Experimentation, learning, and dialogue: an RRI-inspired approach to dual-use of concern

References

• Aicardi, Christine, Simisola Akintoye, B. Tyr Fothergill, Manuel Guerrero, Gudrun Klinker, William Knight, Lars Klüver, et al. 2020. “Ethical and Social Aspects of Neurorobotics.” Science and Engineering Ethics. doi:10.1007/s11948-020-00248-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aicardi, Christine, Lise Bitsch, Nicklas Bang Bådum, Saheli Datta, Kathinka Evers, Michele Farisco, Tyr Fothergill, et al. 2018a. “Opinion on ‘Responsible Dual Use’ Political, Security, Intelligence and Military Research of Concern in Neuroscience and Neurotechnology.” Zenodo. doi:10.5281/zenodo.4588601.
   Google Scholar
• Aicardi, Christine, B. Tyr Fothergill, Stephen Rainey, Bernd Carsten Stahl, and Emma Harris. 2018b. “Accompanying Technology Development in the Human Brain Project: From Foresight to Ethics Management.” Futures 102 (September): 114–124. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2018.01.005.
   Google Scholar
• Aicardi, Christine, Michael Reinsborough, and Nikolas Rose. 2018. “The Integrated Ethics and Society Programme of the Human Brain Project: Reflecting on an Ongoing Experience.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 5 (1): 13–37. doi:10.1080/23299460.2017.1331101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amunts, Katrin. 2020. “Overview of HBP and EBRAINS.” Presentation at the HBP Open Day, Athens, Greece, February 3.
   Google Scholar
• Amunts, Katrin, Christoph Ebell, Jeff Muller, Martin Telefont, Alois Knoll, and Thomas Lippert. 2016. “The Human Brain Project: Creating a European Research Infrastructure to Decode the Human Brain.” Neuron 92 (3): 574–581. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2016.10.046.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amunts, Katrin, Alois C. Knoll, Thomas Lippert, Cyriel M. A. Pennartz, Philippe Ryvlin, Alain Destexhe, Viktor K. Jirsa, Egidio D’Angelo, and Jan G. Bjaalie. 2019. “The Human Brain Project—Synergy Between Neuroscience, Computing, Informatics, and Brain-Inspired Technologies.” PLOS Biology 17 (7): e3000344. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3000344.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balmer, Andrew S., Jane Calvert, Claire Marris, Susan Molyneux-Hodgson, Emma Frow, Matthew Kearnes, Kate Bulpin, Pablo Schyfter, Adrian MacKenzie, and Paul Martin. 2015. “Taking Roles in Interdisciplinary Collaborations: Reflections on Working in Post-ELSI Spaces in the UK Synthetic Biology Community.” Science & Technology Studies 28 (3). https://sciencetechnologystudies.journal.fi/article/view/55340.
   Google Scholar
• Butorac, Isobel, Filippa Lentzos, and Christine Aicardi. 2021. “Gray Matters: Exploring Technologists’ Perceptions of Dual-Use Potentiality in Emerging Neurotechnology Applications.” Health Security 19 (4): 424–430.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collingridge, David. 1980. The Social Control of Technology. London: Frances Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• Delgado, Ana, and Heidrun Åm. 2018. “Experiments in Interdisciplinarity: Responsible Research and Innovation and the Public Good.” PLoS Biology 16 (3): e2003921.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doezema, Tess, David Ludwig, Phil Macnaghten, Clare Shelley-Egan, and Ellen-Marie Forsberg. 2019. “Translation, Transduction, and Transformation: Expanding Practices of Responsibility Across Borders.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 6 (3): 323–331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egeland, Cathrine, Ellen-Marie Forsberg, and Tatiana Maximova-Mentzoni. 2019. “RRI: Implementation as Learning.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 6 (3): 375–380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2019. “Horizon 2020 Programme. Guidance How to Complete Your Ethics Self-Assessment.” Version 6.1, February 4, 2018. Accessed August 20, 2019. https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/ethics/h2020_hi_ethics-self-assess_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. 2013. “Regulation (EU) No1291/2013 of 11 December 2013 Establishing Horizon 2020 – The Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014–2020).”
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, Erik. 2007. “Ethnographic Invention: Probing the Capacity of Laboratory Decisions.” NanoEthics 1 (2): 155–165. doi:10.1007/s11569-007-0016-5.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, Erik. 2020. “Necessary Conditions for Responsible Innovation.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 7 (2): 145–148. doi:10.1080/23299460.2020.1774105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forge, John. 2013. “Responsible Dual Use.” In On the Dual Use of Science and Ethics. Principles, Practices, and Prospects, edited by Brian Rappert and Michael J. Selgelid, 121–132. Canberra: ANU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frahm, Nina, Tess Doezema, and Sebastian Pfotenhauer. 2021. “Fixing Technology with Society: The Coproduction of Democratic Deficits and Responsible Innovation at the OECD and the European Commission.” Science, Technology, & Human Values. doi:10.1177/0162243921999100.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garden, Hermann, David E. Winickoff, Nina Maria Frahm, and Sebastian Pfotenhauer. 2019. Responsible Innovation in Neurotechnology Enterprises. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2019/05. Paris: OECD. doi:10.1787/9685e4fd-en.
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, John, and Clare Williams. 2015. “Responsible Research and Innovation: A Manifesto for Empirical Ethics?” Clinical Ethics 10 (1-2): 5–12. doi:10.1177/1477750914567840.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Giordano, James, and Kathinka Evers. 2018. “Dual Use in Neuroscientific and Neurotechnological Research: A Need for Ethical Address and Guidance.” In Ethics and Integrity in Health and Life Sciences Research, Advances in Research Ethics and Integrity, Vol. 4, 129–145. Emerald. doi:10.1108/S2398-601820180000004009.
   Google Scholar
• Ienca, Marcello, Fabrice Jotterand, and Bernice S. Elger. 2018. “From Healthcare to Warfare and Reverse: How Should We Regulate Dual-Use Neurotechnology?” Neuron 97 (2): 269–274. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2017.12.017.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila. 2003. “Technologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science.” Minerva 41 (3): 223–244. doi:10.1023/A:1025557512320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kavouras, Panagiotis, and Costas A. Charitidis. 2019. “Dual Use in Modern Research. Taming the Janus of Technological Advance.” In Handbook of Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity, edited by Ron Iphofen, 1–21. Springer Nature. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-76040-7_7-1.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhlmann, Stefan, Peter Stegmaier, and Kornelia Konrad. 2019. “The Tentative Governance of Emerging Science and Technology—A Conceptual Introduction.” Research Policy 48 (5): 1091–1097.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahfoud, Tara, Christine Aicardi, Saheli Datta, and Nikolas Rose. 2018. “The Limits of Dual Use.” Issues in Science and Technology, July 31. https://issues.org/the-limits-of-dual-use/.
   Google Scholar
• Molas-Gallart, Jordi. 1997. “Which Way to Go? Defence Technology and the Diversity of ‘Dual-Use’ Technology Transfer.” Research Policy 26 (3): 367–385. doi:10.1016/S00487333(97)00023-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NIH. 2019. “BRAIN Initiative 2.0 Neuroethics Report, The BRAIN Initiative and Neuroethics: Enabling and Enhancing Neuroscience Advances for Society.” Accessed April 2, 2020. https://braininitiative.nih.gov/strategic-planning/acd-working-groups/brain-initiative-and-neuroethics-enabling-and-enhancing.
   Google Scholar
• Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 2013. “Novel Neurotechnologies: Intervening in the Brain.” Accessed September 14, 2020. https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/publications/neurotechnology.
   Google Scholar
• OECD. 2019. “Recommendation of the Council on Responsible Innovation in Neurotechnology.” Accessed September 14, 2020. https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0457.
   Google Scholar
• Oltmann, Shannon. 2015. “Dual Use Research: Investigation Across Multiple Science Disciplines.” Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (2): 327–341. doi:10.1007/s11948-014-9535-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen, Richard, and Mario Pansera. 2019. “Responsible Innovation and Responsible Research and Innovation.” In Handbook on Science and Public Policy, edited by Dagmar Simon, Weert Canzler, Stefan Kuhlmann, and Julia Stamm, 26–48. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Owen, Richard, René von Schomberg, and Phil Macnaghten. 2021. “An Unfinished Journey? Reflections on a Decade of Responsible Research and Innovation.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 8 (2): 217–233. doi:10.1080/23299460.2021.1948789.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rainey, Stephen, Bernd Carsten Stahl, Mark Shaw, and Michael Reinsborough. 2019. “Ethics Management and Responsible Research and Innovation in the Human Brain Project.” In International Handbook on Responsible Innovation: A Global Resource, edited by René von Schomberg and Jonathan Hankins, 379–392. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Global Neuroethics Summit Delegates, K. S. Rommelfanger, S. J. Jeong, A. Ema, T. Fukushi, K. Kasai, K. M. Ramos, A. Salles, and I. Singh. 2018. “Neuroethics Questions to Guide Ethical Research in the International Brain Initiatives.” Neuron 100 (1): 19–36. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2018.09.021.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rychnovská, Dagmar. 2016. “Governing Dual-Use Knowledge: From the Politics of Responsible Science to Ethicalization of Security.” Security Dialogue 47 (4): 310–328. doi:10.1177/0967010616658848.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rychnovská, Dagmar. 2021. “Anticipatory Governance in Biobanking: Security and Risk Management in Digital Health.” Science and Engineering Ethics 27 (30): 1–18.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Salles, Arleen, Jan G. Bjaalie, Kathinka Evers, Michele Farisco, B. Tyr Fothergill, Manuel Guerrero, Hannah Maslen, et al. 2019. “The Human Brain Project: Responsible Brain Research for the Benefit of Society.” Neuron 101 (3): 380–384. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2019.01.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salles, Arleen, Kathinka Evers, and Michele Farisco. 2019. “Neuroethics and Philosophy in Responsible Research and Innovation: The Case of the Human Brain Project.” Neuroethics 12: 201–211. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12152-018-9372-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salles, Arleen, and Michele Farisco. 2020. “Of Ethical Frameworks and Neuroethics in Big Neuroscience Projects: A View from the HBP.” Ajob Neuroscience 11 (3): 167–175. doi:10.1080/21507740.2020.1778116.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sauer, Sabrina, and Federico Bonelli. 2020. “Collective Improvisation as a Means to Responsibly Govern Serendipity in Social Innovation Processes.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 7 (2): S44–S63.
   Google Scholar
• Stahl, Bernd Carsten, Simisola Akintoye, Lise Bitsch, Berit Bringedal, Damian Eke, Michele Farisco, Karin Grasenick, et al. 2021. “From Responsible Research and Innovation to Responsibility by Design.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 8 (2): 175–198. doi:10.1080/23299460.2021.1955613.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stahl, Bernd Carsten, Simisola Akintoye, B. Tyr Fothergill, Manuel Guerrero, Will Knight, and Inga Ulnicane. 2019a. “Beyond Research Ethics: Dialogues in Neuro-ICT Research.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 13. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2019.00105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stahl, Bernd Carsten, Jos Timmermans, Stephen Rainey, and Mark Shaw. 2019b. “Ethics in Innovation Management as Meta-Responsibility: The Practice of Responsible Research and Innovation in Human Brain Simulation.” In The Routledge Companion on Innovation Management, edited by Jin Chen, Alexander Brem, Eric Viardot, and Poh Kam Wong, 435–454. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, Jack. 2016. “Geoengineering as Collective Experimentation.” Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (3): 851–869.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, Jack, Richard Owen, and Phil Macnaghten. 2013. “Developing a Framework for Responsible Innovation.” Research Policy 42 (9): 1568–1580. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tennison, Michael N., and Jonathan D. Moreno. 2012. “Neuroscience, Ethics, and National Security: The State of the Art.” PLoS Biology 10 (3): e1001289. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001289.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Royal Society. 2012. “Neuroscience, Conflict and Security.” Policy Report, Brain Waves Module 3. The Royal Society. https://royalsociety.org/~/media/Royal_Society_Content/policy/projects/brain-waves/2012-02-06-BW3.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ulnicane, Inga. 2020. “Governance of Dual Use Research in the EU: The Case of Neuroscience.” In Emerging Security Technologies and EU Governance: Actors, Practices and Processes, edited by Antonio Calcara, Raluca Csernatoni, and Chantal Lavalée, 177–191. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780429351846-12.
   Google Scholar
• Voarino, Nathalie. 2014. “Reconsidering the Concept of ‘Dual-Use’ in the Context of Neuroscience Research.” Bioéthique Online 3 (16). http://hdl.handle.net/1866/11292.
   Google Scholar
• Whitby, Simon, and Malcolm Dando. 2019. “Ethics, Neuroscience, and Public Policy: A Case Study of Raising Neuroscientists’ Awareness of the Problem of Dual use.” In The Routledge Handbook of Ethics and Public Policy, edited by Anabelle Lever and Andrei Poama, 526–540. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar