Valuation in health and ageing innovation practices

Abstract

In the development and deployment of health and ageing innovations, underlying values such as privacy or quality of life are often seen as a relatively stable starting point, if considered at all. However, values are neither stable nor singular. This paper introduces a valuation framework to explore the co-constitution of values and technological innovations. A careful and ongoing reflection on values and valuation, in particular in innovation practices targeted at older people, is crucial when aiming to increase sustainable innovations. Therefore, we include a Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) perspective to technological development and innovation, to understand better the construction and co-constitution of ageing-in-place technologies. This framework is developed following a review of literature on values and valuation in the broad field of SSH. The proposed valuation framework consists of three core elements: (a) value multiplicity, (b) value dynamism, and (c) valuation implications. To demonstrate potential applicability of the framework, we conducted a thought experiment on values and valuation practices related to the development and potential further deployment of a COVID-19 health app in the Netherlands. This experiment pays special attention to multiple values at stake and implications for older adults who age in place. We argue this valuation framework provokes reflection on dynamic and multiple values underlying technology use and non-use, and contributes to responsible health and ageing innovations.

Action Opportunities to Pursue Responsible Digital Care for People With Intellectual Disabilities: Qualitative Study

“…To limit subjectivity, values were discussed during the workshop with all participants, and themes were created independently by 2 researchers and discussed until consensus was reached. Another discussion point linked to correctness is that the values were discussed and presented as relatively stable entities, while they are neither stable nor singular [ 42 , 43 ]. Values may be affected by time and thus constantly defined and redefined (value dynamism), for instance, because users have gained experience with technology [ 41 , 43 ].…”

“…Another discussion point linked to correctness is that the values were discussed and presented as relatively stable entities, while they are neither stable nor singular [ 42 , 43 ]. Values may be affected by time and thus constantly defined and redefined (value dynamism), for instance, because users have gained experience with technology [ 41 , 43 ]. Although it may be challenging for researchers, innovators, and other stakeholders to continuously respond to this dynamism, a starting point could be to regularly collect the stakeholders’ perspectives about effects, values, and action opportunities.…”

Addressing the Black Box of AI—A Model and Research Agenda on the Co-constitution of Aging and Artificial Intelligence

“…So far, ethical debates on AI in aging research have largely been informed by a principlist approach, which has narrowed ethical reflections to balancing risks and benefits of a certain AI system ( Grigorovich & Kontos, 2020 ). An everyday perspective on ethics in AI highlights that ethical questions cannot be captured and solved at one point in time but require ongoing attention to the multiple values that inform the development, implementation, and use of AI ( van Hees et al 2023 , Gallistl & Wanka, 2022 ). Such a valuation approach toward ethics in AI might not seek to define and solve ethical questions but rather explore the practices of valuation through which manifold forms of value are “produced, diffused, assessed, and institutionalized” ( Lamont, 2012 : 201) throughout the lifecycle of an AI system.…”