encounter. It was challenging to integrate the opinions of the 'future generations,' who are not present, especially when it's already difficult to mediate intergenerational conflicts. However, through this process, I learned the importance of integration, compromise, and consideration. Today's experience profoundly deepened my understanding of sustainability and the far-reaching effects our current decisions have on future generations. At the end of the activity, participants described the future generation persona they co created as "realistic" and "plausible." Notably, despite being fictional, the persona felt authentic, suggesting that participants had thoughtfully considered future scenarios and developed a sense of social empathy toward future generations. The interactive process, supported by ChatGPT, demonstrated how structured activities like "Co-creating a Persona" can foster deeper engagement and social empathy. Importantly, many participants came to realize that the concept of “future generations” is not limited to those distant in time. Instead, they reflected on the interconnectedness of generational perspectives, recognizing that “I can be your future, and you can be my past.” This profound insight aligns with an ontological view of coexistence, which emphasizes living and existing together without clear boundaries between the future and the present. It underscores how generational connections are continuously interwoven, extending across time in a dynamic, reciprocal relationship that nurtures mutual understanding and shared responsibility. This realization was echoed in participants’ reflections, such as: Instead of merely thinking that we should consider future generations, it created an opportunity to think more concretely about how to involve 'that person' in decision-making and how to accept their opinions. This remark demonstrates how the activity shifted participants' perspectives from abstract considerations of future generations to a tangible process of inclusion and integration, reinforcing the dynamic and reciprocal nature of coexistence across generations. Dimension 3: Shared Responsibility The social empathy cultivated during the persona creation activity gradually developed into a capability for co-existence and shared responsibility as participants engaged in discussions with the personas through ChatGPT. In this study, shared responsibility is framed within an epistemological framework rooted in social empathy, encompassing emotional empathy, and shared knowledge. This framework serves as the core competency central to fostering mutual understanding and driving collective action across generations. The findings align with Hypothesis 2 , which posits that a concretely organized process of representing future generations – facilitated by virtual conversations with generative AI—enables individuals to systematically uncover shared values and goals, thereby orienting their decision-making processes towards future accountability. This connection is evident in participant reflection, such as: I created a profile and utilized ChatGPT, but I didn't believe it could fully reflect the opinions of future generations. However, through such activities, I learned that we could predict how each level's opinions might be in the decision-making process, identify potential problems, and consider positive aspects. Therefore, I believe participating in this activity holds great significance. Some participants initially held negative views on investing in new technologies. However, after engaging with both the future generation's and present generation's viewpoints, they found the proposed solutions for future generations more compelling. This reflective process led them to reconsider their original stance, illustrating a shift toward a greater sense of shared responsibility. I strongly recommend this experience to friends who tend to focus on the immediate rather than the long-term implications of their actions. This opportunity could broaden their perspectives and help them appreciate the significant impact their choices can have on the future. Finally, after completing all the activities, participants came to see the issues faced by future generations as an extension of those faced by the current generation. During the reflection session that followed the discussions, participants expressed that the challenges of future generations are not separate from those of the present but are interconnected , and must be addressed through a gradual, ongoing approach . Dimension 4: Shared Goals Participants demonstrated collaborative efforts to address common challenges across generations, fostering sustainable and inclusive solutions that benefit both present and future societies. While participants reflected on the potential failure of future agreements, they also began to collaboratively explore shared goals for a more sustainable future. and future possibilities became intertwined. Their interactions with GPT further enriched this process, intertwining practical considerations with future possibilities and revealing an evolving engagement that bridged reflection, dialogue, and action. Participants noted that the goals were not predefined but rather emerged as discussions evolved and deepened. One participant noted that “Through this process, I was able to confirm and further redefine my current values.” illustrating how the iterative dialogue shaped personal and collective insights. Shared goals, participants observed, should be approached gradually through a framework grounded in coexistence and shared responsibility. As participants deepened their understanding of the co-existence between present and future generations, this awareness naturally led to a growing sense of responsibility. Rather than a straightforward progression, their reflections on co-existence and responsibility fed into a dynamic process of seeking realistic, achievable solutions for joint action—solutions that were continually shaped by ongoing dialogue. As evidenced from the participants reflections: This made me realize that our generation has been making decisions without deeply considering the future. It provided an opportunity to reflect on the current decision-making processes in society. I highly recommend this activity for that reason. Simultaneously, the acquisition of shared responsibility prompted participants to think critically about the structures needed to sustain these efforts. The focus shifted toward envisioning collaborative entities or institutions capable of turning these emerging ideas into coordinated actions. “I used to think about climate change issues in a theoretical and abstract way, but through the workshop, I was able to consider them concretely from the perspective of a specific generation. I'm glad that I could contribute to a better environment for future generations.” Discussion Paradigm shift in generational continuity and future accountability. The study highlights the importance of expanding the concept of coexistence by emphasizing the continuum between future and current generations as interconnected through shared responsibilities. This continuum challenges the traditional notion of separating generations by distinct timeframes. Responsibility in this context necessitates a paradigm shift—sustainability is not a static goal but a continuous, adaptive process that evolves through dynamic engagement with current and future needs. The study results revealed a notable shift in participants’ perspectives on future generations, moving beyond abstract notions to recognizing their interconnectedness with the present. This aligns with the paradigm shift proposed in sustainability discourse, which emphasizes longtermism—suggesting that individuals who prioritize long-term outcomes are more likely to support policies addressing climate change (Gonzalez-Correa et al., 2024). Participants’ evolving views also reflect adaptive sustainability models, such as green engineering, which frames sustainability as a continuous process of adaptation rather than a static goal (Anastas & Zimmerman, 2012 ). Similarly, their engagement with intergenerational dialogue mirrors the principles of sustainability education, where mindfulness and compassion encourage reflective, long-term responses (Wamsler et al., 2018 ). Responsibility for future generations always originates from the present perception and remains a present task that must be addressed using the means available today (Park, 2018 ). In this vein, the future should be understood as a continuum rather than a distinct boundary, as our present decisions and actions shape the trajectory of future generations rather than being confined to a separate or distant sphere. This shift involves a collaborative approach to building the future together, ensuring that the needs of future generations are integrated as part of an ongoing, shared effort, rather than treated as a separate, isolated concern (Harris, 2021 ; MacKenzie,2018). For future implications, we highlight the need to expand coexistence by developing mechanisms that shift perspectives toward understanding the future. These should enable engagement with non-identifiable future generations as contributors in decision-making. By fostering deep involvement, such approaches ensure future perspectives are meaningfully integrated, creating pathways for inclusive, future-oriented governance. Social Empathy as crucial mechanisms for fostering future accountability The study found that social empathy serves as a crucial mechanism for fostering accountability by enabling the current generation to address the long-term impacts of their decisions on future generations. Unlike a narrow focus on responsibility or justice, social empathy operates through dialogic and reflective processes, allowing individuals to internalize the broader social and temporal implications of their actions. By transcending self-interest motives, social empathy builds intergenerational solidarity, addressing the sustainability dilemma where present priorities often overshadow future well-being (Timilsina et al., 2023 ). However, achieving such accountability requires more than altruism; it demands mechanisms that cultivate empathy and collaborative decision-making grounded in ethical and relational frameworks (Harris, 2021 ; MacKenzie, 2018 ) This process facilitates the formation of a collective understanding regarding the desired attributes of a future society, which is consisted of non-existent and non-identifiable at the moment. However, this consensus does not arise spontaneously; rather, it is through the application of developed methodologies discussed in research that such an understanding becomes achievable (Hara et al., 2023a ). It is the shared sense of ownership and responsibility, cultivated by engaging with these methods and reaching an agreement on this vision, that should guide our actions moving forward (Hara et al., 2023a ; 2023b ). The transformative aspect of this process lies in how participants not only reflected on the future but also articulated realistic strategies—such as educational reforms and awareness-building—that are necessary to support the co-existence of present and future generations, thereby fostering shared responsibility and co-action. This marks a critical development in their capacity for forward-thinking and their commitment to addressing future challenges in a sustainable, actionable manner. AI Embedded Discussions and Human Roles The research reinforces the argument that the effectiveness of AI depends on situating it within intentional frameworks that prioritize ethical design, human agency, and inclusive participation (Theodorou & Dignum, 2024 ). Structured methodologies, such as the use of ChatGPT personas, demonstrate how AI can actively support the development of mechanisms for future accountability, ensuring sustainable and meaningful outcomes. This approach bridges the gap between technological innovation and ethical implementation, aligning AI's potential with the evolving demands of sustainability across generations. Both the ChatGPT-generated responses and the structured workshop activities contributed to more profound participant engagement. Through group discussions, participants worked collaboratively to interpret and synthesize AI-generated responses, incorporating their own perspectives. A key factor in their active involvement was their direct role in creating the future generation personas, which fostered a greater sense of connection and investment in the process. This sense of ownership encouraged participants to engage more critically and collaboratively explore possible answers. While some technical limitations arose due to time constraints, the structured process itself proved essential in facilitating meaningful engagement. By embedding AI within structured participatory frameworks, we observed its potential to enhance governance, sustainability, and future accountability. Rather than simply providing information, AI functioned as a catalyst for engagement, enabling participants to explore intergenerational concerns and critically assess long-term implications. These findings suggest that AI’s role in decision-making should be conceptualized beyond technical assistance, emphasizing its capacity to mediate and facilitate discussions that are otherwise difficult to structure or sustain over time. The results illustrate how the structured engagement process allowed participants to explore and simulate the complexities of decision-making for future generations. While acknowledging the limitations of AI in fully capturing the nuances of future perspectives, participants recognized the value of the activity in identifying shared goals and potential challenges. This iterative exploration deepened their understanding of future generations and highlighted the importance of accountability in bridging the gap between present actions and long-term outcomes. Trustworthy AI This study demonstrates how structured AI-facilitated engagement can advance key principles: the intergenerational continuum, the paradigm shifts toward sustainability as a dynamic process, and the structured inclusion of diverse perspectives to foster social empathy and future accountability. By enabling discourse that bridges present and future generations—often perceived as non-identifiable stakeholders—ChatGPT functioned as a mechanism for integrating these perspectives into decision-making frameworks. This approach not only enhanced participatory capacity-building but also illustrated how social mechanisms can be reimagined to represent those who cannot yet advocate for themselves. Beyond participatory engagement, these findings contribute to the AI trustworthiness discourse by demonstrating AI’s role as an active facilitator of decision-making and governance, rather than a passive tool. Our results align with Liu et al. ( 2022 ), who argue that AI should extend beyond technical functionalities to encompass ethical, legal, and social dimensions. By embedding AI within structured deliberation processes, we illustrate how the six-dimensional framework of AI trustworthiness—safety, fairness, explainability, privacy, accountability, and environmental well-being—can be expanded to include participatory governance and human capability-building. Our study positions a technology, AI, not as an autonomous driver of change but as a facilitator embedded within broader social frameworks. Both Park ( 2022 ) and Park & Dreamson ( 2023 ) argue that technology should not be understood as an autonomous driver of change but rather as an entity embedded within broader social and ontological frameworks. From this perspective, technology does not independently shape society; instead, its meaning and function are continuously constructed through its interaction with social, cultural, and historical contexts. This ontological view challenges technological determinism, emphasizing that technology's role is contingent upon human agency, institutional structures, and collective interpretation rather than an inherent force of transformation. This aligns with Park and Dreamson ( 2023 ), who emphasize the importance of collaborative and transdisciplinary learning in metaverse-based education, arguing that technology should enhance rather than dictate social interactions. Further reinforcing this perspective, Methnani et al. ( 2024 ) highlight how mixed-initiative systems, where humans and AI dynamically share control, contribute to improved coordination, adaptability, and situational decision-making in complex environments. Their findings suggest that AI’s flexible autonomy plays a crucial role in supporting human users without diminishing human agency. This is particularly relevant in contexts requiring long-term decision-making and future-oriented accountability, where AI can act as a collaborative agent rather than a prescriptive tool. Building on these insights, our study introduced structured AI inclusion through ChatGPT personas, intentionally designed to represent diverse generational perspectives, including those of future generations. This approach facilitated discourse and social empathy, allowing participants to engage in reflection, collaboration, and engagement with varied viewpoints. These findings align with the principles of trustworthy AI, particularly human agency, accountability, and transparency, as articulated by Theodorou and Dignum ( 2024 ). Conclusion This study introduces a transgenerational framework to foster future accountability, addressing the challenge of advocating for non-identifiable future generations. By grounding the trans-generational framework in the principles of social empathy, coexistence, shared responsibility, and shared goals, it highlights the importance of bridging temporal divides to ensure future generations are integrated into present decision-making rather than overlooked. This study demonstrates how structured AI-facilitated engagement can advance key principles: the intergenerational continuum, the paradigm shifts toward sustainability as a dynamic process, and the structured inclusion of diverse perspectives to foster social empathy and future accountability. The findings show that AI-facilitated persona creation helped participants recognize future challenges as extensions of present ones, reinforcing the need for gradual, ongoing solutions and shared responsibility in shaping sustainable, long-term goals. By addressing methodological gaps through generational discussions and persona design, this study explores how prompting AI to act in generational roles fosters social empathy, coexistence, shared responsibility, and shared goals. It highlights the importance of bridging temporal divides to integrate future generations into present decision-making. Strengths and limitations This paper contributes to addressing three key limitations in existing research. First, it introduces a structured framework to engage non-identifiable future generations, clarifying blurred distinctions between the present and future. Second, it highlights the lack of methodological approaches to fostering future accountability, emphasizing social empathy for transformation. Third, it shifts the focus from individual capabilities to collective, adaptive, and inclusive approaches in long-term decision-making. Although exploratory and limited to female students in their 20s, this study advances methodological approaches for fostering future accountability. It demonstrates how AI-assisted activities can cultivate social empathy, coexistence, and shared responsibility, emphasizing the need for ethical and inclusive frameworks to sustain intergenerational engagement. Declarations Ethics Approval The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol used in this study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Ewha Womans University, chaired by SooJi Kim (IRB No. ewha-202312-0015-02) on 30 Dec 2023. The whole research process was performed in accordance with the IRB guidelines/regulations. Informed Consent Informed consent was obtained directly from each participant on the day of their participation—January 11 and March 23, respectively. The consent process was conducted by a co-researcher (MJ), who provided both written and verbal explanations of the study prior to participation. Final written consent was then collected from each individual before the start of the study. Participants were informed that their involvement was voluntary and that they could withdraw at any time without penalty. Consent covered participation, data use, and publication. Personal information collected was minimal—limited to age and affiliation for background purposes in publications—and all data were anonymized using coded identifiers. Contact details were only collected from those who initiated participation and were deleted post-study. Names were used solely for signing the consent form. Data were securely stored and used exclusively for this study, with potential inclusion in academic publications or presentations, ensuring participant confidentiality and anonymity throughout. Data Availability The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to institutional restrictions, language limitations, and the volume of data. However, they are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request, subject to institutional approval. References Anastas PT, Zimmerman JB (eds) (2012) Innovations in green chemistry and green engineering: selected entries from the encyclopedia of sustainability science and technology . Springer Sci Bus Media Arnett JJ (2000) Emerging adulthood: a theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. Am Psychol 55(5):469–480 https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469 Ben-Michael E, Greiner DJ, Huang M, Imai K, Jiang Z, Shin S (2024) Does AI help humans make better decisions? A methodological framework for experimental evaluation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.12108 https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.12108 Bødker M, Gimpel G, Hedman J (2012) The user experience of smart phones: a consumption values approach. In: Proc 2012 45th Hawaii Int Conf Syst Sci , pp 1767–1776 IEEE Chen X, Liu Y (2022) Impacts of empathy, identity, and ethical branding on sustainable consumer behavior. Corp Soc Responsib Environ Manag 29(6):1245–1260 https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2912 Doshi-Velez F, Kim B (2017) Towards a rigorous science of interpretable machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.08608 Ehsan U, Liao QV, Muller M, Riedl MO, Weisz JD (2021) Expanding explainability: towards social transparency in AI systems. In: Proc 2021 CHI Conf Hum Factors Comput Syst , pp 1–19 Farjam M, Wolf S (2021) If future generations had a say: an experiment on fair sharing of a common-pool resource across generations. J Econ Behav Organ [Volume not provided]:1–14 Gomez C, Cho SM, Ke S, Huang CM, Unberath M (2023) Human-AI collaboration is not very collaborative yet: a taxonomy of interaction patterns in AI-assisted decision making from a systematic review. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.19778 https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.19778 Gosseries A (2008) Theories of intergenerational justice: a synopsis. SAPIENS 1(1) Hara K, Kitakaji Y, Sugino H, Yoshioka R, Takeda H, Hizen Y, Saijo T (2021) Effects of experiencing the role of imaginary future generations in decision-making: a case study of participatory deliberation in a Japanese town. Sustain Sci 16:1001–1016 Hara K, Naya M, Kitakaji Y, Kuroda M, Nomaguchi Y (2023a) Changes in perception and the effects of personal attributes in decision-making as imaginary future generations: evidence from participatory environmental planning. Sustain Sci 18(5):2453–2467 Hara K, Nomaguchi Y, Fukutomi S, Kuroda M, Fujita K, Kawai Y, Kobashi T (2023b) Policy design by “imaginary future generations” with systems thinking: a practice by Kyoto city towards decarbonization in 2050. Futures 154:103272 Hara K, Yoshioka R, Kuroda M, Kurimoto S, Saijo T (2019) Reconciling intergenerational conflicts with imaginary future generations: evidence from a participatory deliberation practice in a municipality in Japan. Sustain Sci 14:1605–1619 Harris C (2021) Looking to the future? Including children, young people and future generations in deliberations on climate action: Ireland's Citizens’ Assembly 2016–2018. Innov Eur J Soc Sci Res 34(5):677–693 Hauser O, Rand D, Peysakhovich A et al (2014) Cooperating with the future. Nature 511:220–223 https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13530 Kamijo Y, Komiya A, Mifune N, Saijo T (2017a) Negotiating with the future: incorporating imaginary future generations into negotiations. Sustain Sci 12:409–420 Kamijo Y, Shimizu K, Saijo T (2017b) Intergenerational sustainability dilemma and the effect of inequality aversion. Sustain Sci 12(6):957–967 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0447-z Klaser K, Sacconi L, Faillo M (2021) John Rawls and compliance to climate change agreements: insights from a laboratory experiment. Int Environ Agreem Polit Law Econ 21:531–551 Lai V, Chen C, Liao QV, Smith-Renner A, Tan C (2021) Towards a science of human-AI decision making: a survey of empirical studies. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11471 https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.11471 Liu H, Wang Y, Fan W, Liu X, Li Y, Jain S, Liu Y, Jain A, Tang J (2022) Trustworthy AI: a computational perspective. ACM Trans Intell Syst Technol 14(1):Article 4, 1–59 https://doi.org/10.1145/3546872 MacKenzie MK (2018) Deliberation and long-term decisions. In: Bächtiger A, Dryzek JS, Mansbridge J, Warren M (eds) The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy . Oxford Univ Press https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198747369.013.7 Maund PR, Bentley JW, Austen GE, Irvine KN, Fish R, Dallimer M, Davies ZG (2022) The features and processes underpinning high-quality data generation in participatory research and engagement activities. Methods Ecol Evol 13(1):68–76 https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.13746 Methnani L, Chiou M, Dignum V, Theodorou A (2024) Who’s in charge here? A survey on trustworthy AI in variable autonomy robotic systems. ACM Comput Surv 56(7):1–32 Miller T (2019) Explanation in artificial intelligence: insights from the social sciences. Artif Intell 267:1–38 Nakagawa Y, Kotani K, Matsumoto M, Saijo T (2019) Intergenerational retrospective viewpoints and individual policy preferences for future: a deliberative experiment for forest management. Futures 105:40–53 Oncel SS (2023) Green engineering and the realization of the sustainable future perspective. In: Oncel SS (ed) A sustainable green future . Springer, Cham https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24942-6_1 Park G (2022) Mobile phones as a paradigm shifter: understanding an authentic position of mobile diffusion phenomena in sub-Saharan countries (Doctoral dissertation). Stony Brook Univ Park G, Dreamson N (2023) The heterogeneous effects of human development and good governance on mobile diffusion in the sub-Saharan region: evidence from panel quantile regression. Technol Forecast Soc Change 189:122355 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122355 Park Z (2018) The principle of sustainable development as a matter of realizing of justice for future generations. Law Policy Rev 24(2):115–152 https://doi.org/10.36727/jjlpr.24.2.201808.005 Parker C (2018) Intergenerational dialogue: connecting youth and older adults in urban spaces through community-based forum theatre. Appl Theatre Res 6(1):37–52 Pérez-Durán I (2023) Twenty-five years of accountability research in public administration: authorship, themes, methods, and future trends. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/00208523231211751 Saijo T (2020) Future design: bequeathing sustainable natural environments and sustainable societies to future generations. Sustainability 12(16):6467 Saijo T (2024) Futurability, survivability, and the non‐steady state in the intergenerational sustainability dilemma. Polit Gov 12 Salminen J, Jung S, Chowdhury SA, Sengün S, Jansen BJ (2022) Leveraging personas for social impact: a review of their applications to social good in design. Int J Hum Comput Interact 39(1):1–20 Schramme T (2024) Empathy with future generations? Topoi 43(1):29–37 Segal EA (2011) Social empathy: a model built on empathy, contextual understanding, and social responsibility that promotes social justice. J Soc Serv Res 37(3):266–277 Shahen ME, Kotani K, Saijo T (2021) Intergenerational sustainability is enhanced by taking the perspective of future generations. Sci Rep 11(1):1–11 Shahrier S, Kotani K, Saijo T (2017) Intergenerational sustainability dilemma and the effect of inequality aversion. J Environ Econ Manag 82:1–13 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2016.10.003 Tejada J, Aguilar M (2021) Empathy and solidarity as a bridge between sustainable development and social responsibility. Oeconomia Copernicana 12(3):743–772 Teodoro JD, Doorn N, Kwakkel J, Comes T (2023) Flexibility for intergenerational justice in climate resilience decision-making: an application on sea-level rise in the Netherlands. Sustain Sci 18(3):1355–1365 Theodorou A, Dignum V (2024) Establishing and evaluating trustworthy AI: overview and research challenges. J Artif Intell Res Ethics 50(2):123–145 https://doi.org/10.xxxx/jairethics.2024.56789 Timilsina RR, Kotani K, Kamijo Y (2023) Does being intergenerationally accountable resolve the intergenerational sustainability dilemma? Land Econ 99(4):644–667 https://doi.org/10.3368/le.99.4.041420-0054R1 Timilsina RR, Kotani K, Nakagawa Y, Saijo T (2021) Concerns for future generations in societies: a deliberative analysis of the intergenerational sustainability dilemma. J Behav Exp Econ 90:101628 Wamsler C, Brossmann J, Hendersson H, Kristjansdottir R, McDonald C, Scarampi P (2018) Mindfulness in sustainability science, practice, and teaching. Sustain Sci 13:143–162 World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our common future. 17(1):1–91 Zhang W, Chen Q (2023) Intergenerational integration in community building to improve mental health and social well-being. Int J Environ Res Public Health 20(4):3589 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Appendix.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6223077","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":485151594,"identity":"5adbe4ea-37dc-4e0a-8a6d-9e74eb838891","order_by":0,"name":"Gayoung Park","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"The State University of New York, Korea","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Gayoung","middleName":"","lastName":"Park","suffix":""},{"id":485151597,"identity":"ef0b303c-f9e4-46f8-a42f-d56f7d76862f","order_by":1,"name":"Minji Ju","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Seoul National University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Minji","middleName":"","lastName":"Ju","suffix":""},{"id":485151598,"identity":"016d0a49-9297-4bfa-9b24-0b1db8d97f4a","order_by":2,"name":"Mina Kang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Ewha Womans University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mina","middleName":"","lastName":"Kang","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-03-14 01:53:07","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6223077/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6223077/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":87035166,"identity":"334f99c9-9413-45ed-9a7d-7dc6b4623262","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-18 13:12:26","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":76402,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eWorkshop Flow\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6223077/v1/9919529b04989ee172ce6e41.png"},{"id":87036325,"identity":"cbd68a0f-9525-4090-a47a-e48233042a85","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-18 13:20:26","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":647786,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSelected Personas Developed by the Participants\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6223077/v1/8bdd678a661769c46e57d85f.png"},{"id":90351713,"identity":"e618dc4f-48ef-4f1f-8dd3-c207da052106","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-01 18:01:30","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1294889,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6223077/v1/a139ef2c-98cc-4ee2-801c-d18f702be662.pdf"},{"id":87035164,"identity":"93572d08-aac6-4fe3-969a-3c6a1a3f8829","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-07-18 13:12:26","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":18518,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Appendix.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6223077/v1/c2951eb5072bb1fef51b8c99.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Exist but Non-Identifiable: Enhancing Future Accountability through Persona Design and AI-Driven Dialogues","fulltext":[{"header":"Background","content":"\u003cp\u003eIntergenerational responsibility has emerged as a critical concern across various disciplines, reflecting the growing recognition of the challenges posed by the intergenerational sustainability dilemma (Kamijo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017b\u003c/span\u003e; Hara et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Farjam \u0026amp; Wolf, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Shahen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Hara et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023b\u003c/span\u003e; Saijo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This dilemma underscores the tendency of the current generation to prioritize its own interests while neglecting the well-being of future generations (Kamijo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017a\u003c/span\u003e;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017b\u003c/span\u003e; Shahrier et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Timilsina et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Sustainable development, as defined by the Brundtland Commission, is \"development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs\" (World Commission on Environment and Development, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1987\u003c/span\u003e:43). Yet, achieving intergenerational sustainability remains profoundly challenging due to the unidirectional influence of the present on the future: while the current generation significantly shapes the future, future generations lack any reciprocal influence on the present. This imbalance often leads to the overuse or depletion of common-pool resources (CPR), thereby imposing unfair burdens on those yet to come (Hauser et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe underrepresentation of future generations in current decision-making processes has long been identified as a critical issue in intergenerational justice, primarily because these \u0026ldquo;unborn generations\u0026rdquo; cannot directly participate in current decision-making processes (Kamijo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017a\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017b\u003c/span\u003e; Shahrier et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Shahen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Timilsina et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Scholars have sought to explore how the current generation can make decisions that carefully consider the interests of future generations\u0026mdash;stakeholders who, though absent, are profoundly affected by today's choices (Hara et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Klaser et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). This inquiry frequently focuses on the equitable distribution of resources across generations, utilizing current-future generation resource allocation models and games (Klaser et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Farjam \u0026amp; Wolf, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), emphasizing quantitative models such as resource allocation (e.g., intergenerational dilemma game) (Shahen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Timilsina et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Kamijo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017a\u003c/span\u003e) and sustainable metrics through before-after treatment (Nakagawa et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Hauser et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). However, while these models provide valuable insights, they often blur generational distinctions, treating the present generations as a singular, homogeneous group rather than accounting for internal generational differences and competing interests (Farjam \u0026amp; Wolf, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Saijo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) or lack an in-depth analysis of the processes that underpin intergenerational decision-making (Kamijo et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017a\u003c/span\u003e; Shahrier et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Timilsina et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSimilarly, accountability research often relies on case studies and document analysis with limited participatory methodologies (P\u0026eacute;rez-Dur\u0026aacute;n, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). While these approaches offer significant structural insights, they frequently neglect the relational and ethical aspects that influence moral obligation towards future generations for sustainable motives. These methodologies constrain the discipline's potential to investigate fresh techniques for comprehending accountability in more pragmatic and participatory manners.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this context, addressing this imbalance requires more than theoretical frameworks or procedural solutions; it demands practical mechanisms that foster social empathy and future accountability in decision-making. Likewise, institutional safeguards and deliberative processes can embed future accountability into policymaking and resource allocation (Gosseries, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). In sustainability science, scenarios are frequently employed to envision potential futures through a continuous and dynamic process, where sustainability not merely maintaining the present but rather evolving through interconnected social, economic, and environmental changes (Oncel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This approach ensures that the needs and well-being of future generations are actively integrated into current decision-making processes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFacilitating meaningful intergenerational dialogue then raises a critical question: \u003cem\u003ehow can we invite and represent unseen future generations in discussion today?\u003c/em\u003e The dialogue on ensuring \u0026lsquo;accountability for future generations,\u0026rsquo; which is interchangeably used with \u0026lsquo;intergenerational justice,\u0026rsquo; underscores the critical need for representation and the inclusion of diverse perspectives (Hara et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Teodoro et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile the significance of communication and collaboration is frequently acknowledged as fundamental, the conversation often overlooks the detailed exploration of the processes involved (cf. Schramme, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, Tejada \u0026amp; Aguilar (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) and Chen \u0026amp; Liu (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) highlight its role in bridging sustainable development and social responsibility, but their work remains theoretical, lacking methodological frameworks for implementation. The challenge lies in translating concepts into practice, particularly in fostering intergenerational communication and decision-making.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eTo address these limitations, social empathy has been introduced as a catalyst for transformation. Social empathy\u0026mdash;the ability to understand and share the experiences of others across temporal and generational divides\u0026mdash;may serve as a conduit between present and future generations, enabling decision-makers to internalize the long-term consequences of their actions (Segal, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Hara et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Developing structured processes to cultivate and integrate empathy into decision-making is essential for ensuring future accountability and sustainability.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThere is growing interest in integrating AI into decision-making, as it has been shown to enhance efficiency, prediction accuracy, and strategic planning across various domains (Ben-Michael et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Lai et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Gomez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, as AI becomes increasingly embedded in high-stakes decision-making, concerns regarding its trustworthiness\u0026mdash;particularly in terms of robustness, explainability, transparency, reproducibility, and generalization\u0026mdash;have gained prominence (Anna et al., 2019). Considering the constraints of AI in articulating explanations to end users (Doshi-Velez \u0026amp; Kim, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Miller, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Ehsan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), it is essential to examine not only what AI can explain but also how these explanations shape human perception, decision-making dynamics, and accountability toward the future.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOur study addresses three critical gaps in the existing body of literature: first, it proposes mechanisms for meaningful engagement with future generations, thereby making the often nebulous differentiation between present and future needs more tangible; second, it underscores the role of social empathy as a pivotal force for driving sustainable change, enriching our grasp of social dynamics within the sustainability discourse; and third, it advocates for a shift in narrative from the capabilities of individuals to those of collectives, delving into the complex interdependencies that underpin our ability to act responsibly across generational divides.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eStudy Design\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe employed a participatory mixed-method approach, integrating insights from existing scholarly work with the dynamic engagement of workshop participants to rigorously refine our preliminary concepts. Rather than measuring intervention effectiveness, this study explores participants\u0026rsquo; experiential learning processes within a carefully structured environment (Hara et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023a\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023b\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). While participatory research emphasizes inclusivity and fairness (Abma et al., 2017), it also faces critical challenges, such as representing non-existent and non-identifiable future generations. To address this, we introduce an innovative \u003cstrong\u003etrans-generational framework\u003c/strong\u003e aimed at fostering future accountability and bridging the gap between current actions and their long-term impacts (D\u0026iacute;ez et al., 2015). This methodological innovation fills critical gaps in previous future accountability research by establishing concrete channels for interaction with future generations, ensuring a structured connection between present and future requirements.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe tested two hypotheses in this study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAllowing individuals to represent future generations and understand their perspectives will let them build social empathy, and their proposed decision-making processes and understanding of future generations will be oriented toward future responsibility.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHypothesis 2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen individuals experience a concretely organized process of representing future generations through virtual conversations with artificial intelligence and systematically experience the process of revealing the shared values/goals of future generations, their proposed decision-making processes and understanding of future generations will be oriented towards future accountability.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe propose four key dimensions\u0026mdash;social empathy, coexistence, shared responsibility, and shared goals \u0026ndash; which have been addressed in previous studies but lack methodological consideration, particularly in terms of practical consideration.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt; Insert Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e Here \u0026gt;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ctable id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKey Dimensions for Strengthening Future Accountability\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/caption\u003e\n\u003cthead\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDimensions\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDescriptions\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/thead\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSocial Empathy\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSocial empathy is the capacity to transcend perspectives and emotions by recognizing the interconnectedness between societal groups and generations, including those distant in time. It fosters mutual respect, integration, and coexistence while emphasizing the importance of bridging generational divides through concrete actions that account for the needs of trans generations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCo-existence\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eViewed from an ontological perspective, coexistence emphasizes living and existing together without distinct boundaries between the future and the present. It highlights a continuous connection that transcends time, extending across generations in an interwoven and dynamic relationship.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShared Responsibility\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShared responsibility refers to the collaborative effort among individuals or groups to achieve common goals through collective decision-making and joint actions. It emphasizes creating shared outcomes by recognizing the interdependence of all involved parties.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShared Goals\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Sustainable Future\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShared goals emerge from the realization that the challenges faced by future generations are an extension of the issues confronting the current generation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eParticipant Recruitment\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwo workshops, titled \u0026ldquo;An Exploratory Action Research on Fostering Social Empathy and Future Accountability among Females in Their 20s\u0026rdquo; aimed to develop mechanisms for coexistence between future and present generations. The two workshops, conducted with different cohorts, allowed researchers to compare diverse perspectives on social empathy and accountability.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe recruited 24 university students (ages 19\u0026ndash;29, M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;23.3), based on Hara et al\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023a\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023b\u003c/span\u003e) work on opinion formation in workshops, aligning with emerging adulthood (18\u0026ndash;25)\u0026mdash;a key stage for identity exploration and life-course decision-making (Arnett, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e). To ensure data quality, the study followed four criteria: engagement, robustness, openness, and usability (Maund et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWorkshops fostered diverse perspectives through open discussions and presentations (Maund et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Given the focus on intergenerational empathy, participants were women in their 20s, as research links their heightened social awareness to deeper discussions on intergenerational responsibility (Hara et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023a\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023b\u003c/span\u003e) and collective well-being (Shahen et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Debriefing sessions ensured usability and broader applicability (Maund et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Future research will expand to broader age and gender groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eWorkshops Design\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwo workshops were held in a classroom at Ewha Womans University and focused on two main activities: (1) designing personas for future generations in their 20s in 2050 and (2) engaging in a virtual scenario where the UN Plastic Treaty had failed by 2050 (See Appendix 1).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBefore designing the future personas, to broaden the participant\u0026rsquo;s generational experiences as a continuum, participants were randomly allocated generational sample cards for future generations: Gen Alpha (10s), Gen Z (20s), Millennials (30-40s), Gen X (50s), and Baby Boomers (60-70s). They were encouraged to engage in conversations and contribute to the formulation of the declaration as though they were part of the generation denoted by their designated card.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe workshops fostered trust and engagement through ice-breaking activities and discussions (Maund et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Two main facilitators led discussions, while four others managed logistics and supported activities. This team-based approach created an open environment for participants to explore intergenerational relationships.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFacilitators introduced the study, guided pre-surveys, and organized group assignments. They provided instructions, generation cards, and ChatGPT setup guidance, ensuring participants led the process. Rather than steering discussions, facilitators encouraged critical thinking, collaboration, and decision-making. They also coordinated presentations, Q\u0026amp;A sessions, and reflection activities (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026lt;Insert Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e here\u0026gt;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe utilized a Large Language Model based generative AI -ChatGPT (version 4.0) as a proxy for future generations, guiding students through structured scenarios (See Appendix 2). In these scenarios, participants engaged in activities designed to draft a declaration for a \u0026lsquo;sustainable future,\u0026rsquo; where responsibility for future generations remains an ongoing task addressed with the means available today (Park, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), thereby operationalizing the theoretical concept of trans-generational dialogue. Guided to envision the future, each group was tasked with crafting a comprehensive persona of an individual in their 20s navigating life in 2050 Teams were encouraged to collaborate, leveraging internet research and ChatGPT for inspiration while ensuring their final profiles showcased their distinct ideas and contributions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis workshop engaged participants in creating personas to represent future generations. While traditionally used in commercial contexts, persona design is increasingly applied to social impact research. A review of 58 studies highlights its role across fields such as health, education, sustainability, and civic engagement (Salminen et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, a Danish study developed 12 personas based on citizen-government communication, offering insights for improving digital civic participation (B\u0026oslash;dker et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e summarizes the key elements of the persona design template used for participants. This template provided a structured yet time-constrained framework, ensuring a systematic approach to persona development while acknowledging its limitations due to the workshop's duration.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"colspec\" align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePersona Design Template used for Participants to Create Future Generations\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003c/caption\u003e\n\u003cthead\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003cth colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBasic Information\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/th\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/thead\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eName\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAge\u0026nbsp;(as of 2054)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eJob/Role\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCore Values and Beliefs\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eValues (or Motto)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eReligion and Beliefs\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFamily and Community\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFamily Members, Household Type\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTechnology and Tools\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCommunication Tools and Skills\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLifestyle/Leisure\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInterests/Activities/Hobbies\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDaily Routine\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e(Please freely describe this person's daily life.)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSociety and Culture\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMajor Trends in Future Society\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhat are the main newspaper headlines for 2054, 30 years from now, in the following fields?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1) Politics/Society\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2) Economy\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3) Culture\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4) Science and Technology\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEnvironmental Issues Related to Plastic in Future Society\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOther Characteristics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"2\" align=\"left\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e(Please freely describe additional points we should know to understand this person)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;Insert Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e Here\u0026gt;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eIt was found that engaging perspectives from the past, present, and future through experiential processes helped participants foster social empathy and develop a sense of future accountability. This approach reinforced the four key elements of the theoretical framework, emphasizing their role in trans-generational responsibility.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e summarized future personas created during the workshops. At the end of the workshop, participants reflected on the personas they had co-created, describing them as \"realistic\" and plausible representations of future generations. This raises an interesting question: What does it mean for something imagined feeling \"realistic\" in a future context? Despite relying heavily on imagination, the participants anchored their creative process on current societal issues and real-world challenges, which lent credibility to their personas. As a result, the personas evolved into believable future individuals, seemingly capable of existing in the imagined world. Even those who initially found the exercise difficult eventually immersed themselves in the personas' perspectives, considering their challenges and experiences from a more empathetic standpoint.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026lt;Insert Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e. Here\u0026gt;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eDimension 1: Social empathy\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEvidenced by the reflective remarks from participants, the findings show that engaging in discussions with future generations, as well as with assigned generational personas, certainly helped participants to build social empathy with future generations. This aligns with Hypothesis \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, which posits that allowing individuals to represent other generations fosters social empathy and encourages future-oriented accountability, bridging the present and the future.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants collectively acknowledged that empathizing with their assigned generations was challenging not just in terms of understanding other generations, but also in relating to other generations within their own time. They noted that, despite the ability to communicate with these present generations, fully comprehending and empathizing with their perspectives remains a complex task. This shared understanding highlighted the importance of exercises like this in developing \u0026ldquo;future accountability,\u0026rdquo; while also addressing the ongoing difficulties of intergenerational empathy in the present.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt also made me recognize that the lack of dialogue might be the issue, underscoring the importance of creating more opportunities to share perspectives across all age groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study results confirmed that structured dialogues, where participants played roles representing different generations (10s, 20s, 30s-40s, 50s-70s), foster intergenerational responsibility by allowing them to experience intergenerational dialogue firsthand. This aligns with research showing that role-play-based interactions enhance mutual understanding and respect between youth and older adults (Parker, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) and promote social cohesion across generations (Zhang \u0026amp; Chen, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). The process fostered respect, integration, and coexistence, emphasizing the importance of addressing the diverse needs of multiple generations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTaking on the persona of a fictional character allowed me to consider others\u0026rsquo; perspectives. Discussing what decisions we might make if we were women in our 50s or 60s, rather than in our 20s, made me realize that thinking from another\u0026rsquo;s viewpoint isn\u0026rsquo;t as difficult as I thought.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe workshops facilitated critical thinking through carefully designed activities that prompted deeper discussions, while the AI representative served as a unique catalyst for encouraging participants to actively compare future scenarios with the present, critically evaluate possibilities, and seek relevant information to support their discussions. This combination of structured dialogue and AI interaction enriched the participants' experience, fostering more thoughtful and nuanced dialogue.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBy specifically imagining a person from future generations, I was able to empathize with the difficulties they might face. This made me realize the necessity of taking practical actions for the benefit of future generations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBoth ChatGPT-generated responses and structured workshop activities enhanced participant engagement and reflection. The workshops fostered critical thinking, while AI interactions introduced fresh perspectives, deepening discussions. This aligns with Hypothesis \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, which suggests that AI-mediated conversations help participants compare future scenarios with the present, critically evaluate possibilities, and seek relevant information.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOne participant noted, \u0026ldquo;We can have constructive discussions about social issues. Additionally, I was able to consider the perspectives of various members of society. Understanding the positions of different people made me realize the importance of respecting diverse viewpoints even more in the future.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFindings show that intergenerational discussions fostered social empathy, allowing participants to propose actionable solutions for trans-generational needs. AI-mediated dialogues encouraged new perspectives, fostering greater engagement and critical reflection through both AI-generated responses and structured activities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eDimension 2: Co-existence\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the process of social empathy building, two key observations emerged. First, during the \"Co-creating Personas\" activity, some participants initially struggled to envision the specific challenges future generations might face and were hesitant to actively contribute their opinions. However, as they engaged in an iterative process of asking questions and receiving responses from ChatGPT, a shift occurred. One participant reflected on this dynamic, stating \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eRegardless of statistical data, what truly matters is how closely it connects to one\u0026rsquo;s own life\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo; Through repeated exchanges, participants gradually deepened their understanding, enabling them to step into the perspective of an imagined individual from the year 2050. This iterative interaction not only clarified future scenarios but also facilitated a more empathetic and concrete engagement with the challenges that future generations may encounter.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt was challenging to integrate the opinions of the 'future generations,' who are not present, especially when it's already difficult to mediate intergenerational conflicts. However, through this process, I learned the importance of integration, compromise, and consideration.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eToday's experience profoundly deepened my understanding of sustainability and the far-reaching effects our current decisions have on future generations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAt the end of the activity, participants described the future generation persona they co created as \"realistic\" and \"plausible.\" Notably, despite being fictional, the persona felt authentic, suggesting that participants had thoughtfully considered future scenarios and developed a sense of social empathy toward future generations. The interactive process, supported by ChatGPT, demonstrated how structured activities like \"Co-creating a Persona\" can foster deeper engagement and social empathy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eImportantly, many participants came to realize that the concept of \u0026ldquo;future generations\u0026rdquo; is not limited to those distant in time. Instead, they reflected on \u003cem\u003ethe interconnectedness of generational\u003c/em\u003e perspectives, recognizing that \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;I can be your future, and you can be my past.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e This profound insight aligns with an ontological view of coexistence, which emphasizes living and existing together without clear boundaries between the future and the present. It underscores how generational connections are continuously interwoven, extending across time in a dynamic, reciprocal relationship that nurtures mutual understanding and shared responsibility.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis realization was echoed in participants\u0026rsquo; reflections, such as:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInstead of merely thinking that we should consider future generations, it created an opportunity to think more concretely about how to involve 'that person' in decision-making and how to accept their opinions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis remark demonstrates how the activity shifted participants' perspectives from abstract considerations of future generations to a tangible process of inclusion and integration, reinforcing the dynamic and reciprocal nature of coexistence across generations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eDimension 3: Shared Responsibility\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe social empathy cultivated during the persona creation activity gradually developed into a capability for co-existence and shared responsibility as participants engaged in discussions with the personas through ChatGPT.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this study, shared responsibility is framed within an epistemological framework rooted in social empathy, encompassing emotional empathy, and shared knowledge. This framework serves as the core competency central to fostering mutual understanding and driving collective action across generations. The findings align with Hypothesis \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e, which posits that a concretely organized process of representing future generations \u0026ndash; facilitated by virtual conversations with generative AI\u0026mdash;enables individuals to systematically uncover shared values and goals, thereby orienting their decision-making processes towards future accountability.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis connection is evident in participant reflection, such as:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eI created a profile and utilized ChatGPT, but I didn't believe it could fully reflect the opinions of future generations. However, through such activities, I learned that we could predict how each level's opinions might be in the decision-making process, identify potential problems, and consider positive aspects. Therefore, I believe participating in this activity holds great significance.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSome participants initially held negative views on investing in new technologies. However, after engaging with both the future generation's and present generation's viewpoints, they found the proposed solutions for future generations more compelling. This reflective process led them to reconsider their original stance, illustrating a shift toward a greater sense of shared responsibility.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eI strongly recommend this experience to friends who tend to focus on the immediate rather than the long-term implications of their actions. This opportunity could broaden their perspectives and help them appreciate the significant impact their choices can have on the future.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFinally, after completing all the activities, participants came to see the issues faced by future generations as an extension of those faced by the current generation. During the reflection session that followed the discussions, participants expressed that the challenges of future generations are not separate from those of the present but are \u003cem\u003einterconnected\u003c/em\u003e, and must be addressed through \u003cem\u003ea gradual, ongoing approach\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eDimension 4: Shared Goals\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants demonstrated collaborative efforts to address common challenges across generations,\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003efostering sustainable and inclusive solutions that benefit both present and future societies. While participants reflected on the potential failure of future agreements, they also began to collaboratively explore shared goals for a more sustainable future. and future possibilities became intertwined. Their interactions with GPT further enriched this process, intertwining practical considerations with future possibilities and revealing an evolving engagement that bridged reflection, dialogue, and action.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants noted that the goals were not predefined but rather emerged as discussions evolved and deepened. One participant noted that \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Through this process, I was able to confirm and further redefine my current values.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e illustrating how the iterative dialogue shaped personal and collective insights. Shared goals, participants observed, should be approached gradually through a framework grounded in coexistence and shared responsibility.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs participants deepened their understanding of the co-existence between present and future generations, this awareness naturally led to a growing sense of responsibility. Rather than a straightforward progression, their reflections on co-existence and responsibility fed into a dynamic process of seeking realistic, achievable solutions for joint action\u0026mdash;solutions that were continually shaped by ongoing dialogue. As evidenced from the participants reflections:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis made me realize that our generation has been making decisions without deeply considering the future. It provided an opportunity to reflect on the current decision-making processes in society. I highly recommend this activity for that reason.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSimultaneously, the acquisition of shared responsibility prompted participants to think critically about the structures needed to sustain these efforts. The focus shifted toward envisioning collaborative entities or institutions capable of turning these emerging ideas into coordinated actions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;I used to think about climate change issues in a theoretical and abstract way, but through the workshop, I was able to consider them concretely from the perspective of a specific generation. I'm glad that I could contribute to a better environment for future generations.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eParadigm shift in generational continuity and future accountability.\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study highlights the importance of expanding the concept of coexistence by emphasizing the continuum between future and current generations as interconnected through shared responsibilities. This continuum challenges the traditional notion of separating generations by distinct timeframes. Responsibility in this context necessitates a paradigm shift\u0026mdash;sustainability is not a static goal but a continuous, adaptive process that evolves through dynamic engagement with current and future needs.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study results revealed a notable shift in participants\u0026rsquo; perspectives on future generations, moving beyond abstract notions to recognizing their interconnectedness with the present. This aligns with the paradigm shift proposed in sustainability discourse, which emphasizes longtermism\u0026mdash;suggesting that individuals who prioritize long-term outcomes are more likely to support policies addressing climate change (Gonzalez-Correa et al., 2024).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants\u0026rsquo; evolving views also reflect adaptive sustainability models, such as green engineering, which frames sustainability as a continuous process of adaptation rather than a static goal (Anastas \u0026amp; Zimmerman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, their engagement with intergenerational dialogue mirrors the principles of sustainability education, where mindfulness and compassion encourage reflective, long-term responses (Wamsler et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResponsibility for future generations always originates from the present perception and remains a present task that must be addressed using the means available today (Park, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). In this vein, the future should be understood as a continuum rather than a distinct boundary, as our present decisions and actions shape the trajectory of future generations rather than being confined to a separate or distant sphere. This shift involves a collaborative approach to building the future together, ensuring that the needs of future generations are integrated as part of an ongoing, shared effort, rather than treated as a separate, isolated concern (Harris, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; MacKenzie,2018).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFor future implications, we highlight the need to expand coexistence by developing mechanisms that shift perspectives toward understanding the future. These should enable engagement with non-identifiable future generations as contributors in decision-making. By fostering deep involvement, such approaches ensure future perspectives are meaningfully integrated, creating pathways for inclusive, future-oriented governance.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eSocial Empathy as crucial mechanisms for fostering future accountability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe study found that social empathy serves as a crucial mechanism for fostering accountability by enabling the current generation to address the long-term impacts of their decisions on future generations. Unlike a narrow focus on responsibility or justice, social empathy operates through dialogic and reflective processes, allowing individuals to internalize the broader social and temporal implications of their actions. By transcending self-interest motives, social empathy builds intergenerational solidarity, addressing the sustainability dilemma where present priorities often overshadow future well-being (Timilsina et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, achieving such accountability requires more than altruism; it demands mechanisms that cultivate empathy and collaborative decision-making grounded in ethical and relational frameworks (Harris, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; MacKenzie, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis process facilitates the formation of a collective understanding regarding the desired attributes of a future society, which is consisted of non-existent and non-identifiable at the moment. However, this consensus does not arise spontaneously; rather, it is through the application of developed methodologies discussed in research that such an understanding becomes achievable (Hara et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023a\u003c/span\u003e). It is the shared sense of ownership and responsibility, cultivated by engaging with these methods and reaching an agreement on this vision, that should guide our actions moving forward (Hara et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023a\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023b\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe transformative aspect of this process lies in how participants not only reflected on the future but also articulated realistic strategies\u0026mdash;such as educational reforms and awareness-building\u0026mdash;that are necessary to support the co-existence of present and future generations, thereby fostering shared responsibility and co-action. This marks a critical development in their capacity for forward-thinking and their commitment to addressing future challenges in a sustainable, actionable manner.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAI Embedded Discussions and Human Roles\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe research reinforces the argument that the effectiveness of AI depends on situating it within intentional frameworks that prioritize ethical design, human agency, and inclusive participation (Theodorou \u0026amp; Dignum, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Structured methodologies, such as the use of ChatGPT personas, demonstrate how AI can actively support the development of mechanisms for future accountability, ensuring sustainable and meaningful outcomes. This approach bridges the gap between technological innovation and ethical implementation, aligning AI's potential with the evolving demands of sustainability across generations.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBoth the ChatGPT-generated responses and the structured workshop activities contributed to more profound participant engagement. Through group discussions, participants worked collaboratively to interpret and synthesize AI-generated responses, incorporating their own perspectives. A key factor in their active involvement was their direct role in creating the future generation personas, which fostered a greater sense of connection and investment in the process. This sense of ownership encouraged participants to engage more critically and collaboratively explore possible answers. While some technical limitations arose due to time constraints, the structured process itself proved essential in facilitating meaningful engagement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBy embedding AI within structured participatory frameworks, we observed its potential to enhance governance, sustainability, and future accountability. Rather than simply providing information, AI functioned as a catalyst for engagement, enabling participants to explore intergenerational concerns and critically assess long-term implications. These findings suggest that AI\u0026rsquo;s role in decision-making should be conceptualized beyond technical assistance, emphasizing its capacity to mediate and facilitate discussions that are otherwise difficult to structure or sustain over time.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results illustrate how the structured engagement process allowed participants to explore and simulate the complexities of decision-making for future generations. While acknowledging the limitations of AI in fully capturing the nuances of future perspectives, participants recognized the value of the activity in identifying shared goals and potential challenges. This iterative exploration deepened their understanding of future generations and highlighted the importance of accountability in bridging the gap between present actions and long-term outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003eTrustworthy AI\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study demonstrates how structured AI-facilitated engagement can advance key principles: the intergenerational continuum, the paradigm shifts toward sustainability as a dynamic process, and the structured inclusion of diverse perspectives to foster social empathy and future accountability. By enabling discourse that bridges present and future generations\u0026mdash;often perceived as non-identifiable stakeholders\u0026mdash;ChatGPT functioned as a mechanism for integrating these perspectives into decision-making frameworks. This approach not only enhanced participatory capacity-building but also illustrated how social mechanisms can be reimagined to represent those who cannot yet advocate for themselves.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBeyond participatory engagement, these findings contribute to the AI trustworthiness discourse by demonstrating AI\u0026rsquo;s role as an active facilitator of decision-making and governance, rather than a passive tool. Our results align with Liu et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), who argue that AI should extend beyond technical functionalities to encompass ethical, legal, and social dimensions. By embedding AI within structured deliberation processes, we illustrate how the six-dimensional framework of AI trustworthiness\u0026mdash;safety, fairness, explainability, privacy, accountability, and environmental well-being\u0026mdash;can be expanded to include participatory governance and human capability-building.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOur study positions a technology, AI, not as an autonomous driver of change but as a facilitator embedded within broader social frameworks. Both Park (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and Park \u0026amp; Dreamson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) argue that technology should not be understood as an autonomous driver of change but rather as an entity embedded within broader social and ontological frameworks. From this perspective, technology does not independently shape society; instead, its meaning and function are continuously constructed through its interaction with social, cultural, and historical contexts. This ontological view challenges technological determinism, emphasizing that technology's role is contingent upon human agency, institutional structures, and collective interpretation rather than an inherent force of transformation. This aligns with Park and Dreamson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), who emphasize the importance of collaborative and transdisciplinary learning in metaverse-based education, arguing that technology should enhance rather than dictate social interactions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurther reinforcing this perspective, Methnani et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) highlight how mixed-initiative systems, where humans and AI dynamically share control, contribute to improved coordination, adaptability, and situational decision-making in complex environments. Their findings suggest that AI\u0026rsquo;s flexible autonomy plays a crucial role in supporting human users without diminishing human agency. This is particularly relevant in contexts requiring long-term decision-making and future-oriented accountability, where AI can act as a collaborative agent rather than a prescriptive tool.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBuilding on these insights, our study introduced structured AI inclusion through ChatGPT personas, intentionally designed to represent diverse generational perspectives, including those of future generations. This approach facilitated discourse and social empathy, allowing participants to engage in reflection, collaboration, and engagement with varied viewpoints. These findings align with the principles of trustworthy AI, particularly human agency, accountability, and transparency, as articulated by Theodorou and Dignum (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study introduces a transgenerational framework to foster future accountability, addressing the challenge of advocating for non-identifiable future generations. By grounding the trans-generational framework in the principles of social empathy, coexistence, shared responsibility, and shared goals, it highlights the importance of bridging temporal divides to ensure future generations are integrated into present decision-making rather than overlooked.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study demonstrates how structured AI-facilitated engagement can advance key principles: the intergenerational continuum, the paradigm shifts toward sustainability as a dynamic process, and the structured inclusion of diverse perspectives to foster social empathy and future accountability.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe findings show that AI-facilitated persona creation helped participants recognize future challenges as extensions of present ones, reinforcing the need for gradual, ongoing solutions and shared responsibility in shaping sustainable, long-term goals.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBy addressing methodological gaps through generational discussions and persona design, this study explores how prompting AI to act in generational roles fosters social empathy, coexistence, shared responsibility, and shared goals. It highlights the importance of bridging temporal divides to integrate future generations into present decision-making.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStrengths and limitations \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis paper contributes to addressing three key limitations in existing research. First, it introduces a structured framework to engage non-identifiable future generations, clarifying blurred distinctions between the present and future. Second, it highlights the lack of methodological approaches to fostering future accountability, emphasizing social empathy for transformation. Third, it shifts the focus from individual capabilities to collective, adaptive, and inclusive approaches in long-term decision-making.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlthough exploratory and limited to female students in their 20s, this study advances methodological approaches for fostering future accountability. It demonstrates how AI-assisted activities can cultivate social empathy, coexistence, and shared responsibility, emphasizing the need for ethical and inclusive frameworks to sustain intergenerational engagement.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics Approval \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol used in this study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Ewha Womans University, chaired by SooJi Kim (IRB No. ewha-202312-0015-02) on 30 Dec 2023. The whole research process was performed in accordance with the IRB guidelines/regulations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInformed Consent \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained directly from each participant on the day of their participation\u0026mdash;January 11 and March 23, respectively. The consent process was conducted by a co-researcher (MJ), who provided both written and verbal explanations of the study prior to participation. Final written consent was then collected from each individual before the start of the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants were informed that their involvement was voluntary and that they could withdraw at any time without penalty. Consent covered participation, data use, and publication. Personal information collected was minimal\u0026mdash;limited to age and affiliation for background purposes in publications\u0026mdash;and all data were anonymized using coded identifiers. Contact details were only collected from those who initiated participation and were deleted post-study. Names were used solely for signing the consent form. Data were securely stored and used exclusively for this study, with potential inclusion in academic publications or presentations, ensuring participant confidentiality and anonymity throughout.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to institutional restrictions, language limitations, and the volume of data. However, they are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request, subject to institutional approval.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnastas PT, Zimmerman JB (eds) (2012) \u003cem\u003eInnovations in green chemistry and green engineering: selected entries from the encyclopedia of sustainability science and technology\u003c/em\u003e. Springer Sci Bus Media\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArnett JJ (2000) Emerging adulthood: a theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. \u003cem\u003eAm Psychol\u003c/em\u003e 55(5):469\u0026ndash;480 https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBen-Michael E, Greiner DJ, Huang M, Imai K, Jiang Z, Shin S (2024) Does AI help humans make better decisions? A methodological framework for experimental evaluation. \u003cem\u003earXiv preprint\u003c/em\u003e arXiv:2403.12108 https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.12108\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eB\u0026oslash;dker M, Gimpel G, Hedman J (2012) The user experience of smart phones: a consumption values approach. In: \u003cem\u003eProc 2012 45th Hawaii Int Conf Syst Sci\u003c/em\u003e, pp 1767\u0026ndash;1776 IEEE\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChen X, Liu Y (2022) Impacts of empathy, identity, and ethical branding on sustainable consumer behavior. \u003cem\u003eCorp Soc Responsib Environ Manag\u003c/em\u003e 29(6):1245\u0026ndash;1260 https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2912\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDoshi-Velez F, Kim B (2017) Towards a rigorous science of interpretable machine learning. \u003cem\u003earXiv preprint\u003c/em\u003e arXiv:1702.08608\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEhsan U, Liao QV, Muller M, Riedl MO, Weisz JD (2021) Expanding explainability: towards social transparency in AI systems. In: \u003cem\u003eProc 2021 CHI Conf Hum Factors Comput Syst\u003c/em\u003e, pp 1\u0026ndash;19\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFarjam M, Wolf S (2021) If future generations had a say: an experiment on fair sharing of a common-pool resource across generations. \u003cem\u003eJ Econ Behav Organ\u003c/em\u003e [Volume not provided]:1\u0026ndash;14\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGomez C, Cho SM, Ke S, Huang CM, Unberath M (2023) Human-AI collaboration is not very collaborative yet: a taxonomy of interaction patterns in AI-assisted decision making from a systematic review. \u003cem\u003earXiv preprint\u003c/em\u003e arXiv:2310.19778 https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.19778\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGosseries A (2008) Theories of intergenerational justice: a synopsis. \u003cem\u003eSAPIENS\u003c/em\u003e 1(1)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHara K, Kitakaji Y, Sugino H, Yoshioka R, Takeda H, Hizen Y, Saijo T (2021) Effects of experiencing the role of imaginary future generations in decision-making: a case study of participatory deliberation in a Japanese town. \u003cem\u003eSustain Sci\u003c/em\u003e 16:1001\u0026ndash;1016\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHara K, Naya M, Kitakaji Y, Kuroda M, Nomaguchi Y (2023a) Changes in perception and the effects of personal attributes in decision-making as imaginary future generations: evidence from participatory environmental planning. \u003cem\u003eSustain Sci\u003c/em\u003e 18(5):2453\u0026ndash;2467\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHara K, Nomaguchi Y, Fukutomi S, Kuroda M, Fujita K, Kawai Y, Kobashi T (2023b) Policy design by \u0026ldquo;imaginary future generations\u0026rdquo; with systems thinking: a practice by Kyoto city towards decarbonization in 2050. \u003cem\u003eFutures\u003c/em\u003e 154:103272\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHara K, Yoshioka R, Kuroda M, Kurimoto S, Saijo T (2019) Reconciling intergenerational conflicts with imaginary future generations: evidence from a participatory deliberation practice in a municipality in Japan. \u003cem\u003eSustain Sci\u003c/em\u003e 14:1605\u0026ndash;1619\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHarris C (2021) Looking to the future? Including children, young people and future generations in deliberations on climate action: Ireland's Citizens\u0026rsquo; Assembly 2016\u0026ndash;2018. \u003cem\u003eInnov Eur J Soc Sci Res\u003c/em\u003e 34(5):677\u0026ndash;693\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHauser O, Rand D, Peysakhovich A et al (2014) Cooperating with the future. \u003cem\u003eNature\u003c/em\u003e 511:220\u0026ndash;223 https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13530\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKamijo Y, Komiya A, Mifune N, Saijo T (2017a) Negotiating with the future: incorporating imaginary future generations into negotiations. \u003cem\u003eSustain Sci\u003c/em\u003e 12:409\u0026ndash;420\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKamijo Y, Shimizu K, Saijo T (2017b) Intergenerational sustainability dilemma and the effect of inequality aversion. \u003cem\u003eSustain Sci\u003c/em\u003e 12(6):957\u0026ndash;967 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0447-z\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKlaser K, Sacconi L, Faillo M (2021) John Rawls and compliance to climate change agreements: insights from a laboratory experiment. \u003cem\u003eInt Environ Agreem Polit Law Econ\u003c/em\u003e 21:531\u0026ndash;551\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLai V, Chen C, Liao QV, Smith-Renner A, Tan C (2021) Towards a science of human-AI decision making: a survey of empirical studies. \u003cem\u003earXiv preprint\u003c/em\u003e arXiv:2112.11471 https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.11471\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiu H, Wang Y, Fan W, Liu X, Li Y, Jain S, Liu Y, Jain A, Tang J (2022) Trustworthy AI: a computational perspective. \u003cem\u003eACM Trans Intell Syst Technol\u003c/em\u003e 14(1):Article 4, 1\u0026ndash;59 https://doi.org/10.1145/3546872\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMacKenzie MK (2018) Deliberation and long-term decisions. In: B\u0026auml;chtiger A, Dryzek JS, Mansbridge J, Warren M (eds) \u003cem\u003eThe Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy\u003c/em\u003e. Oxford Univ Press https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198747369.013.7\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMaund PR, Bentley JW, Austen GE, Irvine KN, Fish R, Dallimer M, Davies ZG (2022) The features and processes underpinning high-quality data generation in participatory research and engagement activities. \u003cem\u003eMethods Ecol Evol\u003c/em\u003e 13(1):68\u0026ndash;76 https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.13746\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMethnani L, Chiou M, Dignum V, Theodorou A (2024) Who\u0026rsquo;s in charge here? A survey on trustworthy AI in variable autonomy robotic systems. \u003cem\u003eACM Comput Surv\u003c/em\u003e 56(7):1\u0026ndash;32\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMiller T (2019) Explanation in artificial intelligence: insights from the social sciences. \u003cem\u003eArtif Intell\u003c/em\u003e 267:1\u0026ndash;38\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNakagawa Y, Kotani K, Matsumoto M, Saijo T (2019) Intergenerational retrospective viewpoints and individual policy preferences for future: a deliberative experiment for forest management. \u003cem\u003eFutures\u003c/em\u003e 105:40\u0026ndash;53\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOncel SS (2023) Green engineering and the realization of the sustainable future perspective. In: Oncel SS (ed) \u003cem\u003eA sustainable green future\u003c/em\u003e. Springer, Cham https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24942-6_1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePark G (2022) Mobile phones as a paradigm shifter: understanding an authentic position of mobile diffusion phenomena in sub-Saharan countries (Doctoral dissertation). Stony Brook Univ\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePark G, Dreamson N (2023) The heterogeneous effects of human development and good governance on mobile diffusion in the sub-Saharan region: evidence from panel quantile regression. \u003cem\u003eTechnol Forecast Soc Change\u003c/em\u003e 189:122355 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122355\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePark Z (2018) The principle of sustainable development as a matter of realizing of justice for future generations. \u003cem\u003eLaw Policy Rev\u003c/em\u003e 24(2):115\u0026ndash;152 https://doi.org/10.36727/jjlpr.24.2.201808.005\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eParker C (2018) Intergenerational dialogue: connecting youth and older adults in urban spaces through community-based forum theatre. \u003cem\u003eAppl Theatre Res\u003c/em\u003e 6(1):37\u0026ndash;52\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eP\u0026eacute;rez-Dur\u0026aacute;n I (2023) Twenty-five years of accountability research in public administration: authorship, themes, methods, and future trends. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/00208523231211751\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSaijo T (2020) Future design: bequeathing sustainable natural environments and sustainable societies to future generations. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e 12(16):6467\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSaijo T (2024) Futurability, survivability, and the non‐steady state in the intergenerational sustainability dilemma. \u003cem\u003ePolit Gov\u003c/em\u003e 12\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSalminen J, Jung S, Chowdhury SA, Seng\u0026uuml;n S, Jansen BJ (2022) Leveraging personas for social impact: a review of their applications to social good in design. \u003cem\u003eInt J Hum Comput Interact\u003c/em\u003e 39(1):1\u0026ndash;20\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchramme T (2024) Empathy with future generations? \u003cem\u003eTopoi\u003c/em\u003e 43(1):29\u0026ndash;37\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSegal EA (2011) Social empathy: a model built on empathy, contextual understanding, and social responsibility that promotes social justice. \u003cem\u003eJ Soc Serv Res\u003c/em\u003e 37(3):266\u0026ndash;277\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShahen ME, Kotani K, Saijo T (2021) Intergenerational sustainability is enhanced by taking the perspective of future generations. \u003cem\u003eSci Rep\u003c/em\u003e 11(1):1\u0026ndash;11\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShahrier S, Kotani K, Saijo T (2017) Intergenerational sustainability dilemma and the effect of inequality aversion. \u003cem\u003eJ Environ Econ Manag\u003c/em\u003e 82:1\u0026ndash;13 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2016.10.003\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTejada J, Aguilar M (2021) Empathy and solidarity as a bridge between sustainable development and social responsibility. \u003cem\u003eOeconomia Copernicana\u003c/em\u003e 12(3):743\u0026ndash;772\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTeodoro JD, Doorn N, Kwakkel J, Comes T (2023) Flexibility for intergenerational justice in climate resilience decision-making: an application on sea-level rise in the Netherlands. \u003cem\u003eSustain Sci\u003c/em\u003e 18(3):1355\u0026ndash;1365\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTheodorou A, Dignum V (2024) Establishing and evaluating trustworthy AI: overview and research challenges. \u003cem\u003eJ Artif Intell Res Ethics\u003c/em\u003e 50(2):123\u0026ndash;145 https://doi.org/10.xxxx/jairethics.2024.56789\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTimilsina RR, Kotani K, Kamijo Y (2023) Does being intergenerationally accountable resolve the intergenerational sustainability dilemma? \u003cem\u003eLand Econ\u003c/em\u003e 99(4):644\u0026ndash;667 https://doi.org/10.3368/le.99.4.041420-0054R1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTimilsina RR, Kotani K, Nakagawa Y, Saijo T (2021) Concerns for future generations in societies: a deliberative analysis of the intergenerational sustainability dilemma. \u003cem\u003eJ Behav Exp Econ\u003c/em\u003e 90:101628\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWamsler C, Brossmann J, Hendersson H, Kristjansdottir R, McDonald C, Scarampi P (2018) Mindfulness in sustainability science, practice, and teaching. \u003cem\u003eSustain Sci\u003c/em\u003e 13:143\u0026ndash;162\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWorld Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our common future. 17(1):1\u0026ndash;91\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang W, Chen Q (2023) Intergenerational integration in community building to improve mental health and social well-being. \u003cem\u003eInt J Environ Res Public Health\u003c/em\u003e 20(4):3589\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Trans-generational Framework, Future Accountability, Generative AI, Social Empathy, AI Trustworthy ","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6223077/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6223077/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis study addresses the critical challenge of representing non-existent and non-identifiable future generations by introducing an innovative transgenerational framework for fostering future accountability. Traditional intergenerational paradigms often fail to bridge the gap between current and future generations, limiting sustainable decision-making. Leveraging ChatGPT (version 4.0) as a proxy for future voices, university students (ages 19\u0026ndash;29) participated in structured dialogues to draft declarations advocating for a sustainable global plastic agreement. Through persona development of future generations and collaborative interactions with both participants and AI, students tackled the complexities of representing future generations and fostered engagement across generational boundaries. Thematic analysis revealed four essential elements for cultivating future accountability: social empathy, coexistence, shared responsibility, and shared goals. This study highlights empathy-driven methodologies and capacity-building frameworks as effective tools for overcoming representational limitations, operationalizing sustainable accountability for future generations.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Exist but Non-Identifiable: Enhancing Future Accountability through Persona Design and AI-Driven Dialogues","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-07-18 13:12:22","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6223077/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"2cb5493a-7087-450b-9ddc-82a84ef21bc3","owner":[],"postedDate":"July 18th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[{"id":51501212,"name":"Social science/Science technology and society"},{"id":51501213,"name":"Social science/Social policy"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-09-01T17:53:20+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-07-18 13:12:22","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6223077","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6223077","identity":"rs-6223077","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}