Rinie van Est

Synthetic Biology and the Role of Civil Society Organizations Shaping the Agenda and Arena of the Public Debate

1. Introduction, Markus Schmidt 2. That Was the Synthetic Biology That Was, Luis Campos 3. An Introduction to Synthetic Biology, Carolyn M.C. Lam, Miguel Godinho, Vitor A.P. Martins dos Santos 4. Computational Design in Synthetic Biology, Maria Suarez, Guillermo Rodrigo, Javier Carrera, Alfonso Jaramillo 5. The Ethics of Synthetic Biology, Anna Deplazes, Agomoni Ganguli-Mitra, Nikola Biller-Andorno 6. Do I understand what I can create?, Markus Schmidt 7. Security Issues Related to Synthetic Biology, Alexander Kelle 8. The Intellectual Commons and Property in Synthetic Biology, Kenneth A. Oye, Rachel Wellhausen 9. Governing Synthetic Biology: processes and outcomes, Joyce Tait 10. Synthetic Biology and the Role of Civil Society Organisatons, Dirk Stemerding, Huib de Vriend, Bart Walhout, Rinie van Est 11. Summary and Calculations, Alexander Kelle Index

The practice of TA : science, interaction and communication

As TAMI reflects on the activities of Technology Assessment (TA) institutions and their effectiveness, the central question seems to be: which methods should TA use in order to optimise impact? Although this question sounds quite easy, this paper shows that reflecting on the impact of TA methods is a very complex endeavour. The goal of optimising impact of TA activities requires a comprehensive reflection on TA processes, TA quality criteria and, the institutionalisation and mission of TA. In this paper we strive to provide a common ground for such a broad reflection.

The Broad Challenge of Public Engagement in Science: Commentary on: “Constitutional Moments in Governing Science and Technology”

Timely public engagement in science presents a broad challenge. It includes more than research into the ethical, legal and social dimensions of science and state-initiated citizen’s participation. Introducing a public perspective on science while safeguarding its public value involves a diverse set of actors: natural scientists and engineers, technology assessment institutes, policy makers, social scientists, citizens, interest organisations, artists, and last, but not least, politicians.

Ethical Challenges in Emerging Applications of Persuasive Technology

Persuasive technologies are gaining ground. As they enter into society they are being applied in more situations, and integrated with other technologies in increasingly smart environments. We argue that this development creates new challenges in designing ethically responsible persuasive technologies. Applications in social contexts like work environments raise the questions whether persuasion serves the interests of the user or the employer, and whether users can still voluntarily choose to use the technology. Informing the user and obtaining consent become complicated when persuasive systems are integrated in smart environments. To ensure that the autonomy of the user is respected, we argue that the user and provider should agree on the goal of persuasion, and users should be informed about persuasion in smart environments.

Responsible Innovation as a source of inspiration for Technology Assessment, and vice versa: the common challenge of responsibility, representation, issue identification, and orientation

ABSTRACTClarifying the historic relationship between Responsible Innovation (RI) and Technology Assessment (TA) can benefit both fields. To achieve this, a basic distinction is made between TA directed toward the promotion side of technology (Constructive Technology Assessment [CTA]) and the control side (Parliamentary TA). In particular, CTA can be seen as a major source of the idea of framing innovation policy in terms of transformative innovation and RI. Originally, the practice of CTA was directed toward democratizing the promotion side of technology. The practice of RI has the broader ambition of encompassing both the promotion and the control side of technology. Parliamentary TA’s familiarity with the control side of technology could inspire RI. At the same time, RI challenges Parliamentary TA to pay more attention to the promotion side of technology and to stimulating politically desired effects of innovation. Accordingly, the paper describes three challenges faced by both TA and RI: representation...

Governance strategies for living technologies: Bridging the gap between stimulating and regulating technoscience

The life sciences present a politically and ethically sensitive area of technology development. NBIC convergence—the convergence of nanotechnology, biotechnology, and information and cognitive technology—presents an increased interaction between the biological and physical sciences. As a result the bio-debate is no longer dominated by biotechnology, but driven by NBIC convergence. NBIC convergence enables two bioengineering megatrends: “biology becoming technology” and “technology becoming biology.” The notion of living technologies captures the latter megatrend. Accordingly, living technology presents a politically and ethically sensitive area. This implies that governments sooner or later are faced with the challenge of both promoting and regulating the development of living technology. This article describes four current political models to deal with innovation promotion and risk regulation. Based on two specific developments in the field of living technologies—(psycho)physiological computing and synthetic biology—we reflect on appropriate governance strategies for living technologies. We conclude that recent pleas for anticipatory and deliberative governance tend to neglect the need for anticipatory regulation as a key factor in guiding the development of the life sciences from a societal perspective. In particular, when it is expected that a certain living technology will radically challenge current regulatory systems, one should opt for just such a more active biopolitical approach.

Synthetic Biology and the Role of Civil Society Organizations

In this chapter we discuss the role of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in current and future public debates about synthetic biology as a new and emerging science and technology. We see CSOs as potentially important intermediaries between scientific and governance institutions on the one hand and wider publics on the other hand. In this role CSOs have already contributed to the agenda of the emerging debate about synthetic biology. However, the way in which CSOs and wider publics may be involved in future debates about synthetic biology will also depend on the framing of the issues at stake by governmental and scientific actors in these debates. To make this clear we refer in this chapter to the lessons learnt from earlier debates about genetic engineering and nanotechnology which show a notable difference between governmental and scientific approaches to the implications of new science and technology, focusing on issues of risk and regulation, and the activities of CSOs, emphasizing broader societal issues. This tension is also apparent from our analysis of the agenda of the emerging synbio debate and from the results presented in this chapter of a survey in which we have interviewed a variety of CSOs about their visions on synthetic biology. In the light of this tension we also discuss in this chapter the conditions that should be met for a constructive role of CSOs in future public debates about synthetic biology.

Keeping the Dream Alive: What ELSI-Research Might Learn from Parliamentary Technology Assessment

The last section of the book offers lessons for action. Rinie van Est, a staff member at the Dutch parliamentary technology assessment organization, the Rathenau Institute, proposes that the notion of moving towards equity and equality through nanotechnology is as big a vision as the visions of technological transformation put forth by many nano-advocates. In order to move in the direction of the vision, van Est argues for three important steps. First, we must reflect on emerging equity and quality issues early in the development of new technologies rather than after they are produced. Van Est challenges researchers to develop constructive suggestions to strengthen equity and equality. Second, we need to mobilize the public rather than wait for people to get interested in nanotechnology. Van Est envisions people of all walks of life weighing in on what they want our nano-enabled future to be. To make this possible we need to stimulate public participation on many levels, including the active engagement of civil society organizations and experts like social scientists, policy makers, and politicians. Third, and perhaps most important for this volume, van Est encourages ELSI-researchers to play a more active role in the public and political debate so their insights may have a larger impact in society. Publishing in academic journals. . . or even Yearbooks. . . may not reach a sufficient audience to make change possible. To further the cause of equity in a meaningful way, academe needs to connect with the larger world.—eds.

Just Ordinary Robots: Automation from Love to War

A social robot is a robot that interacts and communicates with humans or other autonomous physical agents by following social behaviors and rules attached to its role. We seem to accept the use of robots that perform dull, dirty, and dangerous jobs. But how far do we want to go with the automation of care for children and the elderly, or the killing of terrorists? Would we be setting humanity aside if we accepted such automation? Just Ordinary Robots: Automation from Love to War provides a socially involved, yet sober, view into the new age of robots. It supplies a cutting-edge look at robot technologies, including what these technologies are capable of and the ethical and regulatory questions they raise. The book surveys the various types of social robots and examines their social significance in homes, health care, traffic, the police, and the military. Considering the technical characteristics and societal expectations of robots in these areas, it explores what is possible right now in terms of robot technologies. It also looks into the social, ethical, and regulatory issues future robot technologies will create. The text provides authoritative insights into the social significance of robots for the medium and long term. Illustrating the political, administrative, and regulatory consequences related to each area, it highlights key points that need to be publicly discussed or put on the agenda by todays politicians and policy makers.

Risk and Technology Assessment

This chapter provides an overview of the changing relationship between risk, technology assessment (TA), and risk assessment (RA). It does so by comparing the development of the practice of parliamentary TA and RA, the way risk is interpreted in these practices, and the political role these practices play in dealing with risks. The basic argument is that originally RA and TA presented politically separate practices. Over the last decade, the conceptual gap between these two practices has been bridged to alarge extent. We start with describing the classical approaches to TA and RA, which developed in 1960s in the United States and where guided by the belief that scientific methods would improve decision making around the risks involved in science and technology. Classical parliamentary TA and RA present very distinct scientific and political practices, with different conceptions of risk and political roles. The classical approach to risk operated with anarrow mathematical definition of risk. Classical TA defined risk in amuch broader fashion; risk referred to abroad set of (potential) negative social effects of science and technology. RA was thought to help the government in managing risk, by depoliticizing risk management. In contrast, parliamentary TA aimed to enable apolitical debate within Congress, and thereby strengthening the position of Congress vis-a-vis the executive branch. Throughout the years, both practice and scientific literature have revealed basic shortcomings of the classical approach to TA and risk. Driven by the concept of uncertainty, the role of RA and TA and their interpretation of risk have changed. Modern risk approaches are expected to deal with both calculable and uncertain risk. TA is encouraged to look beyond effects, to also analyze current visions and values that drive science and technology. Based on the concept of uncertainty, attempts have been made to characterize risk or problem situations in order to clarify the limitations of the classical RA and TA approaches. The claim is that in case of scientific and regulatory uncertainties, and value dissent more participatory approaches to RA and TA are required, which seek to represent public controversy. The IRGC risk governance framework can be seen as exemplary for the new risk approach. From arisk governance perspective, RA and parliamentary TA have become complementary practices. The case of risk governance on nanotechnology in the Netherlands proofs this point. However, parliamentary TA’s role within risk governance presents aremarkable blind spot on the current research agenda.