See STEPS co-director Andy Stirling's presentation - From Precaution to Robustness: in governance of technological vulnerability - prepared as background to discussion at the workshop on The Vulnerability of Technological Cultures: new directions in research and governance, Maastricjt, 1-3 June 2008

1. From Precaution to Robustness:
in governance of technological vulnerability
Andy Stirling, SPRU
these slides wee prepared from various presentations as background to the
discussion at the workshop on The Vulnerability of Technological Cultures:
new directions in research and governance, Maastricjt, 1-3 June 2008

2. Technology Progress as Social Choice
conventional ‘linear’ understandings of
technology change still prevail in
mainstream technology governance TECHNOLOGY
eg:
“… this government's approach is to make progress
decisions … on the basis of sound science”
- Tony Blair
[there is] an anti-technology culture in the
“
UK …a pro-technology culture must be SCIENCE
created…” - Council on Science & Tech
“politicians in power are affected by the anti-
science or anti-technology feelings of
influential intellectuals.” - EU HLG on S&T

3. Technology Progress as Social Choice
conventional ‘linear’ understandings of
technology change still prevail in
mainstream technology governance FUTURE
eg:
“history is a race to advance technology” time
- Royal Academy of Engineering
„anti-technology protestors‟ are “…
members of the 'flat earth society’,
opposed to modern economics, modern PAST
technology, modern science, modern life
itself.” – UN DDG

4. Technology Progress as Social Choice
space of technological
possibilities
time

5. Technology Progress as Social Choice
space of technological
possibilities
time
- different disciplines agree over pathway dynamics of technology
(shaping / contingency / momentum / trajectories / lock-in / entrapment)
- each path displays different forms and distributions of vulnerability
- all are subject to divergent framings and incomplete knowledge
- raises questions over precaution and robustness in pathway choice

6. Technology Progress as Social Choice
space of technological
possibilities
time
- politics of technology choice underlies many set-piece ‘risk’ debates
eg: centralised thermal power / distributed renewable energy
industrial GM agriculture / low-input, marker-assisted breeding
halogenated hydrocarbons / ‘closed loop’ materials and energy
private urban automobiles / integrated public transportation
IP-driven pharmaceuticals / preventive open-source public health
consumer product-based IT / internet access to service-based IT

7. Technology Progress as Social Choice
space of technological
possibilities
time
- not all possibilities can be realised (especially in globalised markets)
eg: centralised thermal power / distributed renewable energy
industrial GM agriculture / low-input, marker-assisted breeding
halogenated hydrocarbons / ‘closed loop’ materials and energy
private urban automobiles / integrated public transportation
IP-driven pharmaceuticals / preventive open-source public health
consumer product-based IT / internet access to service-based IT

8. Technology Progress as Social Choice
space of technological
possibilities
time
- technology vulnerabilities doubly-constituted by evolution and closure
1 intrinsic indeterminacies of technology change cause general vulnerabilities
which typically bear most acutely on the least powerful social groups
2 closure on particular paths reflect incumbent interests and exclude others
compounds disempowerment, disappropriation with specific vulnerabilities

9. Technology Progress as Social Choice
space of technological
possibilities
time
challenges for governance of technological vulnerability
epistemic: uncertain and contested understandings of complex dynamics
needs precaution in appraisal (knowledge production, learning)
ontological: material intractability to action: technology and nature ‘bite back’
needs resilience and robustness in technology commitments

10. A Reflective ‘Systems’ View
inchoate array of
physical, social and
technological
entities and
relationships

11. A Reflective ‘Systems’ View
environment
‘system’

12. A Reflexive Co-Productionist View
environment
FRAMINGS
‘system’

13. A Reflexive Co-Productionist View
context
environment
FRAMINGS
‘system’

14. A ‘Critical Political’ View
context
environment
subaltern
framings
system
hegemonic
framing

15. A ‘Critical Political’ View
context
environment eg: nuclear power
subaltern
framings
system
hegemonic
framing

16. Precaution against Incertitude
Rio Declaration, Principle 15 (1992):
“In order to protect the environment, the precautionary
approach shall be widely applied by States according to their
capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or
irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall
not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective
measures to prevent environmental degradation”
Ambiguous and contested as a ‘decision rule’ in ‘risk management’:
‘threats’? ‘serious’? ‘irreversible’? ‘certainty’?
proportionality? contending uncertainties?
Greater clarity and convergence as a process of ‘social appraisal’
more broad-based frameworks for understanding contending
technological pathways and associated vulnerabilities

17. Contrasting Aspects of Incertitude
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic problematic
unproblematic
knowledge
about
likelihoods
problematic

18. Contrasting Aspects of Incertitude
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic problematic
unproblematic RISK
known pathogens
normal flood / drought
familiar toxins / hazards
knowledge
about
likelihoods
problematic

19. Contrasting Aspects of Incertitude
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic problematic
unproblematic RISK
known pathogens
normal flood / drought
familiar toxins / hazards
knowledge
about
likelihoods
mutated pathogens
local climate change
unfamiliar toxins / hazards
problematic UNCERTAINTY

20. Contrasting Aspects of Incertitude
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic problematic
unproblematic RISK AMBIGUITY
known pathogens different interests / priorities
normal flood / drought divergent notions of harm
familiar toxins / hazards trust, fairness, ethics
knowledge
about
likelihoods
mutated pathogens
local climate change
unfamiliar toxins / hazards
problematic UNCERTAINTY

21. Contrasting Aspects of Incertitude
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic problematic
unproblematic RISK AMBIGUITY
known pathogens different interests / priorities
normal flood / drought divergent notions of harm
knowledge familiar toxins / hazards trust, fairness, ethics
about
likelihoods
mutated pathogens unknowns, surprise, novelty
local climate change new vectors / forms of harm
unfamiliar toxins / hazards (CFCs-ozone, BSE, EDCs)
problematic UNCERTAINTY IGNORANCE

22. Alternative Approaches to Appraisal
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic problematic
unproblematic RISK AMBIGUITY
risk / cost-benefit analysis participatory deliberation
multi-criteria assessment scenarios / backcasting
probabilistic techniques MC mapping, q-method
knowledge
about
likelihoods
uncertainty heuristics monitor, surveil, research
interval analysis social / institutional learning
sensitivity analysis adaptive management
problematic UNCERTAINTY IGNORANCE

23. Pressures for Reductive Aggregation
need for reflexivity over epistemic dynamics of power
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic problematic
unproblematic RISK decision rules AMBIGUITY
aggregative analysis
deliberative process
political closure
knowledge evidence-basing
about reductive modeling `
agenda-setting
likelihoods stochastic reasoning
horizon scanning
rules of thumb
transdisciplinarity
insurance
liability law
harm definitions
indicators / metrics
institutional remits
problematic UNCERTAINTY IGNORANCE

24. Pressures for Reductive Aggregation
need for reflexivity over epistemic dynamics of power
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic problematic
unproblematic RISK AMBIGUITY
knowledge POWER DYNAMICS
about
there is a tendency for
likelihoods
incumbent institutions to
favour reductive-aggregative
appraisal procedures
to justify favoured pathways
problematic UNCERTAINTY IGNORANCE

25. Pressures for Reductive Aggregation
need for reflexivity over epistemic dynamics of power
knowledge about outcomes
unproblematic problematic
unproblematic RISK AMBIGUITY
knowledge PRECAUTION:
about ‘broaden out’ view of
likelihoods incertitude: frameworks,
methods, pathways,
pros & cons, perspectives
problematic UNCERTAINTY IGNORANCE

26. Precaution as Broadening of Appraisal
(after EEA, 2001)
extend scope additive, cumulative, synergistic effects; life cycles, compliance
real world effects: CFCs, DES; „closed systems‟: MTBE, PCBs
humility on science sensitivities & proxies: mobility, persistence, bioaccumulation
omission of persistence in organochlorines, MTBE, CFCs
active research prioritise open monitoring & surveillance & targeted experiment
neglected: TBT, BSE; no monitoring: asbestos, benzene, PCBs
deliberate argument levels of proof, burden of evidence, onus of persuasion
Swann committee on antimicrobials, 1967 later ignored
alternative options pros, cons, justifications for range of options & substitutes
ALARA, BAT, BPM – ionising radiation, fisheries, acid rain
institutional learning collect all relevant knowledge, beyond the ‘usual suspects’
MTBE / engineers; BSE / vets (clinical / toxicology / epidaem.)
Public engagement independence through pluralism and robustness on values
benzene, DES, asbestos, acid rain, fisheries

27. From Knowledge to Action
challenges for governance of technological vulnerability
epistemic: uncertain and contested understandings of complex dynamics
needs precaution in appraisal (knowledge production, learning)

28. From Knowledge to Action
challenges for governance of technological vulnerability
epistemic: uncertain and contested understandings of complex dynamics
needs precaution in appraisal (knowledge production, learning)
ontological: material intractability to action: technology and nature ‘bite back’
needs resilience and robustness in technology commitments

29. From Precaution to Robustness
how and under what conditions and perspectives do
resilience and robustness reduce technological vulnerabilities?
like ‘sustainability’, dynamic properties are normatively nonspecific
- if referring to structure, then intrinsically conservative
- if referring to incumbent interests, then intrinsically regressive
- if referring to measures against vulnerability, then normatively progressive
key questions are therefore:
- what are the salient features of resilience, robustness (etc…)?
(in dynamics of vulnerability in technological pathways)
- how might we be more specific about the governance implications?
(with greater reflexivity about dynamics of framing and power)

30. From Precaution to Robustness
aim of governance intervention
control response
(vulnerability arises (vulnerability arises
internal to control system) external to control system)
shock
(vulnerability to
transient disruption)
temporality
of target
vulnerabilities
stress
(vulnerability to
enduring shift)

31. From Precaution to Robustness
aim of governance intervention
control response
(vulnerability arises (vulnerability arises
internal to control system) external to control system)
shock
(vulnerability to STABILITY
transient disruption)
temporality
of target
vulnerabilities
stress
(vulnerability to
enduring shift)

32. From Precaution to Robustness
NB: ‘context’ includes both
positive notions of ‘system
environment and
constructivist notions of
subjective framings
STABILITY
context
system
endogenous vulnerabilities are held to be
disruption broadly subject to control
system
(eg: routine optimising
management of pest
outbreaks in intensive
monocultures)

33. From Precaution to Robustness
aim of governance intervention
control response
(vulnerability arises (vulnerability arises
internal to control system) external to control system)
shock
(vulnerability to STABILITY
transient disruption)
temporality
of target
vulnerabilities
stress
(vulnerability to DURABILITY
enduring shift)

34. From Precaution to Robustness
context
system
internal
stresses
DURABILITY

35. From Precaution to Robustness
context
system
internal
stresses
DURABILITY

36. From Precaution to Robustness
context
system
internal
stresses
DURABILITY

37. From Precaution to Robustness
context
system
internal
stresses
DURABILITY

38. From Precaution to Robustness
context
system
internal vulnerabilities are held to be
stresses broadly subject to control
system
(eg: active adaptations against
soil erosion in intensive
DURABILITY agricultural systems)

39. From Precaution to Robustness
aim of governance intervention
control response
(vulnerability arises (vulnerability arises
internal to control system) external to control system)
shock
(vulnerability to STABILITY RESILIENCE
transient disruption)
temporality
of target
vulnerabilities
stress
(vulnerability to DURABILITY
enduring shift)

40. From Precaution to Robustness
RESILIENCE
context
system
vulnerabilities are held to be
beyond control system,
so subject only to response
(eg: maintaining productivity
of specific farming system transient exogenous shocks
through episodic drought)

41. From Precaution to Robustness
aim of governance intervention
control response
(vulnerability arises (vulnerability arises
internal to control system) external to control system)
shock
(vulnerability to STABILITY RESILIENCE
transient disruption)
temporality
of target
vulnerabilities
stress
(vulnerability to DURABILITY ROBUSTNESS
enduring shift)

42. From Precaution to Robustness
secular context
external
stress
system
ROBUSTNESS

43. From Precaution to Robustness
secular context
external
stress
system
ROBUSTNESS

44. From Precaution to Robustness
secular context
external
stress
system
ROBUSTNESS

45. From Precaution to Robustness
secular context
external
stress
system
ROBUSTNESS

46. From Precaution to Robustness
secular context
external
stress
vulnerabilities are held to be
beyond control system, so system
subject only to response
(eg: transforming /
passive adaptation of
farming system to long term
secular change in climate)
ROBUSTNESS

47. From Precaution to Robustness
STABILITY RESILIENCE
context context
system system
endogenous
disruption
transient exogenous shocks
DURABILITY ROBUSTNESS
context secular context
system external
stress
internal system
stresses

48. Dynamic Properties of Sustainability
aim of governance intervention
control response
(vulnerability arises (vulnerability arises
internal to control system) external to control system)
shock
(vulnerability to STABILITY RESILIENCE
transient disruption)
temporality
of target
vulnerabilities
stress
(vulnerability to DURABILITY ROBUSTNESS
enduring shift)

49. Dynamic Properties of Sustainability
aim of governance intervention
control response
(vulnerability arises (vulnerability arises
internal to control system) external to control system)
shock
(vulnerability to STABILITY RESILIENCE
transient disruption)
temporality
of target SUSTAINABILITY
vulnerabilities
stress
(vulnerability to DURABILITY ROBUSTNESS
enduring shift)

50. Pressures for Incumbent Pathways
Need to be reflexive about the dynamics of power
aim of governance intervention
control response
(vulnerability arises (vulnerability arises
internal to control system) external to control system)
shock
(vulnerability to STABILITY RESILIENCE
transient disruption)
POWER DYNAMICS
temporality
tendency for incumbent
of target
institutions to favour
vulnerabilities
equilibrium strategies, which
preserve the status quo
stress
(vulnerability to DURABILITY ROBUSTNESS
enduring shift)

51. Pressures for Incumbent Pathways
Need to be reflexive about the dynamics of power
aim of governance intervention
control response
(vulnerability arises (vulnerability arises
internal to control system) external to control system)
shock
(vulnerability to STABILITY RESILIENCE
transient disruption)
eg - avian influenza:
temporality equilibrium methods, routinised
of target practices encoded in standard,
vulnerabilities global surveillance, early warning
and rapid response repertoires
stress
(vulnerability to DURABILITY ROBUSTNESS
enduring shift)

52. Pressures for Incumbent Pathways
Need to be reflexive about the dynamics of power
aim of governance intervention
control response
(vulnerability arises (vulnerability arises
internal to control system) external to control system)
shock
(vulnerability to STABILITY RESILIENCE
transient disruption) vigilant, responsive,
reactive, directed
equilibrium strategies absorptive strategies
temporality
of target
vulnerabilities
foresighted, persistent, agile, visionary.
malleable strategies supple strategies
stress
(vulnerability to DURABILITY ROBUSTNESS
enduring shift)

53. Contrasting Policy Implications
Strategic nuances of different dynamic properties
STABILITY RESILIENCE DURABILITY ROBUSTNESS
control shock respond to shock control stress respond to stress
specific (eg: outage) specific (eg: terror) specific (eg: peak oil) specific (eg: climate)
general general general general
INTENTIONAL directed clarity tenacity resolution
PURPOSE
fixity coherence vigour agility
POLITICAL prioritised focus persistence vision
ATTENTION
alertness vigilance foresight acuity
POLICY proportional targeted transitional transformative
INTERVENTION
reactive responsive flexible adaptive
SOCIO- optimised resistant applicable pliant
TECHNICAL
COMMITMENTS
elastic absorptive malleable supple