National Ethics Advisory Bodies in the Emerging Landscape of Responsible Research and Innovation

The article examines the role played by policy advice institutions in the governance of ethically controversial new and emerging science and technology in Europe. The empirical analysis, which aims to help close a gap in the literature, focuses on the evolution, role and functioning of national ethics advisory bodies (EABs) in Europe. EABs are expert bodies whose remit is to issue recommendations regarding ethical aspects of new and emerging science and technology. Negative experiences with the impacts of science and technology in the past have resulted in calls for increased transparency and broader participation and pluralism in expert advice and policy decision-making. Do national EABs function as inclusive, anticipatory “hybrid forums”? Or do they resemble more “classical” expert-oriented bodies, inspired by technocratic or decisionist approaches? As part of the empirical analysis of the role and functioning of institutional ethical advisory structures in 32 European countries, an extensive analysis of EAB websites and the content of publicly available documents on such institutions has been carried out, supplemented by an online survey of representatives of the EABs. One major finding of the empirical analysis is the very uneven distribution of “hybrid forum” features of EABs across Europe.

[1]  A. Nordmann If and Then: A Critique of Speculative NanoEthics , 2007, The Ethics of Nanotechnology, Geoengineering and Clean Energy.

[2]  Maximilian Weber,et al.  Gesammelte politische Schriften , 1960 .

[3]  M. Castells The Network Society , 2004 .

[4]  A. Grunwald,et al.  The normative basis of (health) technology assessment and the role of ethical expertise , 2004, Poiesis Prax..

[5]  Christopher Coenen Deliberating Visions: The Case of Human Enhancement in the Discourse on Nanotechnology and Convergence , 2009 .

[6]  R. Tutton Constructing Participation in Genetic Databases , 2007 .

[7]  Peter Weingart Die Stunde der Wahrheit? : zum Verhältnis der Wissenschaft zu Politik, Wirtschaft und Medien in der Wissensgesellschaft , 2001 .

[8]  H. Jonas Das Prinzip Verantwortung : Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation , 1988 .

[9]  Arie Rip,et al.  TAKING EUROPEAN KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY SERIOUSLY Report of the Expert Group on Science and Governance to the Science, Economy and Society Directorate, Directorate-General for Research, European Commission , 2007 .

[10]  M. Lengwiler Participatory Approaches in Science and Technology , 2008 .

[11]  M. Korstanje The Risk Society: Towards a new modernity , 2009 .

[12]  R. Kurzweil,et al.  The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology , 2006 .

[13]  M. Friele Do committees ru(i)n the bio-political culture? On the democratic legitimacy of bioethics committees. , 2003, Bioethics.

[14]  Nebojsa Nakicenovic,et al.  Converging Technologies - Shaping the Future of European Societies , 2004 .

[15]  Martin W. Bauer,et al.  Biotechnology - the Making of a Global Controversy , 2002 .

[16]  R. V. Schomberg Prospects for Technology Assessment in a Framework of Responsible Research and Innovation , 2011 .

[17]  M. Peinado,et al.  The making of a global controversy , 2004 .

[18]  D. Wilson Creating the ‘ethics industry': Mary Warnock, in vitro fertilization and the history of bioethics in Britain , 2010, BioSocieties.

[19]  S. Borrás The Innovation Policy of the European Union , 2003 .

[20]  L. PytlikZillig,et al.  Public Engagement for Informing Science and Technology Policy: What Do We Know, What Do We Need to Know, and How Will We Get There? , 2011 .

[21]  J. Gregory,et al.  Producing the Post-Fordist Public: The Political Economy of Public Engagement with Science , 2010 .

[22]  S. Kelly Public Bioethics and Publics: Consensus, Boundaries, and Participation in Biomedical Science Policy , 2003, Science, technology & human values.

[23]  Bernhard Wieser,et al.  Yearbook 2001 of the Institute for Advanced Studies on Science, Technology & Society , 2001 .

[24]  F. Fukuyama Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution , 2002 .

[25]  H. M. Collins,et al.  The Third Wave of Science Studies , 2002, Science, Technology, and Society.

[26]  Franc Mali Bringing converging technologies closer to civil society: the role of the precautionary principle , 2009 .

[27]  M. Frankel,et al.  Good, Better Best: The Human Quest for Enhancement , 2006 .

[28]  Patrick Lin,et al.  Ethics of Human Enhancement: 25 Questions & Answers , 2010 .

[29]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science , 2003 .

[30]  C. Thorpe Participation as Post-Fordist Politics: Demos, New Labour, and Science Policy , 2010, Minerva.

[31]  Mihail C. Roco,et al.  Nanotechnology Research Directions for Societal Needs in 2020: Retrospective and Outlook , 2011 .

[32]  Rudolf Haag Retrospective and Outlook , 1996 .

[33]  Michel Callon,et al.  Acting in an uncertain world , 2009 .

[34]  Funtowicz Silvio Post-Normal Science , 2020, Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

[35]  Niels Mejlgaard,et al.  Participation and competence as joint components in a cross-national analysis of scientific citizenship , 2010 .

[36]  Sheila Jasanoff,et al.  Handbook of Science and Technology Studies , 1995 .

[37]  M. Gibbons,et al.  Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty , 2003 .

[38]  Karen Kastenhofer,et al.  Risk Assessment of Emerging Technologies and Post-Normal Science , 2011 .

[39]  L. Levidow Democratizing technology—or technologizing democracy? Regulating agricultural biotechnology in Europe , 1998 .

[40]  Wiebe E. Bijker,et al.  The Paradox of Scientific Authority: The Role of Scientific Advice in Democracies , 2009 .

[41]  A. Giddens The consequences of modernity , 1990 .

[42]  Mike Michael,et al.  Science, Social Theory and Public Knowledge , 2003 .

[43]  G. Rowe,et al.  A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms , 2005 .

[44]  A. Schulman Human dignity and bioethics : essays commissioned by the President's Council on Bioethics , 2008 .

[45]  Risto Eräsaari Open-Context Expertise , 2009 .

[46]  Kathrin Braun,et al.  Beyond Speaking Truth? Institutional Responses to Uncertainty in Scientific Governance , 2010 .

[47]  A. Grunwald,et al.  Nanotechnology – Steps Towards Understanding Human Beings as Technology? , 2007 .

[48]  Ethical Expertise in Democratic Societies , 2008 .

[49]  H Roberts,et al.  Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity , 1994 .

[50]  C. Kropp,et al.  Knowledge on Stage: Scientific Policy Advice , 2010 .

[51]  Let's Disagree! Talking Ethics in Technology Controversies , 2011 .

[52]  A. Mark,et al.  The encyclopedia of Earth , 2010 .

[53]  Arianna Ferrari Developments in the Debate on Nanoethics: Traditional Approaches and the Need for New Kinds of Analysis , 2010 .

[54]  H. Ostrer,et al.  The Case Against Perfection : Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering , 2008 .

[55]  Hans Heinz Holz,et al.  JONAS Hans. Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation, 1979 , 2013 .

[56]  T. Swierstra,et al.  Converging Technologies, Shifting Boundaries , 2009, Nanoethics.

[57]  Susana Borrás,et al.  The Innovation Policy of the European Union: From Government to Governance , 2003 .

[58]  Gregor Wolbring,et al.  Why NBIC? Why human performance enhancement? , 2008 .

[59]  P. Weingart Scientific expertise and political accountability: paradoxes of science in politics , 1999 .

[60]  Parliamentary technology assessment institutions as indications of reflexive modernization , 2011 .

[61]  Hans Peter Peters,et al.  Mass-Mediated Expertise as Informal Policy Advice , 2010 .

[62]  E. Millstone Science, risk and governance: Radical rhetorics and the realities of reform in food safety governance , 2009 .

[63]  Stefan Böschen,et al.  Advisory and Regulatory Science between Uncertainty, Normative Disagreement and Policy-Making , 2010 .

[64]  Ulrike Felt,et al.  Taking European Knowledge Society Seriously , 2009 .

[65]  Jacqueline E. W. Broerse,et al.  Stakeholder interaction within research consortia on emerging technologies: learning how and what? , 2011 .

[66]  Stephen Hilgartner,et al.  Science on stage : expert advice as public drama , 2000 .

[67]  J. Schmidt,et al.  The Renaissance of Francis Bacon , 2011 .

[68]  Miltos Ladikas,et al.  Embedding society in science & technology policy : European and Chinese perspectives , 2009 .

[69]  T. Gieryn,et al.  Boundaries of Science , 1995 .

[70]  R. V. Schomberg Understanding Public Debate on Nanotechnologies , 2010 .

[71]  Armin Grunwald,et al.  Converging technologies: Visions, increased contingencies of the conditio humana, and search for orientation , 2007 .

[72]  S. Jasanoff Designs on Nature , 2005 .