DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Anticipatory Governance of Emerging Technologies

떠오르는 기술들에 대한 예비 협치

  • Guston, David H. (Politics and Global Studies, Center for Nanotechnology in Society at ASU, Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes)
  • Received : 2010.06.21
  • Accepted : 2010.10.18
  • Published : 2010.11.30

Abstract

The Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University (CNS-ASU) is a Nano-scale Science and Engineering Center (NSEC) funded by the US National Science Foundation (NSF). It implements an agenda of "real-time technology assessment" (RTTA) in pursuit of a strategic vision of the "anticipatory governance" of nanotechnologies. To achieve this vision, CNS-ASU unifies research programs not only across several universities but also across three critical, component activities: foresight (of plausible future scenarios), integration (of social science and humanities research with nano-scale science and engineering), and engagement (of publics in deliberations). CNS-ASU also performs educational and training activities as well as public outreach and informal science education. This paper elaborates the Center's strategic vision of anticipatory governance and its component activities, especially in the context of extending the concerns of societal dimensions research beyond the traditional risk paradigm.

아리조나 주립대학교의 사회 속의 나노기술 센터(CNS-ASU)는 미국 자연과학기금(NSF)에서 지원하는 나노 스케일 과학 및 공학 센터(NSEC)이다. 이 센터는 나노기술의 '예비 협치'(anticipatory governance)의 전략적 비전을 위한 실시간 기술 평가를 구현한다. 이 비전을 달성하기 위하여, CNS-ASU는 몇 개 대학의 연구사업을 통합할 뿐 아니라 예견(그럴듯한 미래 시나리오), 집적(사회인문과학을 나노스케일 과학기술과 연계) 및 참여(대중에게 홍보) 등 세 개의 주요 활동을 통합한다. CNS-ASU는 교육 훈련 활동을 할 뿐만 아니라 대중 소통과 비공식적 과학 교육을 실시한다. 이 논문은 이 사업은 전통적인 위험 관리 체계를 뛰어 넘는 사회적 차원의 연구를 포함한 예비 협치의 내용과 전략적 전망을 논술하고 있다.

References

  1. W. P. McCray, Hist and Tech. 21, 177 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1080/07341510500103735
  2. M. C. Roco and W. S. Bainbridge (eds.), Societal Implications of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology (US National Science Foundation, Arlington, 2001).
  3. E. Fisher and R. L. Mahajan, Sci. Pub. Pol. 33, 5 (2006). https://doi.org/10.3152/147154306781779181
  4. D. H. Guston and D. Sarewitz, Tech. in Soc. 24, 93 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-791X(01)00047-1
  5. D. W. Bronk, Science 188, 409 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1091972
  6. C. Lyall and J. Tait (eds.), New Modes of Governance (Ashgate, Aldershot, 2005).
  7. R. Karinen and D. H. Guston in M. Kaiser, M. Kurath, S. Maasen, and C. Rehmann-Sutter (eds.), Governing Future Technologies (Springer, Dordrecht, 2010), pp.217-232.
  8. D. H. Guston, Nature 454, 940 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/454940a
  9. D. Barben, E. Fisher, C. Selin, and D. H. Guston in E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, and J. Wajcman (eds.), The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, Third Edition (MIT Press, Cambridge, 2008), pp.979-1000.
  10. C. Selin, Sci, Tech. & Hum. 32, 196 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243906296918
  11. I. Bennett in E. Fisher, C. Selin, and J. Wetmore (eds.), Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, Volume 1 (Springer, New York, 2008), pp.149-156.
  12. C. Selin, The Future of Medical Diagnostics, #R08- 0001 (Center for Nanotechnology in Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, 2008).
  13. S. Davies and C. Selin, Solar to Fuels, #R10-0002 (Center for Nanotechnology in Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, 2008).
  14. C. Selin, CNS Visioning Workshop, #R08-0002 (Center for Nanotechnology in Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, 2008).
  15. C. Selin, et al., Plausibility Project Workshop #R10- 0001 (Center for Nanotechnology in Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, 2010).
  16. P. Hamlett, M. Cobb, and D. H. Guston, National Citizens Technology Forum: Nanotechnologies and Human Enhancement, #R08-0003 (Center for Nanotechnology in Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, 2008).
  17. J. A. Delborne, A. A. Anderson, D. L. Kleinman, M. Colin, and M. Powell. Public Understanding of Science. Published online first as doi: 10.1177/0963662509347138 (2009).
  18. D. L. Kleinman, J. A. Delborne, and A. A. Anderson. Public Understanding of Science. Published online first at doi: 10.1177/0963662509347137 (2009).
  19. M. Philbrick and J. Barandiaran, Sci. Pub. Pol. 36, 335 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3152/030234209X442052
  20. C. A. Miller, D H. Guston, D. Barben, J. Wetmore, C. Selin, and E. Fisher. Nanotechnology and Society: Ideas for Education and Public Engagement, #R07- 0001 (Center for Nanotechnology in Society, Arizona State University, Tempe, 2007).
  21. L. Bell, Museums and Soc. Iss. 4, 21 (2009).
  22. E. Fisher, R. L. Mahajan, and C. Mitcham, Bull Sci. Tech. Soc. 26, 486 (2006).
  23. J. McGregor and J. Wetmore, Nanoethics 3, 17 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-009-0055-1
  24. T. Benn, The Release of Engineered Nanomaterials from Commercial Product (Doctoral Dissertation, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Arizona State University. Tempe, 2009).
  25. J. Lappe, Photoreactivation and Positive Cell Selection for the Directed Evolution of Proteins (Doctoral Dissertation, Chemistry and Biochemistry, Arizona State University, Tempe, 2009).
  26. E. Hackett, D. Conz, J. Parker, J. Bashford, and S. DeLay. Res. Pol. 33, 747 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2003.12.002
  27. J. Robert, C. Miller, I. Bennett and S. Hays (eds.), Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society, Volume 3 (Springer, New York, forthcoming 2011).
  28. L. Zonneveld, H. Dijstelbloem, and D. Ringoir, Reshaping the Human Condition: Exploring Human Enhancement (Rathenau Institute, The Hague, 2008).

Cited by

  1. The Discussions around Precision Genetic Engineering: Role of and Impact on Disabled People vol.5, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3390/laws5030037
  2. Staff’s Views from One Canadian Organ Procurement Organization on Organ Donation and Organ Transplant Technologies: a Content Analysis vol.11, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-017-0292-7
  3. Once the rockets are up, who should care where they come down? The problem of responsibility ascription for the negative consequences of biofuel innovations vol.5, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-1758-8
  4. De-Facto Science Policy in the Making: How Scientists Shape Science Policy and Why it Matters (or, Why STS and STP Scholars Should Socialize) vol.51, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-013-9234-x
  5. Responsible innovation, the art and craft of anticipation vol.1, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.882064
  6. RRI as the inheritor of deliberative democracy and the precautionary principle 2017, https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1331097
  7. “The Train Has Left the Station”: The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies and the Shaping of Nanotechnology Policy in the United States vol.30, pp.5, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12034
  8. Nano-Industry Operationalizations of “Responsibility”: Charting Diversity in the Enactment of Responsibility vol.30, pp.5, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12032
  9. Employment, Disabled People and Robots: What Is the Narrative in the Academic Literature and Canadian Newspapers? vol.6, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3390/soc6020015