PPP+3+-+1+Science,+Technology+and+Democracy (3)
Science Technology Democracy – Chapter 2
How a Spanish city was named one of the best places to live after prioritising pedestrians
Science, Technology and Democracy
Daniel Lee Kleinman, editor
Town Meetings and Technology
- In democracy, policy decisions effect all citizens
- Yet, these policies are framed by: business, military and university representatives.
- The argument is that non experts are ill equipped to comment on complex technical matters. (Unimaginable that citizens who can’t even program their VCR(DVD) player can contribute)
- Technology Assessment Agencies
-
–Consensus Conference Format
- Engages a much wider range of people, holds the potential to build a broader constituency familiar with and supportive of technology assessment.
- Both the forum and subsequent judgment, in a formal report, become a focus of national attention, in Denmark – usually before Parliament.
- These judgments are non binding – just give a sense to legislator of where the people stand on some technological issues.
- Danish Board of Technology has organized more than twenty consensus conferences.
-
–Genetic engineering
–Educational technology,
–Food irradiation, air pollution
–Human infertility
–Sustainable agriculture
–Telecommuting and the future of private automobiles.
-
–Consensus conference is crucial to limiting the negative and often unintended consequences that can result when technologies are deployed without widespread social consideration.
Consensus Conferences as Democratic Participation
Richard E. Sclove
Framing an Issue
- The Danish Board of Technology
- To organize a consensus conference, it first:
Selects a salient topic. (Broader than assessing toxicity of a single chemical, and narrower than formulating national strategy)
–Board selects a well-balanced steering committee. (To oversee the organization of the conference)
–Board advertises in local newspapers for volunteer lay participants. (Candidates must sent a one-page letter describing their backgrounds and reasons for wanting to participate)
–A skilled facilitator helps lay participants discuss background paper (commissioned by the board and screened by the steering committee.)
- The group then formulates questions, suggests addition addressed during a public forum.
- The Board goes on to assemble an expert panel.
- The lay group meets for a second weekend, to discuss background readings, refine questions, etc.
- The Board finalizes the expert panel and asks its members to prepare oral and written responses.
- In the concluding public forum, a four-day event, facilitator brings together experts with the media, MPs and interested Danish citizens.
- Every expert speaks 20 to 30 minutes.
- Addresses follow up questions.
- And questions from the audience.
- Afterwards the ley group retires to discuss what it heard.
- On the next day they cross examine the expert panel.
- Then they are politely dismissed.
- 1992 Danish Conference on genetically engineered animals shows a perspective that is neutral, neither pro or anti technology.
- Patenting animals could deepen the risk of their being treated purely as objects.
-
–It would lead to objectification of people.
–Genetically altered animals into the wild – could create a domination or out-competing wild species.
- No problem if fenced.
- Can these Consensus Conferences be held in Kosovo?
-
–What topics would be selected as relevant public policy issues?
–Examples:
- Ban gender selection babies during pregnancy of expectant mothers?
- Health?
- Education – Finland’s experiences? Pros and cons?
- Foreign Investments in large projects?
Subsidize trade, versus production? Agriculture?
- No problem if fenced.
- Lay group prepares a report summarizing points of agreement and those which are in disagreement.
- On the fifth day expert panel me correct their reports.
- In the end the lay group presents its report at a national press conference.