Skip to main content

Author: admin_tech_ethos_strong

TechEthos game workshops: exploring public awareness & attitudes

TechEthos game workshops: exploring public awareness & attitudes
30 January 2023

Authored by: Greta Alliaj
Reviewed by: Cristina Paca

Article | 30 January 2022

What might a world in which technologies like the metaverse or neuroimaging have reached their full potential look like? What would it be like to live in a reality where such technologies are deployed in the most diverse fields, from education to justice, passing through marketing and entertainment? Imagine a world where neuroimaging is used to diagnose predispositions to certain neurological diseases. Such diagnosis could allow health professionals to better prevent a disease or decrease its impact on the patient, but at the same time, it could take a toll on people’s personal and professional relationships. Would you be in favour of implementing this technology?

Last autumn, hundreds of citizens across Europe took part in the Tech Ethos Science Cafés and engaged with scientists, innovators and civil society representatives to learn more about our three families of technologies. Now, the six science engagement organisations involved in the project are ready to build on this experience and invite all technology enthusiasts out there to play our new board game: The Tech Ethos game: Ages of Technology Impacts.

The TechEthos game is part of a longer workshop aimed at exploring the public’s attitudes towards Digital Extended Reality, Neurotechnologies and Climate Engineering. Participants will be invited to sit on their regional delegation to the Citizen World Council and decide what may be best for future generations and the Planet. Participants will forge the future starting from a set of technologies whose potential is not yet fully realised and each of their choices will have unforeseeable consequences.

Each round, players will be asked to discuss and agree on which technologies they would like to see further developed in their ideal future and, to do so, they will be confronted with the ethical implications of these choices. What will be the values and principles that will guide their decisions?

Throughout the different activities of the workshop, participants will have the opportunity to listen and learn from each other, express their concerns and defend their beliefs. This exchange will provide the project with insights into public attitudes and views on new and emerging technologies.

18 game workshops will take place in Austria, Czech Republic, Romania, Serbia, Spain, and Sweden. To capture a broader and richer perspective, the six science engagement centres will collaborate with associations supporting groups whose access to such activities is often hindered by economic and social factors.

Developed in co-creation with science engagement and game experts, the TechEthos game is essential in capturing ethical and societal values. This moves us closer to the project’s end goal, producing ethics guidelines that considers such values in the earliest phases of technology design and development.

Would you be interested in taking part in the conversation and shaping your ideal world? Have a look at our game resource page, keep an eye on the activities of TechEthos science engagement centres and follow us on Twitter and LinkedIn.

More about the game

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

The TechEthos game: Ages of Technology Impacts

Tool
The TechEthos game: Ages of Technology Impact

Developed in co-creation with science engagement professionals and game experts, the TechEthos game aims at capturing societal attitudes, values and concerns towards Digital Extended Reality, Neurotechnologies and Climate Engineering.

Have a look at the game rulebook and discover how participants will forge their ideal world

A co-creation process

The TechEthos game was developed using the Triadic Game Design methodology in a series of workshops with science engagement professionals and game experts. This allowed the key principles of the game to emerge and guide the design choices. This process has been captured in a project report.

Image gallery

The TechEthos game is available in 7 languages (English, German, Czech, Romanian, Serbian, Spanish, and Swedish). Here is a glimpse of what it looks like:

  • TE game | 31 January 2023

    TechEthos_image_game-gallery_07

    TechEthos game version in Spanish. Photo: Parque de las Ciencias.
  • TE game | 31 January 2023

    TechEthos_image_game gallery_05

    TechEthos game voting cards. Photo: Marko Risovic/ Center for the Promotion of Science.
  • TE game | 31 January 2023

    TechEthos_image_game-gallery_01

    TechEthos board and cards. Photo: Marko Risovic/ Center for the Promotion of Science.
  • TechEthos_image_gamegallery_09

    TechEthos game workshop at the Center for the Promotion of Science. Photo: Marko Risovic/ Center for the Promotion of Science.

  • TE game | 31 January 2023

    TechEthos_image_game gallery_02

    TechEthos cards from the Natural Language Processing (NLP) deck. Photo: Marko Risovic/ Center for the Promotion of Science.
  • TE game | 31 January 2022

    TechEthos_image_game gallery_06

    TechEthos game box created at the Center for the Promotion of Science. Photo: Marko Risovic/ Center for the Promotion of Science.
  • TE game | 31 January 2023

    TechEthos_image_game-gallery_03

    TechEthos World Card. Photo: Marko Risovic/ Center for the Promotion of Science.
  • TE game | 31 January 2023

    TechEthos_image_game-gallery_04

    Internal workshop at the Center for the Promotion of Science. Photo: Marko Risovic/ Center for the Promotion of Science.
  • TechEthos_image_gamegallery_08

    TechEthos game workshop at the Center for the Promotion of Science. Photo: Marko Risovic/ Center for the Promotion of Science.

Interested to try the game?

Get in touch

teamGreta Alliaj
Ecsite – European Network of Science Centres and Museums

galliaj@ecsite.eu

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Tools to develop and advance scenarios dealing with the ethics of new technologies

Deliverable
Tools to develop and advance
scenarios dealing with the ethics
of new technologies

Publication | 15 December 2022

In short

This report describes the process of co-creation of the TechEthos game that was developed to enhance the TechEthos scenarios.

It also presents the results of employing the Triadic Game Design methodology as an approach to working with expert game design stakeholders across the dedicated workshops in order to resolve emerging value tensions in game design.

The game resulting from the co-creation activities with expert stakeholders will be used in conjunction with the TechEthos scenarios and both expert and citizen participants to surface ethical issues and concerns in those scenarios and, consequently, helping to enhance the scenarios in order to be more comprehensive in their breadth.

Authors

Steven Umbrello, Delft University of Technology (TUD), Pieter Vermaas, TUD, Cristina Paca, European Network of Science Centres and Museums (Ecsite), Greta Alliaj, Ecsite, Andrew Whittington-Davis, Ecsite, Fabrice Jouvenot, Ecsite, Michael J. Bernstein, AIT Austrian Institute of Technology (AIT), Wenzel Mehnert, AIT, Masafumi Nishi, AIT, Eva Buchinger, AIT.

Date of publication

15 December 2022

Status

Draft version submitted to the European Commission for review

Cite this resource

Umbrello, S., Vermaas, P., Paca, C., Alliaj, G., Nishi, M., Whittington, A., Jouvenot, F., Bernstein, M.J., Mehnert, W., Buchinger, E., (2022). Tools to develop and advance scenarios dealing with the ethics of new technologies. TechEthos Project Deliverable. Available at: www.techethos.eu.

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Newsletter #4: Spotlight on TechEthos analysis of international & EU law

Newsletter #4
Spotlight on TechEthos analysis of international & EU law on new and emerging technologies

Newsletter | 09 November 2022

In short

Welcome to the fourth instalment of the TechEthos newsletter. This issue highlights the key findings of TechEthos analysis of international and EU law and policy. Have a look and learn more about our human rights impact assessment, get familiar with the key role of our Advisory and Impact Board, and discover materials and resources that we think you may find useful. Additional resources, tools and events relevant to the TechEthos community complete this edition.

Date of publication

9 November 2022

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Moral Equivalence of the Metaverse

Publication
Moral Equivalence in the Metaverse

Publication | 17 November 2022

In short

This scientific paper dives into the question “Are digital subjects in virtual reality morally equivalent to human subjects?”, from the perspective of cognitive and emotional equivalence. It builds on TechEthos’ analysis of ethical issues concerning Digital Extended Reality and expands significantly on the question of moral transfer, including themes of identity, action, responsibility, and imitating human language and appearance.

Authors

Alexei Grinbaum, Commissariat à l’Énergie Atomique et aux Énergies Alternatives (CEA), Laurynas Adomaitis, CEA.

Date of publication

11 October 2022

Cite this paper

Grinbaum, A., Adomaitis, L. (2022). Moral Equivalence in the Metaverse. Nanoethics. 16, 257-270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-022-00426-x

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Neurotechnologies through the lens of human rights law

Neurotechnologies through the lens of human rights law
06 october 2022

Authored by: Ben Howkins and Julie Vinders
Reviewed by: Corinna Pannofino and Anaïs Resseguier

Article | 06 October 2022

Technological innovation can both enhance and disrupt society in various ways. It often raises complex legal questions regarding the suitability of existing laws to maximise the benefits to society, whilst also mitigating potentially harmful consequences. Some emerging technologies even challenge us to rethink the ways in which our fundamental rights as human beings are protected by law. What happens, for example, to the right to not self-incriminate if advanced neurotechnologies in the courtroom can provide insights into a defendant’s mental state?

As a means of directly accessing, analysing, and manipulating the neural system, neurotechnologies have a range of use applications, presenting the potential for both enhancements to and interferences with protected human rights. In an educational context, insights on how the brain works during the learning process gained from research on neuroscience and the use of neurotechnologies may lead to more effective teaching methods and improved outcomes linked to the right to education. This may enhance the rights of children, particularly those with disabilities, yet more research is required to assess whether there is the potential for long-term impacts to brain development. The (mis)use of neurotechnologies in the workplace context, meanwhile, may negatively impact an individual’s right to enjoy the right to rest and leisure by increasing workload, or instead positively enhance this right by improving efficiency and creating more time and varied opportunities for rest and leisure.

Neurotechnologies and medical treatment

The primary use application of neurotechnologies is in a clinical context, both as a means of improving understanding of patients’ health and as a means of administering clinical treatment, the effects of which have the potential to enhance various protected human rights in conjunction with the right to health. For example, neurotechnologies may facilitate communication in persons whose verbal communication skills are impaired, the benefits of which are directly linked to the right to freedom of expression. Additionally, neurotechnologies may be used to diagnose and treat the symptoms of movement disorders such as Parkinson’s disease, thereby potentially enhancing the rights to dignity and autonomy of persons with disabilities.

However, the clinical use of neurotechnologies requires compliance with legal and bioethical principles such as consent and the right to refuse treatment, without which the protected rights of users may be interfered with. A particular concern is that the clinical use of neurotechnologies may lead to infringements with the right to non-discrimination, specifically in the form of neurodiscrimination, whereby the insights from brain data processed by neurotechnologies form the basis of differential treatment between individuals, for instance in insurance and employment contexts. From this a key consideration emerges, namely whether brain data is adequately protected by the existing right to privacy, or whether there is a need for a putative right to mental privacy, amongst a range of novel human rights protections, including a right to cognitive liberty, a right to mental integrity and a right to psychological continuity. The essential premise behind these proposed ‘neurorights’ is that the existing human rights framework needs revising to ensure individuals are adequately protected against certain neuro-specific interferences, including the proposed ‘neurocrime’ of brain-hacking.

Neurotechnologies and the legal system

Neurotechnologies are also increasingly being used in the justice system, wherein they may enhance an individual’s right to a fair trial, for instance by ‘establishing competency of individuals to stand trial’ and informing rules on the appropriate ‘age of criminal responsibility’. However, the use of neurotechnologies may also interfere with access to justice and the right to a fair trial. For example, advanced neurotechnologies capable of gathering data on mental states consistent with one’s thoughts and emotions risks interfering with the right to presumption of innocence or the privilege against self-incrimination. An additional consideration in this context is the right of individuals to choose to or opt against benefitting from scientific progress, the relevance of which is that individuals cannot be compelled by States to use neurotechnologies, except in certain limited circumstances determined by the law. The enforced use of neurotechnologies in justice systems could therefore interfere with the right to choose to opt against “benefitting” from scientific progress, as well as the right to a fair trial and access to justice.

Neurotechnologies and future human rights challenges

Finally, whilst this study has highlighted the ways in which neurotechnologies may already affect the enjoyment of fundamental human rights, the potential for enhancements to and interferences with these protected rights may increase as the technological state of the art progresses. For example, although primarily contemplated within the realm of science fiction, in a future reality the use of neurotechnologies may challenge the strictness of the dichotomy between ‘life’ and ‘death’ by enabling ‘neurological functioning’ to be sustained independently of other bodily functions. This may affect States’ obligations to ensure the full enjoyment of the right to life, while also raising questions around the appropriate regulation of commercial actors seeking to trade on the promise of supposed immortality

Next in TechEthos – is there a need to expand human rights law?

The study highlights the importance of bringing a human rights law perspective into the development of neurotechnologies. The human rights impact assessment is a mechanism designed to help ensure that new and emerging technologies, including neurotechnologies, develop in a manner that respects human rights, while also enabling the identification of potential gaps and legal uncertainties early on in the development stage. The analysis also raises the question as to whether further legislation may be required to address these gaps. Crucial to this question is the need to strike a balance between ensuring technological development does not interfere with fundamental human rights protections and avoiding overregulating emerging technologies at an early stage and thereby stifling further development.

Read more about the human rights law implications of climate engineering and digital extended reality.

Read the report

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Digital extended reality through the lens of human rights law

Digital extended reality through the lens of human rights law
06 October 2022

Authored by: Ben Howkins and Julie Vinders
Reviewed by: Corinna Pannofino and Anaïs Resseguier

Article | 06 October 2022

Technological innovation can both enhance and disrupt society in various ways. It often raises complex legal questions regarding the suitability of existing laws to maximise the benefits to society, whilst also mitigating potentially harmful consequences. Some emerging technologies even challenge us to rethink the ways in which our fundamental rights as human beings are protected by the law. For instance, how might digital extended reality (XR) affect online safety and the emerging rights to be online and to disconnect?

XR technologies have an assortment of uses and applications, from gaming and filmmaking to healthcare and education. Each use case of XR creates the potential for enhancements to and interferences with various human rights, including new and emerging rights, such as the right to a healthy environment, a right to disconnect and a right to be online.
The use of XR gaming applications, for instance, is consistent with the right to benefit from scientific progress and may enhance the right to rest and leisure of all users. It may benefit persons with disabilities in particular, whose right to autonomy, for instance, may be enhanced by being able to access leisure experiences perhaps otherwise unattainable in the physical world. However, the use of XR gaming applications may also lead to increased incidences of cyberbullying, harassment, and virtual sexual assault, the experiencing of which may interfere with the realisation of the rights of women and children, in particular.

XR and possible use cases

In addition to particular use cases, there are also a variety of contexts in which the use of XR technologies may lead to both positive and negative impacts on the realisation of fundamental rights. In the clinical context, for instance, XR may enhance the right of healthcare professionals to just and favourable conditions of work when used to provide low-risk, hyper-realistic training experiences designed to improve overall healthcare provision. For patients, meanwhile, the clinical use of XR may lead to benefits linked to the right to health. Such applications may also enhance other protected rights, with the use of XR technologies to treat psychological trauma, for instance, potentially enhancing the right to dignity of victims of criminal offences. There is a risk, however, that the use of XR in a clinical setting could interfere with these protected rights, for instance if patients experience short or long-term health-related harms through the use of XR, such as motion sickness and depersonalisation / derealisation disorder.

Developing XR in accordance with human rights

In an educational context, the use of XR technologies may lead to improved learning outcomes linked to the right to education, including by accommodating specific educational needs, the benefits of which relate to the enjoyment of the rights of persons with disabilities on the basis of non-discrimination. Similarly, the incorporation of XR into the judicial system may enhance an individual’s right to a fair trial by improving the accessibility of legal proceedings, enabling evidential recreation of events, and helping to provide legal professionals with anti-bias training in order to maintain fairness. In both contexts, however, there is also a risk that the use of XR may lead to interferences with these rights, particularly if adopted without consideration of the potential drawbacks.

As such, the use of XR as an educational tool, for instance, should be informed by research on information overload and the possible effects on brain and neurological development in children, without which potentially safer and more effective teaching measures may be deprioritised or underfunded. Likewise, the use of XR in legal proceedings should be guided by factors including the suitability of virtual participation and the accessibility of XR technology. The right of access to justice may otherwise be undermined, for instance by serving to promote a form of participation of inferior type or quality in comparison to in-person participation, or by exacerbating existing accessibility issues faced by disadvantaged parties.

XR and future human rights challenges

There are certain human rights considered in this study for which XR technologies may enhance enjoyment while also raising challenging issues which fall short of constituting interferences. In relation to the right to freedom of expression, for instance, XR applications may facilitate new forms of creative expression in a variety of mediums, including music, narrative storytelling, and art. Yet there are also concerns related to the appropriate treatment of content in XR depicting violence, pornography, hate speech and mis/disinformation. This creates a tension between the right of everyone to freedom of expression and the obligation on States to protect users of XR from potentially harmful content and interferences with other fundamental rights. In seeking to resolve this conflict, States are required to strike a balance between unrestricted freedom and legitimate limitations.

Next in TechEthos – is there a need to expand human rights law?

The study highlights the importance of bringing a human rights law perspective into the development of new and emerging technologies, including XR. The human rights impact assessment is a mechanism designed to help ensure that such technologies develop in a manner that respects human rights, while also enabling the identification of potential gaps and legal uncertainties early on in the development stage. The analysis also raises the question as to whether further legislation may be required to address these gaps. Crucial to this question is the need to strike a balance between ensuring technological development does not interfere with fundamental human rights protections and avoiding overregulating emerging technologies at an early stage and thereby stifling further development.

Read more about the human rights law implications of climate engineering and neurotechnologies.

Read the report

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Climate engineering through the lens of human rights law

Climate engineering through the lens of human rights law
05 September 2022

Authored by: Ben Howkins and Julie Vinders
Reviewed by:Corinna Pannofino and Anaïs Resseguier

Article | 05 September 2022

Technological innovation can both enhance and disrupt society in various ways. It often raises complex legal questions regarding the suitability of existing laws to maximise the benefits to society, whilst mitigating potential negative consequences. Some emerging technologies even challenge us to rethink the ways in which our fundamental rights as human beings are protected by law. For example, how do your rights as an individual stack up if your local environment is affected by climate engineering activities aimed at addressing global climate change?

Whilst aimed at tackling climate change, climate engineering may in itself impact human rights in a variety of ways, typically either by way of enhancement or interference. Human rights relevant to climate engineering can be split between substantive rights – which are freestanding rights possessed by individuals (such as the right to life, or health) – and procedural rights, which relate to administrative procedure and enforcement of substantive rights (such as the right to be informed or have access to legal remedies).

Substantive human rights

The substantive rights most relevant in the context of climate engineering include the right to life, the right to a healthy environment, the right to health, the right to access food, and the right to water. Climate engineering is intended to mitigate the harms of climate change and may therefore enhance some of these substantive rights. However, it could also in itself result in serious environmental harms affecting human lives and their environment. The right to life encompasses threats to the quality and dignity of life, including those related to human health and access to food and water. Climate engineering activities have the potential to, albeit unintentionally, adversely, and potentially irreversibly affect the climate in some locations. This may affect precipitation patterns, possibly inducing drought conditions and reducing food and water security, which can either directly or indirectly affect the right to life, a healthy environment, health, food and water.

Rights related to scientific research

A subset of substantive rights relevant to climate engineering pertains to scientific research. States are required to respect the freedom indispensable for scientific research and everyone has the right to benefit from scientific research. Additionally, research participants are protected by various rights, including the general prohibition on torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Thus, whilst researchers are freely able to develop climate engineering technologies, any testing is subject to obtaining free and informed consent from all impacted individuals. In the context of real-world climate engineering testing, however, any resultant effect to the Earth’s climate system is unlikely to be contained within a specific area, due to its global scale. This means that communities worldwide may essentially become research participants. It follows that the practical difficulties of obtaining consent from prospective research participants, as well as the adequate protection of intellectual property rights related to innovation and research, are two of the main legal challenges in relation to climate engineering technologies.

Public participation and procedural rights

On the issue of obtaining consent for climate engineering activities from all impacted individuals, procedural human rights offer a set of participation rights, which include the right to information, the right to participate in public affairs, and the right to access legal remedies. Information about climate engineering activities, particularly from public bodies, falls within the remit of the right to information. The European Court of Human Rights has assessed the right to environmental information in relation to the right to respect for private and family life, as well as the right to freedom of expression, and observed that these rights may be violated if a State fails or refuses to provide information. Furthermore, everyone has the right to engage in public affairs, including public debate and decision-making in relation to climate engineering. States should give citizens the possibility to participate in public affairs and exert influence through public debate and dialogue. In addition, the right to access legal remedies seeks to ensure individuals have access to legal recourse in the event of alleged human rights violations. This means that, according to international and EU law, individuals should have legal recourse if they were not adequately informed, involved in public dialogue, or their informed consent was not obtained in relation to climate engineering activities. Individuals also have a right to recourse if their substantive rights are violated by climate engineering.

Next in TechEthos – is there a need to expand human rights law?

The study highlights the importance of bringing a human rights law perspective into the development of new and emerging technologies, including climate engineering. The human rights impact assessment helps to ensure that such technologies develop in a manner that respects human rights, while also enabling the identification of potential gaps and legal uncertainties early on in the development stage. The analysis also raises the question as to whether further legislation may be required to address these gaps. Crucial to this question is the need to strike a balance between ensuring technological development does not interfere with fundamental human rights protections, and avoiding overregulating emerging technologies at an early stage, and thereby stifling further development.

Read more about the human rights law implications of neurotechnologies and digital extended reality.

Read the report

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Exploring emerging technologies through the lens of human rights law

Exploring emerging technologies through the lens of human rights law
05 September 2022

Authored by: Ben Howkins and Julie Vinders
Reviewed by: Corinna Pannofino and Anaïs Resseguier

News | 5 September 2022

Technological innovation can both enhance and disrupt society in various ways. It often raises complex legal questions regarding the suitability of existing laws to maximise the benefits to society, whilst mitigating potential negative consequences. Some emerging technologies even challenge us to rethink the ways in which our fundamental rights as human beings are protected by law.

For example, how do your rights as an individual stack up if your local environment is affected by climate engineering activities aimed at addressing global climate change? Or what would happen to the right to not self-incriminate if advanced neurotechnologies in the courtroom can provide insights into a defendant’s mental state? And how might digital extended reality (XR) affect online safety and the emerging rights to be online and to disconnect?

A human rights impact assessment

A recent study by the TechEthos project analysed international and European Union (EU) human rights law, including the International Bill of Human Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (CFREU), in relation to climate engineering, neurotechnologies and digital extended reality (XR). While such legal frameworks do not explicitly mention climate engineering, many of the provisions contained therein are nonetheless likely to be directly applicable. By highlighting the potential for enhancements to and interferences with various human rights, the study essentially provides a human rights impact assessment of the three technology families. It identifies some gaps and legal uncertainties, which may give rise to the need for further legislation, or at least further legal clarification in the future.

Read more about the human rights law implications of Climate Engineering, Neurotechnologies and Digital Extended Reality.

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Newsletter #3: A summer edition of the TechEthos newsletter

Newsletter #3
A summer edition of the TechEthos newsletter

Newsletter | 26 July 2022

In short

Welcome to the third issue of the TechEthos Newsletter. In this summer edition we are delighted to announce the publication of three sets of key findings that enhance our understanding of the implications of TechEthos technology families. Have a look and learn more about the results of our ethical, legal and media analyses, get a glimpse of the start of our societal engagement activities and discover our cluster of 16 like-minded projects working with us on Research Ethics.
Additional resources, tools and events relevant to the TechEthos community complete this edition.

Date of publication

26 July 2022

Share:

go to top

Continue reading