Francis Bacon once said, “Knowledge is power.” This statement is still relevant when discussing science and technology, as modern scientific knowledge is more than an understanding of the modern world. It is also an understanding that enables us to intervene and alter the world around us and is actively intertwined with technology and innovation. Science is being used in establishments like government institutions, universities, and organizations. Governance of science, in other words, is a highly relevant topic for a country to debate. Governance is the process of control and management that takes place between states, in public and private firms, or any other organization. Good governance seek to enact five aspects: open communication with the public; participation by citizens as much as possible; accountability among the institutions; effectiveness in achieving goals; and clear coherence among the institutions and policies. The governance of science is faced with the challenges of a rapidly evolving field of advancement that is realized through research, and that science is increasingly becoming more globalized compared to the 20th century when only a few states had monopoly on technology and science.
The Collingridge Dilemma
Around 40 years ago David Collingridge coined the idea of the Collingridge dilemma. The dilemma has been widely used in the studies of technology and science. Essentially it includes two problems. The first is an information problem: until the technology is extensively developed and widely used, we cannot predict its impacts on the world. The other problem is a power problem: controlling or changing the technology is very difficult when is it already entrenched in society. This dilemma has permeated discussion around the governance of science and technology since the dilemma was coined. A symptom of this dilemma is the increasing emergence of science and technology as part of political, industrial and academic agendas and the urge to align these developments with societal needs. To solve this issue there has been calls to govern the studies of science and technology in a more normative direction. That means more social inclusion and public participation, more experimentation, and more attention to the public value and purpose of the studies of science and technology.
Strengthening science-society relationships are very important to overcome the Collingridge dilemma, and the best way to do this is through engaging with the public, stakeholders and experts. This engagement happens on different levels and is organised between universities and actors such as businesses, governments and civil society. This type of engagement can be difficult and paradoxical as all the different sectors build on conflicting norms and values from each other, and often commercial interests can win over societal concerns. Industry should play a bigger role in development of responsible research and innovation; however, businesses need to be more aware of what responsible innovation entails. That includes more ethical conduct of research and innovation such as care for human rights and a focus on transparency.
Governance of Science and Technology
Laws have not managed to keep up with science and technology. And the gaps are getting wider because they are advancing even more rapidly than ever before. Advancements like the printing press in the 1400s was extremely disruptive to political and religious leaders at the time because suddenly people had access to knowledge. It helped spread the ideas such as nationalism that eventually led into the Age of Enlightenment, where we see the creation of the first copyright laws. Later the invention of the steam engine and the railroad started the industrial revolution which in turn created the first property rights. What is different this time is the speed of innovation. Massive changes that used to take decades now only take years. Social media did not exist 20 years ago and most technology was only for the super-rich. Now anyone can buy a drone, access the internet and everyone is walking around with a smart phone. The pace of technology and science is happening too rapidly for governments to catch up.
Governments should try to keep up because the question is really about ethics and what laws should be in relation to technology and science. An important question is that of privacy in the age of smart phones and social media. Our phones can track our every step and knows what apps we use, what we write on social media and surveillance is a hot topic of discussion as many governments have been accused of spying on their population. Surveillance is happening in countries like China, where government surveillance is a fact of life for the people living there. The Western world is still not at this level of surveillance, however modern cities like London and New York are still filled with CCTV cameras, almost at the same level as Chinese cities like Beijing and Shanghai. Most governments surveillance and data collection still pale in comparison to what companies like Google, Facebook and Apple are collecting. Everything we do on our phones and computers are tracked by companies, and we should question where to draw the line of what is legal and ethical. Governments should do a better job of keeping up with these advancements and make proper laws that protect our privacy; however, we should not give governments permission to surveil and collect data about the population.
There is some existing governance over information and communications technology, i.e., existing bodies of international laws, political agreements and norms in different tech sectors. The aim is to strengthen cybersecurity on national and a global level and draws from existing rules, values and principles in our society. For instance, we have privacy norms, freedom of opinion and expression, and human rights that apply online just as it does offline. However, many states do not uphold these norms, and there are concerns around the human cost of cyber operations, specifically those that target healthcare systems. And states have not managed to agree on an international framework to counter cybercrime. There has been clear progress in catching up with the digital revolution, however, significant challenges lie ahead. Protecting data, privacy and human rights online continue to be a challenge, and heightening competition and deteriorating trust between states on the global state will making it even harder. Fostering diplomacy for dialogue and cooperation will be the make or break moment for the Internet’s future.
Governance of Advancing Technologies
Another topic of debate is the collection of our DNA. Genetic engineering is another rapidly evolving part of science and technology and protecting our genomic data will be increasingly more difficult. Scientists can now see what diseases people are predisposed to. The issue, however, is what companies can do with that information. Many genetic-testing companies have contractual clauses that let them use and sell their customers genetic information to third parties. The laws on genetic engineering has still not caught up with the advancements in the field. Commercial usage of the information is still legal, so there is nothing preventing marketers from targeting ads at people with genetic defects or preventing insurance companies from discriminating these people from getting life insurance. There needs to be laws preventing companies from collecting our genetic data and making us the property owner of our medical data to prevent it from being shared or sold.
Inventions like brain-computer interfaces could benefit a lot of patients like those who paralysed by spinal cord injuries and brain damage. However, these technologies could have damaging effects in the field of cybersecurity as hackers could access sensitive data and hijack systems. Also, advancements in cognitive enhancement, biomedicine and synthetic biology will pose a danger of transhumanism, which will alter the very foundation of humanity as we know it. The benefits of advancements in science and technology are undoubtedly great, however they must be balanced with a serious concern for human welfare, sustainability and general security.
Governments and non-state actors are also paying attention to the emerging and expanding potential of science and technology because they can be developed for military use. Among it is predictive analytics, which uses data of outcomes that happened in the past to determine and predict future outcomes – a technology that is particularly relevant for security in the future. This is a part of the field of machine learning, or artificial intelligence. The desire to innovate in every field of science and technology can lead to catastrophic outcomes without clear regulations, laws, and ethical guidelines. The risk increases because both private and non-state actors can use these technologies easier than ever before.
The advancements of AI can lead to great economic and social benefits. Almost every part of society will benefit from this, however the risks can also be great. The immediate risk includes the already mentioned cybersecurity risk, unintended consequences when AI converges with critical tech like biotech and nuclear tech, also algorithmic discrimination and biases, weak AI decision making and narrow ways of conceptualizing ethical problems. In short, AI will likely significantly alter the way we do economics, socio-political life, geopolitical competition and conflict. It might even have existential risks if doing it wrong. The world needs to think seriously about AI to have strong and responsible responses to the future of an AI world.
Political Implications of Advancing Technologies
With the digital technology tools currently available, engaging with larger communities for more political communication and participation is easier than ever before. But when it comes to influence and control over these technologies, the outcomes are very much out of anyone’s control. In other words, its just as easy to distort and manipulate information through information platforms, than it is to engage people with meaningful political information. With social media and general online platform algorithms there has been a general loss of public trust in democratic governmental institutions, media, science and facts themselves. The attempts to intervene and hack government elections, creation of bots to spread misinformation or “fake news” have continuously threatened the foundation of democracies, a system that is based on informed citizens making reasonable electoral decision-making on causes like climate change or other threats to mankind. Democracies especially need to update laws to combat misinformation and stop outside threats that tries to undermine democratic values. Politics is about power, and some people or governments will do anything to get it.
Today’s technological advancements are not just disruptive in the market, but they are also disruptive in legal and regulatory orders and have the potential to disrupt the very foundation of the current social order. There are existing complex frameworks in some fields of technology and science, for example in the field of cyberspace there now exists international laws. Also, in the private sector we see more political agreements and protocols for human rights, trade, business and general regulations. Responding to the looming governance dilemmas will require new governance structures, however it will also require a deeper understanding of how social, cultural, geopolitical and economic contexts shape how norms and policies are formed.
Sources:
European Commission, 2009. Global governance of science, retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/global-governance-020609_en.pdf
Barbara Ribeiro, Lars Bengtsson, Paul Benneworth, Susanne Bührer, Elena Castro-Martínez, Meiken Hansen, Katharina Jarmai, Ralf Lindner, Julia Olmos-Peñuela, Cordula Ott & Philip Shapira (2018) Introducing the dilemma of societal alignment for inclusive and responsible research and innovation, Journal of Responsible Innovation, retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23299460.2018.1495033
Wadhwa, Vivek. April 15 2014, Laws and tech can’t keep pace with technology, retrieved from https://www.technologyreview.com/2014/04/15/172377/laws-and-ethics-cant-keep-pace-with-technology/
Kavanagh, Camino. August 28 2019, New tech, new threats, and new governance challenges: an opportunity to craft smarter responses?, retrieved from https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/08/28/new-tech-new-threats-and-new-governance-challenges-opportunity-to-craft-smarter-responses-pub-79736
Al-Rodhan, Nayef. March 4 2014, Security, ethics and emerging technologies, retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2014/03/security-ethics-emerging-technologies/
Kane, Tom and Novellil, Nick. March 16 2019, Technology for governance, politics, and democracy, retrieved from https://technologyandsociety.org/technology-for-governance-politics-and-democracy/
Comments