43
Frameworks for Responsible Innovation [email protected] @jackstilgoe with acknowledgements to Richard Owen and Phil Macnaghten

Paris april 2013

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

 

Citation preview

Page 1: Paris april 2013

Frameworks for Responsible [email protected]

@jackstilgoe

with acknowledgements to Richard Owen and Phil Macnaghten

Page 2: Paris april 2013
Page 3: Paris april 2013
Page 4: Paris april 2013
Page 5: Paris april 2013
Page 6: Paris april 2013
Page 7: Paris april 2013

Synthetic biology

Page 8: Paris april 2013
Page 9: Paris april 2013
Page 10: Paris april 2013

1. What is the purpose? 2. Why do you want to do it? 3. What are you going to gain

from it? 4. What else is it going to do? 5. How do you know you are

right?

Page 11: Paris april 2013

‘Research Councils have a responsibility to scrutinize the potential impacts and risks of emerging technologies, and encourage the researchers we fund to do likewise.... The challenge will be to define an approach that promotes creativity and innovation in research underpinned by a commitment to its responsible development.’

David Delpy, ESPRC CEO

Page 12: Paris april 2013

The what, the how and the why of innovation

Products

• What are the likely risks and benefits ?

• How will the risks and benefits be distributed?

• What other impacts can we predict ?

• How might these change in the future?

• What don’t we know about?

• What might we never know about?

Processes

• How should research and innovation take place?

• How should standards be drawn up and applied?

• How should risks and benefits be defined and measured?

• Who is in control?• Who will take

responsibility if things go wrong?

• What if we are wrong?

Purposes

• Why should this research be undertaken?

• Who will benefit ?• What are the

alternatives?• Who gets to decide?

Page 13: Paris april 2013

Pathologies of innovation

– Late lessons from early warnings (EEA)– The dilemma of control (David Collingridge)– Systemic risk and normal accidents (Charles Perrow)– Technological lock-in (Paul David)– Myths of techno-fixes (Dan Sarewitz)– Altered nature of human action (Hans Jonas)– Organised irresponsibility (Ulrich Beck)– Expectations and Imaginaries (Brown, Hedgecoe, Jasanoff,

Wynne et al.)– Deficit models of publics (Brian Wynne)– Society as a laboratory (Krohn and Weyer)

Page 14: Paris april 2013

On responsibility

• From retrospective… (accountability and liability)

• … to prospective (care and responsiveness)• … and collective• Role responsibilities and general

responsibilities• Second-order (or meta-)responsibilities

Page 15: Paris april 2013

On innovation

• Non-linear• Socio-technical• Systemic

Responsible innovation is ‘collective care for the future through the stewardship of innovation in the present’

Page 16: Paris april 2013

Four characteristics of responsible innovation

Reflexive Anticipatory

Responsive Inclusive

Page 17: Paris april 2013

Making innovation responsible

Governance experiments• Life-cycle analysis• Risk assessment• Ethics committees• Public dialogue• Foresight• Codes of conduct• CTA/RTTA/midstream

modulation/STIR etc.• … and more

De facto governance• Multidisciplinary collaboration• Technology appraisal• Training and capacity-building• Institutional structures• Reward and recognition• Intellectual property• Standards• Publication• Peer review• Political economy of science• … and more

Page 18: Paris april 2013
Page 19: Paris april 2013

Rationales for a European framework/frameworks

• Sharing ‘best practice’• Harmonising regulation• A new narrative for science in society• A new narrative for “Science in Society”• Europe as powerful governance actor– Grand challenges– Horizon 2020

• Anchoring innovation to European values• Moving from application to iteration

Page 20: Paris april 2013

“The imaginary made real”

Page 21: Paris april 2013

Stratospheric Particle Injection

for Climate Engineering

(SPICE)

Page 22: Paris april 2013
Page 23: Paris april 2013
Page 24: Paris april 2013
Page 25: Paris april 2013
Page 26: Paris april 2013
Page 27: Paris april 2013
Page 28: Paris april 2013
Page 29: Paris april 2013
Page 30: Paris april 2013
Page 31: Paris april 2013
Page 32: Paris april 2013

A Stage gate

Page 33: Paris april 2013

A Stage gate

Page 34: Paris april 2013

Stage gate criteria

1. Safety2. Compliance3. Framing and Communication (reflexive)4. Imagination of applications and

implications (anticipatory, reflexive)5. Hearing public and stakeholder views

(inclusive)

Page 35: Paris april 2013
Page 36: Paris april 2013
Page 37: Paris april 2013
Page 38: Paris april 2013
Page 39: Paris april 2013
Page 40: Paris april 2013
Page 41: Paris april 2013
Page 42: Paris april 2013
Page 43: Paris april 2013