Ethics and new and emerging fields of science and technology

Kjetil Rommetveit, University of Bergen

Science and technology governance problems:

• “…people increasingly distrust institutions and politics or are simply not interested in them.” (White Paper on Governance, 2001)

• Inclusive, socially robust and participatory (Nowotny et al. 2001)

• A “communication gap”

Technolife diagnose:• New ethical frameworks must take into

account conditions for communication and dialogue

• Existing frameworks (ethics, technology assessment, participatory exercises) not always conducive to this goal

• The framing problem: policy problem defined by experts, using language of science, ethics or law

Three technologies:

• Biometrics and mobility

• Enhancements of the human body through converging technologies

• Geographical imaging systems and digital globes

Biometrics and mobility

• Improve security• Enhanced efficiency• Protect privacy

Main EU policy response: “balancing security with privacy”

• It is…important not to lose sight of the need for a proper balance between the reinforcement of security and due regard for the individual rights of the persons concerned (2004/0039 CNS)

• …the Union needs to strike the right balance between privacy and security in sharing information among law enforcement and judicial authorities (The Hague Programme: Ten priorities for the next five years)

• It is part of the balanced Commission approach to take into account possible negative effects on human rights, notably privacy rights of citizen (Hobbing 2006)

Problems:• Lack of evidence for systems this scale

• Complexity. EP LIBE report on SIS II: “complex and opaque project – hard to understand, even for experts and absolutely incomprehensible to citizens”

• Privacy under pressure from ever more “interoperable” systems

• Do we know what “balancing security with privacy” really means?

• The balancing metaphor presupposes degrees of knowledge that we do not have

Technolife: reframing the issue• Biometrics and many other large scale information systems used for

governance: Identity management systems

• There is no way of ascribing identity to an individual except as a member of this or that group or category: “threat to public order”, “terrorist”, “EU citizen”, “third country national” (VISA: chinese, US, Maroccean, Norwegian…), “resident of ….”, and so on

• Interaction with technology: Algorithms, code, software, protocols, templates, integration of systems, complexities of systems…

• It makes a lot more sense to frame policy issues in terms of emerging relations between individuals, groups, communities and governments

Technolife approach:• How do individuals and groups imagine

themselves as caught up in and concerned by emerging biometric systems?

• Methodologically: use films and social media, develop software and deliberative forum

• Conceptually: imagined communities, socio-technical imaginaries; groups and publics

Dobermanmacload: Biometrics will enable us to closely scrutinize individuals tagged for closer observation, and quickly identify the perpetrators of crimes. Using the data from biometric observations, we will also be able to analyse patterns of movement for criminal intent, and automatically more closely scrutinize those individuals. Let me repeat: a future sustainable high technology society will bear little resemblence to the one we currently live in - in particular privacy concerns will be minimized, and concerns about protecting the group will be of overriding concern.

Singularity Utopia: There is nothing good about biometrics because biometrics are open to misuse. Biometrics is simply a tool of oppression, but the leaders of capitalism say biometrics is for our safety and it will speed up everyday processes. We are told these measures will help prevent terrorism but we often see laws designed to stop terrorists being applied to people how are engaging in lawful protest. Anti-terror laws are a way for corrupt governments to silence freedom of expression. Biometrics is the beginning of 1984, it will lead to thought-crime and other authoritarian methods of oppression.

MarkoK: Sustainability (which we all hopefully agree about) means that available resources are limited and must be allocated with great care and longterm plans. Biometric tech, as any other tech, has its potential cons but is the only way to make sure that everyone really got their piece of the pie in a high tech society. And its not just about distribution but also of making sure that resources are not

wasted in absurd ways. Dont you agree?

Policy recommendations:• Lay people are perfectly capable of envisioning

the wider socio-technical context of biometric systems. Increase public debate!

• Among our participants: a number of concerns voiced, not just “security versus privacy”. Social justice a recurrent theme

• How are group and individual identities transformed along with the implementation of new identity management systems?

• Identification versus identity

Thank you!