Adding to the Mix: Integrating ELSI into a National Nanoscale Science and Technology Center

Abstract

This paper describes issues associated with integrating the study of Ethical, Legal and Social Issues (ELSI) into ongoing scientific and technical research and describes an approach adopted by the authors for their own work with the center for nanophase materials sciences (CNMS) at the Oak Ridge national laboratory (ORNL). Four key questions are considered: (a) What is ELSI and how should it identify and address topics of interest for the CNMS? (b) What advantages accrue to incorporating ELSI into the CNMS? (c) How should the integration of ELSI into the CNMS take place? (d) How should one judge the effectiveness of the activity? We conclude that ELSI research is not a monolithic body of knowledge, but should be adapted to the question at hand. Our approach focuses on junctures in the R&D continuum at which key decisions occur, avoids topics of a purely ethical nature or advocacy, and seeks to gather data in ways that permit testing the validity of generalization. Integrating ELSI into the CNMS allows dealing with topics firmly grounded in science, offers concrete examples of potential downstream applications and provides access to the scientists using the CNMS and their insights and observations. As well, integration provides the opportunity for R&D managers to benefit from ELSI insights and the potential to modify R&D agendas. Successful integration is dependent on the particular ELSI question set that drives the project. In this case questions sought to identify key choices, information of value to scientists, institutional attributes, key attributes of the CNMS culture, and alternatives for communicating results. The opportunity to consult with scientists on ELSI implications is offered, but not promoted. Finally, ELSI effectiveness is judged by observing the use to which research products are put within the CNMS, ORNL, and the community of external scholars.

Nanoethics and the Breaching of Boundaries: A Heuristic for Going from Encouragement to a Fuller Integration of Ethical, Legal and Social Issues and Science

“…For instance, take Bjornstad and Wolfe's observation that ''Collaborations involving academic, government, and private-sector participants increasingly meld the [science and technology] R&D enterprise with the entrepreneurial enterprise that would bring the fruits of successful enquiry to market [such that]…The gap between knowledge creation and knowledge utilization is narrowing'' (Bjornstad and Wolfe 2011). This insight is really one of noting a boundary breach wherein the prior divisions between goal-oriented R&D and science and technology knowledge-oriented work have now become blurred.…”

“…It is insufficient to provide resources for scientific researchers and to depend upon their embrace and legitimization of the goals of society as a whole. 9 Those concerned about the ethical, legal and social implications of science and technology must proceed forward along the lines that Bjornstad and Wolfe (2011) suggest, with a clearly structured and systematic approach, but also with very specific goals in mind. Focusing on the possible new connections that a technology allows (boundary crossings) serves as a good organizing point around which to draw the attention of all who will be affected by the technology.…”

“…The advantage of the former is that specific and limited goals are pursued and assessed as they are put in place. While it may seem overly hopeful to imagine research and development (R&D) ''embrac [ing] multidisciplinary enquiry as a part of the [science and technology] process'' and again ''embrac [ing] both basic, that is, curiosity-driven enquiry, as well as outcome-driven enquiry,'' (Bjornstad and Wolfe 2011) all the while being ''informed'' by, and informing, a new convergent paradigm, these series of goals are certainly important. 1 Much more is at stake in such an inquiry, both for the individuals and disciplines, and for the broader prospects and goals of society, than simply establishing legitimacy for ELSI integration.…”

“…And the third is a challenge of epistemic methodology: How do we as researchers go from successful individual case studies to understanding broader consequences and implications, and ultimately towards the goal: a paradigm for ELSI incorporation? Since Bjornstad and Wolfe provide helpful suggestions for the first two sets of challenges (Bjornstad and Wolfe 2011), 3 I would like to offer a heuristic tool for moving towards that elusive convergent paradigm (see Wimsatt 1980Wimsatt , 1986. The data (the number of case studies) are sparse and heuristics are, by their very nature, false idealizations.…”

Analyses of Acceptability Judgments Made Toward the Use of Nanocarrier-Based Targeted Drug Delivery: Interviews with Researchers and Research Trainees in the Field of New Technologies

“…They also suggest that both public and expert perceptions could account for a broader range of values in assessing technologies. This perspective is illustrated in Bjornstad and Wolfe [ 17 ], who demonstrate that a medical technology that represents a major advance over existing products could, on one hand, offer unprecedented solutions for certain health problems while, on the other hand, come into conflict with individual and social values. According to Giacomini et al [ 18 ], in a pluralist society, a clarification of the individual and societal values that underlie a technology’s acceptability could offer a way to answer complex questions about how to allot limited health care resources and how to steer innovations in the health field.…”