Nanotechnologies for Tomorrow’s Society

A Case for Reflective Action Research in Flanders, Belgium

ASU, October 27, 2006

Prof. Dr. Lieve Goorden (UAntwerpen)Michiel van Oudheusden (UAntwerpen)

Johan Evers (KULeuven)

2

Overview

I. Introduction: NT’s main challengesII. Flemish Innovation PolicyIII. NanoSoc as an experiment in dealing with

uncertaintiesIV. Case FocusV. Choice for Reflective ActionVI. Conclusion

3

I. INTRODUCTIONThree challenges for NT promotors

• Goal searching character of nanoscience and engineering (strategic uncertainty) - difficult to steer top down- huge amount of new combinations- guided by a vague claim

• Difficulties to reach sound knowledge (complexity)- about complex systems- common RA not applicable

• Uncertainty about future attitudes (ambivalence)- difficult to predict- discuss vulnerability of assumptions

4

To what extent do you approve of its use?

(EU 25) Eurobarometer 225 EC (2005)

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

chip in brain that cangive hearing back

chip in brain thatimproves memory

under all circumstances only highly regulated and controlled

only exceptional circumstances never

don't know

5

Dilemma’s in dealing with challenges

• Strategic uncertainty- Explore and occupy the future;

- Learn to cope with with unexpected turns;(f.e. GMO-policy in Belgium)

• Complexity- Be fast and leave competitors behind;

- Be reflexive and precautious;• (f.e. 21st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act 2003)

• Ambivalence- Provoke with daring images of the future;

- Strive for consensus and define identities;• (f.e. ‘CT’s for Improving Human performance’ versus ‘CT’s for European

knowledge societies’);

6

US and European report on Convergent Technologies

Converging Technologies: Shaping the

Future of European Society’s,

EC, 2004

Converging Technologies for Improving

Human Performance, NSF, 2002

7

Flemish project: ‘Nanotechnologies for tomorrow’s society’

An experiment in dealing with challenges

• Transfer of experiences;

• The process is as important as the outcomes;- the quality of the process- the impact of the process

8

II. INNOVATION POLICY IN FLANDERS

9

EUROPE

10

Flanders, Belgium

11

Flemish Innovation Policy: contradictory strategies

• 80s : top down, picking winners- Innovation driven by

• strategic steering;• science push;

- TA: • helping hand in picking winners, expert approach (social scientists),

incoporated in universities, secluded from society;

• 90s: bottom up, ad hoc policy- Innovation driven by

• market demand;• technology diffusion;

- TA: • not slow down innovation, expert approach (scientists/technologists),

incorporated in technological institutes, secluded from society;

12

2 recent surveys in Flanders (by Flemish Parliamentary TA Institute)

• Expectations of promotors towards public governance of new technologies;

• Degree of awareness of members of the Flemish Parliament of nanotechnology

13

Promotors of new technologies

• Policy goal of spending 3% of BRP on R&D by 2010, should be translated in a collective vision;

• Public governance should play the role of mentor in a social learning approach;

• S&T should have a more prominent place on public-political agenda;

14

Awareness of new technologies by members of the Flemish parliament

Inquiry by the Flemish Parliamentary Institute for Technology Assessment (101/124 parliamentarians)(2005)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

med

icaltech

no

log

y

enviro

nm

ental

techn

olo

gy

energ

ytech

no

log

y

ICT

bio

techn

olo

gy

nan

otech

no

log

y

transp

ort

techn

olo

gy

new

materials

well informed

heard of

badly informed

15

Communication of the European Commission:

“Towards a European Strategy for Nanotechnology” (2004)

“An effective two-way dialogue is indispensable, whereby the general publics’

views are taken into account and may be seen to influence decisions concerning R&D policy”

mandate

16

21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act

(US)

• “Ensure that ethical, legal, environmental and other appropriate societal concerns … are considered during the development of nanotechnology.” (US Congress, 2003)

mandate

17

Flemish Innovation Policy today: “backing winners”

technological innovation as

- a comprehensive process

• innovation on the agenda of other policy domains;

• objectives of innovation go beyond the economic sphere (sustainable development);

- a social learning process

• Flemish Parliamentary TA Institute (viWTA): - focus on upstream public engagement;

• Institute for the Promotion of Innovation through Science and Technology in Flanders (IWT):

- focus on promoting reflexivity in the lab (NanoSoc);

18

III. NANOSOC AS AN EXPERIMENT IN DEALING WITH UNCERTAINTIES

• Strategic uncertainty

• Ambivalence

• Complexity

19

Strategic uncertainty

a dialogue about ‘now’ and ‘later’

• Experiences of ordinary people with new technologies will make images of the future more robust;

• Explications of tacit future images by scientists will allow civil society to compare alternatives;

process approach: complementary use of TA and TF

20

Ambivalence

a dialogue about likeliness and desirableness

• Stimulate provocative images of the future to incite people to examine their identities;

• Reflection about essential values will inspire scientists to look for new technological paths;

process quality criteria: perplexity, inclusion,

ranking of values, closure

21

Complexity

a dialogue among a wide variety of actors

• Co-responsibility of promotors and users;

• Focus on reflexivity of nano-researchers;

Process design:• nano-experts push the debate (first stage)

• input civil society (middle stages)• nano-experts respond to the debate (last stage)

22

IV. CASE STUDIES

Funded by IWT, Institute for the Promotion of Innovation through Science and Technology in

Flanders

23

Case Studies

• IMEC- smart environment- bio-on-chip

• EMAT- meso porous materials

24

IMEC 1984 - 2006

Established by state government of Flanders in Belgium in 1984Non-profit organizationInitial investment: 62M€Initial staff: ~70

By 2006 one of the largest independent R&D organizations in its field worldwideRevenue: 231M€ (including 35M€ grant from government)15% government / state fundingStaff > 1450Collaboration with > 550 partners worldwide

25

Smart Environment

• Relation between service and place and relation between service and device disappear

• Anyplace anywhere and anytime

26

Smart Environment

• New services determine the roadmaps • Typical examples: imaging, games, entertainment,

health, sports and business

27

Bio-on-chip

• 1993: start of IMEC’s biosensor research

• based on the coupling/interactions between biological molecules “soft”) and microelectronic components (“hard”)

transducer surface

INTERFACING

28

Bio-on-chip

• Intensive interaction/cooporation between (bio)medical sciences and engineering

• Bringing together various materials with different dimensions

Med

icin

e

Biology

Chemistry

Micro-electronics

29

• Electron Microscopy for Materials Science• Department of Physics, UA, since 1965• Study of (inorganic) materials by different electron microscopy

techniques

• Fundamental solid state physics, materials science, solid state

chemistry and materials characterisation

New nanomaterials

30

- comparable to porous materials, e.g. sponge - pores are extremely small (2 to 500nm)- large specific area

sort of filter: only particles smaller than the pores can infiltrate in the material and are possible subjects of reaction processes.

0D structures – Meso-porous Materials

New nanomaterials

31

Why these three cases?

• Different time scale:- Short term: smart environment- Mid-term: bio-on-chip- Long term: new nanomaterials

• Different societal challenges:- Smart environment: privacy & control

- Bio-on-chip: autonomy and human-machine interface

- New nano-materials: toxicity

32

V. THE CHOICE FOR REFLECTIVE ACTION

• 3 TA Frameworks• 3 Key Components• 2 Central Questions• 4 Stage Process

33

How to support scientists in finding promising research

agendas?

• Agenda setting should be subject of deliberation with concerned groups;

• Design innovation processes as ‘learning processes’:- a ‘collective’ learning process: an interactive process

with promoters and users;- an ‘open ended’ learning process: gradually the

desired characteristics of all parties will become clear.

34

Linking up TA Frameworks

• Constructive Technology Assessment (CTA)• Real Time Technology Assessment (RTTA)• Public Engagement

Applicable to Flanders and NT:1. Mapping innovation dynamics2. Reflective action with stakeholders (upstream)

35

Three components

(1) ACTION is complemented with (2) PROCESS and (3) IMPACT analysis

Process assessment aims to evaluate the interactions and argumentations of the participants

Impact assessment to measure the effects of the social learning process on existent research practices

36

The Choice for Reflective Action

• Actors: ‘Promotors’ and ‘Demanders’= bring together a wide variety of relevant actors

• Two central questions:1. Which NT developments are likely?2. Which ones are desirable for future society?

• 4-stage process:A. ExplorationB. VisioningC. NormativeD. Designing

37

Four qualitative research methods

(a) Three-round Delphi study A. EXPLORATION

(b) Scenario Workshop B. VISIONING

(c) Value Tree Analysis C. NORMATIVE

(d) Vision Assessment D. DESIGNING

38

(a) Delphi questionnaire

• Natural and social scientists, journalists, artists, politicians + first citizens panel (no professionals)

• Find out:- What future developments to be expected?- Alternatives?

• 2 anonymous rounds over the internet, 3d round interactive session

• Example story telling

39

Delphi story example

Wireless Monitoring of Diabetics via Body Area Network (BAN)

• Patient wears a BAN which passively monitors his health situation (blood pressure, glucose level, heart rate…)

• Wireless technology transmits health data to hospital, where it is assessed• Patient not only receives advice on diet and exercise at regular intervals via

internet or cell phone, but – as an elderly patient with diabetes risk – is informed when to administer glucose

• Social / political context: Bill in Parliament to make Distance Wireless Monitoring (DWM) mandatory starting from 50 years onwards, following trend in other technologically advanced countries; if not, termination of social security benefits for individual

• Protest from civil rights groups: violation of civil rights law (discrimination), end of patient’s privacy

• …

40

(b) Scenario Workshop

• Outcomes of Delphi presented to second citizens panel (selection criterion: sociological diversity)

• Reconstruct representations of the future from ‘gut feel’; make images more socially robust

• Criticism, vision, realization

41

(c) Value Tree Analysis

• Stakeholders• Identifty and question norms and values• Arrange concerns along branches tree

structure

42

(d) Vision Assessment

• Back to nano-experts• How are project outcomes to be realized?

43

VI. CONCLUSION

1. Stimulate reflexivity among NT scientists, researchers, innovation actors- by raising awareness and sensitivity to societal

impacts of NT- through processes of systematic and ongoing

reflection with civil society Help to transform research practices, cultures? Impact

on larger context?2. Experimental method useful for dealing with other

uncertainties caused by technology innovation? Transfer to other institutional settings?

44

Nanotechnologies

for Tomorrow’s Society

www.nanosoc.be