Case study 01 · Three-report series · evidence to 21 July 2026
Australia, AI, jobs and entry/re-entry work to 2035
Question: Will AI and robotics mainly displace or reshape entry and re-entry work—or can they open viable business-creation pathways across age groups?
What is being tested: The series tests the stronger proposition that AI- and robotics-enabled new job and business creation will become the largest and highest-quality labour-market effect for people entering or re-entering work—outweighing displacement and augmentation, aided by targeted support, and remaining viable through a major shock.
Cumulative result: That stronger proposition is not supported on current evidence. New job and business creation is real enough to investigate, but the evidence does not yet show that it is larger than displacement and augmentation, that targeted support can make it dominant and higher quality, or that it would remain viable through a major shock.
Explore the case study →
Case study 02 · Three-report series · evidence to 22 July 2026
Australia's AI resilience and readiness to 2035
Question: Does Australia need AI to manage its 2035 resilience risks, and can it use AI well enough to justify the risks?
What is being tested: AI is justified only if it measurably strengthens resilience under disciplined governance, public legitimacy and institutional readiness.
Cumulative result: Australia needs AI for some 2035 resilience risks, but the benefit is useful only if governance capacity is built and demonstrated in time.
Explore the case study →
Case study 03 · Three-report series · evidence to 24 June 2026
AI data centres: the public-interest test
Question: Are Australian AI data-centre impacts significant, do benefits outweigh costs, and can approval systems cope?
What is being tested: Australia's AI data-centre build-out earns public-interest support only if nationally manageable impacts, genuinely additional clean energy, local benefit and enforceable governance can be demonstrated.
Cumulative result: The build-out can pay off for Australia, but only under binding governance that Australia has already described and not yet made enforceable.
Explore the case study →
Case study 04 · Three-report series · evidence to 22 August 2026
AI Help, Living Well and Democratic Renewal
Question: Can Australia's existing systems manage interacting risks to 2035, where is AI necessary or useful, and can broad AI-enabled civic resilience be delivered safely and durably?
What is being tested: A three-stage test of the strongest feasible non-AI comparator, AI necessity and human benefit, and the delivery, safeguards and endurance of broad AI-enabled civic resilience.
Cumulative result: No function is demonstrated NECESSARY. Anticipation and forecasting, and cyber and AI-threat management, are USEFUL NOT NECESSARY. Climate, infrastructure and logistics; care and living well; information judgement; and deliberation remain UNRESOLVED. P2 is the most credible near-term delivery pattern but remains partial; P3 and P4 remain unproven.
Explore the case study →