Drones in 2040: A Good Servant or a Bad Master?
They are small, relatively inexpensive, and capable of reshaping both warfare and the functioning of the economy. Drones are no longer just toys for enthusiasts; they have become a strategic tool that is erasing long-standing assumptions about security and state power. Slovak academics, working with experts from the V4 countries and NATO, have produced two unique studies modelling how these systems may shape our reality by 2040. We spoke with Viliam Ostatník from the Department of Political Science at the Faculty of Arts, Comenius University Bratislava, about four possible future scenarios outlined in one of these studies.
You are a political scientist, yet you work on topics people tend to associate with engineers. How does a political scientist get involved with drones?
Drones are transforming both warfare and society, and political science has a great deal to say about that. We try to understand state strategies, and drones enter that space as a kind of “symmetry breaker”. Suddenly, there are new actors on the battlefield: a drone operator with equipment worth a few thousand dollars may be a member of the armed forces, but also a private individual or a paramilitary unit. This disrupts the traditional domain of the state, which until now held a monopoly on tanks and army divisions. There is also a civilian dimension: how do drones affect the power of the state over its own citizens? They can become tools of repression, increased surveillance, or interference with privacy and fundamental rights and freedoms. That is political science par excellence.
Your study uses the “foresight” method. What does that mean in practice?
We refer to it as 'strategic foresight'. It is not about predicting a single future, but about modelling possible development scenarios. We use what is known as a cone of possible futures. This approach opens up different possibilities and shows that scenarios may overlap or unfold simultaneously. For our study on drones, we chose the year 2040 as the horizon. It is a medium-term outlook: five years is too short to capture the drivers of change, while 2060 is already too distant - we wanted to remain grounded in reality rather than science fiction.
Why did you focus specifically on Central Europe and the Visegrad Four?
The project we are discussing was carried out with support from the International Visegrad Fund, while a second study, focused purely on military applications of drones, was prepared directly for the NATO Chief Scientist Office. In Slovakia, the topic of drones still lags somewhat behind Poland or the Czech Republic, which even have dedicated institutes at the state level. We wanted to develop a strategic perspective that has been missing. We collected data over several months: from open-source analysis to structured interviews with experts and intensive workshops in Bratislava, Prague, Warsaw and Budapest. We also drew on relevant data inputs from Ukraine.
You outline four scenarios for 2040. What are the main ones?
The scenarios range from optimistic to cautionary. On one end, there is the Bonanza scenario, where drones increase productivity and efficiency in agriculture and industry. They become part of smart cities and help manage crisis situations. At the other extreme, there is a scenario of dangerous dependence on the state or misuse of the technology. The state, as the dominant actor, could use drones to significantly increase control over the population. One problem is that legislation in most EU countries does not currently allow hostile drones to be neutralised quickly and effectively, which puts us at a disadvantage vis-à-vis adversaries.
Is the answer better cooperation, stricter legislation, or something else?
A key factor, if we want to unlock the potential of the so-called low-altitude economy enabled by drones, is above all the development of infrastructure and appropriate regulatory frameworks. It is one thing to develop the technology, but without adequate support systems it will never be fully usable in practice. We recently discussed this at the Drone World Expo in Warsaw, one of the largest exhibitions of unmanned systems in Central Europe. It was important for us that a Slovak perspective was heard and that we could present our findings in Poland, which is a major player in the drone industry.
At the same time, we should not underestimate our domestic potential. It may seem that little is happening here, but in reality Slovakia hosts a number of companies producing high-end solutions and components for drones, whether software or hardware. We also have an association, and a major drone conference is held annually in Piešťany. The problem is that, compared with the Czech Republic or Poland, we still lack a coherent state strategy and solid institutional backing - and, frankly, perhaps also a sufficiently strong ambition to succeed in this area. We need to stay connected to global developments and set regulatory frameworks that protect security, rights and freedoms without stifling this dynamic industry, where Slovak developers and manufacturers have real potential.
In your scenarios, you also mention the risk of misuse by the state. Where does security end and total control begin?
That’s one of the most sensitive questions we deal with, both professionally and personally. In a scenario dominated by the state, drones become an extension of repressive structures. Imagine smart cities where drones equipped with highly advanced facial and object recognition technologies monitor people’s movements around the clock. The justification is always security: combating crime or terrorism. However, the line between security and surveillance is very thin. If the state gains near-total control over urban airspace and drone use, it may lead to restrictions on freedoms and rights, such as assembly, privacy, property or movement, and even to the intimidation of opponents. It is essential that democratic institutions and civil society set clear boundaries before this technology becomes ubiquitous.
That sounds rather pessimistic. Is there a way forward?
The solution is complex. It lies in building digital literacy, resilience, and finding a healthy balance. People should begin to recognise that there is a level of exposure to new technologies that is still acceptable, but beyond that we risk losing autonomy. Not everything in our homes needs to be connected to the internet simply because it is modern or convenient. At the state level, this means investing in cybersecurity, digital infrastructure, and diversifying systems so that the failure of one component does not bring down the whole. We must learn to live with drones and artificial intelligence, but we must also retain control over them.
In that sense, are drones a good servant but a bad master?
Absolutely. Our aim was to put these scenarios on the table so that not only companies but also policymakers take notice. It is better to be prepared than surprised. We need to build regulatory frameworks and state resilience in a way that protects privacy, freedom and security, while not stifling this growing industrial sector, which has significant potential - for example, in improving labour productivity. Political scientists must also have a voice in this debate, because they can highlight factors and risks that engineers or vendors may overlook or prefer not to see.
Eva Kopecká
Viliam Ostatník works at the Department of Political Science, Faculty of Arts, Comenius University Bratislava, and serves as a director at the think tank Adapt Institute. Together with his colleagues Imrich Marton (Department of Political Science, Faculty of Arts, Comenius University Bratislava), Filip Šandor (Department of Regional Geography and Regional Development, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University Bratislava) and Matej Kandrík, he recently presented two groundbreaking studies on the future of drones in Central Europe: Drone Futures 2040: Foresight from Central Europe a The Future of Drones: Strategic interregnum.