Transcript 先進技術の社会影響評価

Innovation and Institutionalization of
Technology Assessment (TA) in Japan:
Dealing with Nanotechnologies
Project status report
May 31-June 1, 2008, Edinburgh, UK
Tatsujiro Suzuki
Visiting Professor, Graduate School of Public Policy
The University of Tokyo
[email protected]
This research project is sponsored by Research Institute for Science and Technology for
Society (RISTEX), Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST). The project is
coordinated by Science, Technology and Public Policy (SciTePP) Research Unit, Graduate
School of Public Policy (GRASPP), the University of Tokyo
1
Objective



To review and analyze the past and current practice
of technology assessment, and identify the barriers
of institutionalization of TA in Japan.
To develop an innovative TA technique applying the
Problem Structuring Method and test its
effectiveness through implementing TA for
nanotechnologies.
To propose innovative approaches to, as well as
techniques for, the TA that is appropriate for the 21st
century and a recommendation for their
institutionalization in Japan.
2
Research Approach
（１）Historical Analysis of
so-called “TA” activities
in Japan
Conditions for
“institutionalizing TA”
in Japan
（２)Development of
an innovative TA
methodology
New
methodology
（３) Implementation of
TA: Dealing with
Nanotechnologies
Lessons learned from
Implementation of TA
（４）Recommendations for new TA
methodologies and Institutionalization of
TA in Japan
3
TASK 1: Institutional analysis on the past and
current practice of “fragmented” TA in Japan




How "fragmented" TA was implemented in Japan?
Why did it happen? What were the consequences of
"fragmented" TA (instead of comprehensive TA)?
Why has TA never been institutionalized in the
Japanese policy-making processes, while it could be
in other countries? And what were the consequences
of such "lack of institutionalization" of TA in Japan?
What were the experiences of TA in other countries,
with regard to comprehensive TA and
institutionalization?
What are the possible preconditions for
institutionalizing TA in Japan?
4
TASK 2: Review and Development of Innovative
Methods of TA

Need for new methodologies for TA





Dealing with “diversified” value systems and
stakeholders
Uncertainties in both development paths and
societal impacts of technology innovation
Review of innovative methods for TA in other
countries;
Explore and identify key conditions of new
TA; and
Develop a new method of TA by incorporating
Problem Structuring Method;
5
TASK 3: Applying the newly developed TA
techniques to nanotechnologies
（１）Select technology



Target Applications
 Clinical testing/medicine
 Energy conversion/storage
 Food processing
Selection Criteria
 High social needs。
 Relatively clear application。
 Near commercialization。
TA Panel



Step by Step approach
Involving various
stakeholders。
Output

Lessons for
Institutionalization
（２）Select experts on Technology
（３）Create ”Cognitive Maps” based on literature
survey and interviews with stakeholders
（４）Establishment of Technology
Expert Panel
（５）Re-organizing “Congnitive Maps” based on
Panel Study
（６）TA Panel: consisting of technology experts with other experts, NGOs, etc.l
（Reflecting diversified values, opinions of stakeholders)
（７）Panel
Conclusions
（８）Networking among
Stakeholders
（９) Participatory TA Panel (involving
citizens)
(10) Conclusions and recommendations
6
TASK 4: Proposal for Innovation and
Institutionalization of TA in Japan

Based on the outcome of Task 1 to Task 3, we will make proposals and
recommendations for innovation and institutionalization of TA in Japan

Recommendations for Social-decision making process
 How to structuralize “comprehensive TA” with “fragmented TA activities”?
 How to link and coordinate “government sponsored TA” with “voluntary,
private-sectors’ TA activities”?
 How to build up “partnerships in TA” among key stakeholders and
institutions?
Recommendations for Institutionalization of TA and social infrastructure
of TA
 Who should implement TA?
 Who should sponsor? How to develop TA expertise?
 How to assure “independence” of TA? (with fragile financial resource and
expertise)

7
III. TEAM MEMBERS(1)

A. Multidisciplinary Project Team (Leader: Tatsu Suzuki)
Tatsujiro Suzuki (University of Tokyo/CRIEPI, Leader)
Hideaki Shiroyamama, Ayako Kamisato, Masaru Yarime (University of Tokyo)
Kotaro Kuroda (Nagoya University), Tomoko Tsuchiya (CRIEPI)
Yoshinori Nakagawa (Kochi University of Technology)

B. TA Institutional Analysis Group (Leader: Hideaki Shiroyama)
Hideaki Shiroyama (University of Tokyo, Law and Politics/GRASPP, Leader)
Takashi Yamamoto, Makiko Matsuo, Yoko Hatanaka (University of Tokyo)
Go Yoshizawa (Citizen's Science Initiative, University of Sussex)
Ryoko Masuzawa (Tottori Environment University)

C. TA Technique Development Group (Leader: Tatsu Suzuki)
Tatsujiro Suzuki (Univ. of Tokyo/CRIEPI, Leader)
Hideaki Shiroyama, Takayuki Minato, Ayako Kamisato, Masahiro Matsuura (Univ. of
Tokyo)
Yaichi Aoshima (Hitotsubashi Univ.), Akifumi Ueda (Citizen's Science Initiative)
Kotaro Kuroda (Nagoya University), Yoshinori Nakagawa (Kochi University of
Technology)
8
III. TEAM MEMBERS(2)

D. Nanotechnology TA Implementation Group (Leader:
Masahiro Takemura)
Masahiro Takemura (National Institute for Materials Science, Leader)
Yuji Miyahara, Yoshiyuki Uchida (NIMS), Tatsujiro Suzuki (Univ. of Tokyo)
Yoshinobu Baba (Nagoya University), Koji Miyasaka (Powersystems Inc.)
Akifumi Ueda, Go Yoshizawa (Citizen's Science Inititative)
Kikuko Tatsumi (Association for Advisor Consulting for Consumers)
Masashi Tachikawa (Policy Research Institute for Ministry of Agriculture,
Forestry and Fisheries), Manabu Ichihara (Nagoya University)
Masao Watari, Akio Yanashita (Business Council for Nanotechnologies,
Japan)

Oversea Advisors

Michael Rogers (UK, formerly with EU)
Arie Rip (Netherland)
Chirstopher Hill (US)

Philip Vergragt (US/Netherland)


9
Working Definition of TA

Technology assessment (TA) refers to
institutions and practices which support
problem-definition (agenda setting) or
decision-making for the development of
technology and society by anticipating
societal impacts of emerging technologies
that are difficult to be governed by
conventional research, innovation and legal
systems at an early stage of the technology
development.
10
Expert-Based
Exploring a variety of future
technologies and societies
enhancing communications
and collaborations between
expert stakeholders at an early
stage of the technology
development
Discourse-Oriented
Forecasting societal impacts of
future technologies based on
expertise in order to provide
necessary information for
decision-making or problemsolving
Decision-Oriented
Defining problems in future
technologies and societies by
facilitating societal learning for
wider stakeholders and general
public
Forming practical strategies for
the development of technology
through a transparent and
open deliberation process by
involving various actors
Participatory
11
Objectives of TA
Expert-based
• Policy Analysis
• Scientific Assessment
• Agenda Setting
• New Policy
• Introduction of New
R&D Policy
Agenda
Setting
Discourse-oriented
• Societal Mapping
• New Decision Making
Process
Decision-oriented
Policy
Implementation
• Reconstruction of Political
Debate
• Reconciliation
Political Stalemate
Policy
Making
Participatory
12
Adapted from Bütschi et al. (2004)
TA Framework and Institutions
Expert-based
• Strategic TA
（OTA-II、OPECST）
• Bureaucratic TA
（POST、TAB、STOA、viWTA）
Discourse-oriented
• OTA-I TA
• Constructive
TA
Decision-oriented
• Interactive TA
• Informal TA
• Rathenau Institute
• Participatory TA
（DBT、Meeting of Minds）
Participatory
13
Important Characteristics of TA organization
Accountability
→Trust
Independence
Political/Technical independence
Quality
Interdisciplinary, professional credibility,
fairness, transparency,
good peer review system
Communication
Presentation, writing skills, media,
moderator
capability
Political
Optimum size
Low budget pressure, minimum political
risk, flexibility,
Networking
Information, intelligence, external
resources
Timeliness
Responsiveness, quick output
Link with Policy
Institutional setting, personal connection
Feasibility
Policy Orientation
→Authority
Making Process
Source: Adapted from Bütschi et al. (2004), Suzuki (2008)14
Brief History of Japanese TA

Various concepts and TA-like activities since the 1970s

Industry groups introduced the concept of TA to Japan
(1969)
-> TA as voluntary process management

STA (1971-78) and MITI (1971-84) conducted case
studies, but limited the subjects to their jurisdictions
-> TA as R&D project evaluation

Failed attempts to establish a parliamentary TA
organisation

Politicians’ passive attitudes in the 1970s

Bureaucratic resistance in the 1990s
15
Technology Assessment Activities in Japan
(1970s~80s)
small,
distributed
technology
Technical
Assessment
Societal
implications
Big Science
Technology


plastic
synthetic paper
automobile transport
revolutionary textile
agricultural chemicals
anti-rust technology
ocean farm
Large scale use of methanol
nuclear-powered steel making
large off-shore building
Supersonic transport
Selection criteria for target technologies
does not seem consistent (mostly noncontroversial)
Assessments were often fragmented, and
the results were mostly predictable
16
Decline of TA activities in Japan (1)

By Junnosuke Kishida (2000)



Focus was on environmental pollution and
business community was strongly against any
move toward regulating economic activity
Science and Technology Agency (STA)
planning division was promoting TA, but
nuclear energy division of STA was not
enthusiastic about TA
Both bureaucratic and business resistance
were major barriers for TA activities
17
Decline of TA activities in Japan (2)

NISTEP “Analysis of TA activities in Japan”

Causes for decline






（１）opposition from promoters of science and
technology
（２） dependence on imported methodologies and
lack of clear definition of TA itself
（３）large burden and uncertain merits
（４）lack of independent TA, limits of “voluntary TA”
by technology developers
（５）decline of interests in environmental pollution
（６）Negative impact of oil shock on new initiatives
18
Why TA was not institutionalized in Japan
“Monju”
accident
Failure of
“Mutsu” nuclear
ship
Perceived need
for TA in Diet
Ethic
Committee of
Life Science
Environmental
Impact
Assessment
Law passed
？
Law to establish “S&T
Assessment Council” was
proposed, by Dietmen Group
？
Perception that TA should be
done by the gov’t
1970s
1980s
1990s
Science & Technology
council conducted R&D
assessment
Bureaucratic
battle
Oppose TA by other
agencies
“TA like activities
are already done
in Japan”
Administrative
Reform
Group dissolved
TA was not
institutionalized
？decline of interests
in environmental
pollution
Nuclear division
oppose nuclear
technology TA
oppose TA
institution within
government
oppose any
movement to restrain
tech development
“TA should
TA not clearly
be done by
defined
private
sectors”
lack of recognition
lack of needs to
of TA needs
apply TA for policy
making
Pilot TA results were
not appreciated
interests in TA
driven by
lack of
pollution issues
lack of new results coordination
lack of deliberation
by the TA pilot
lack of clear methodologies
among
stakeholders lack of involvement of social scientists projects
19
19
Why TA has not been institutionalized in Japan

Fragmented TA


Lack of independency


Fragmentation is not necessarily wrong, but a
core organization is needed to minimize the
diversification of concepts, support TA networks
and increase the significance of TA activities
Cross-sectoral issues and unwanted results were
avoided in voluntary, self-evaluative exercises
Ad hoc basis

Little incentive for the institutionalization of
project-based TA exercises in the “unwritten”
political culture
20
Applying “Problem Structuring Method” to TA for nanotechnologies
(Hypothesis) Someone’s
evolutionary invention
Mr. I
(Hypothesis)
Controlling diameter,
chirality and length of
CNTs
(Current Situation) CNTs
have many possible
application fields.
(Hypothesis)
Producing CNTs with
high degree of purity
Closely Related
(Current Situation) As
well as Japan, Korea can’t
manufacture displays
based on fundamental
technologies on CNTs.
(Worry) Development
of Field Emission
Display by Samsung
(Worry) Market
share will be
grabbed by Korea
Exclusive
(Expectation) Development of
Field emission displays’
hardware using CNTs
(Expectation)
Market share
grabbed by Janan
(Hypothesis)
Some measures
for pervasion
(Current Situation)
Students tend to
take interest in CNTs.
(Current Situation)
Plasma displays, that are
pervading in Japan,
consumes much
electricity.
(Expectation)
Pervasion of Field
Emission Displays
(Expectation) Expansion of the
(Expectation)
market size of peripheral
Reduction in the amount of
electronic devises
energy consumption by 4
million kW, which correspond
to the amount produced by 4
power plants
(Expectation) Expansion
of the market size of
electronics
(Expectation) Contribution
to energy savings
(Current Situation)
Liquid crystalline
displays lose energy
efficiency as their size
become large
(Worry) Pervasion of
plasma displays lead
to decrease in
Exclusive
electronic demand
A
B The interviewee perceives a causal relation between A and B
A
B
A
B
C The interviewee thinks that C arises only when both A and B
arise.
The interviewee don’t think that there is a causal relation
between A and B
21
E xpectati
ons for other actors etc.
A ffi
l
i
ati
on
(A rea of
speci
al
i
zati
on)
M r.A
A m edi
a
representati
ve
M r.B
A researcher
i
n a thi
nk tank
m aj
ori
ng
sci
ence and
technol
ogy
M r.C
A staff of an
agency on
sci
ence and
technol
ogy
M r.D
A staff of a
nati
onal
i
nsti
tute on
i
ndustri
al
sci
ence and
technol
ogy
M r.E
A rel
evant
i
ndustry
parti
ci
pant.
M r.F
A
representati
ve
of a ci
ti
zens’
group on
sci
ence and
technol
ogy
M r.G
M r.H
M r.I
E ssence of
nanotechnol
ogi
es
E xpectati
ons for
nanotechnol
ogi
es
(1) S uppl
em entati
on of
negati
ve si
de of exi
sti
ng
technol
ogi
es by
nanotechnol
ogi
es,
(2) D evel
opm ent of
nanotechnol
ogi
es for
envi
ronm ental
i
m provem ent
(1) N anotechnol
ogi
es
uti
l
i
ze the nature of
thi
ngs i
ntri
nsi
c to
them (e.
g.sel
f
organi
zati
on),
(2) N anotechnol
ogi
es
enabl
e us to push the
l
i
m i
ts of the current
technol
ogi
es
(1) M i
ni
tuari
zati
on of
m anufacturi
ng processes,
(2) E nhancem ent i
n
energy effi
ci
ency
In devel
opi
ng
nanotechnol
ogi
es,
di
fferent di
sci
pl
i
nes
(e.
g.physi
cs,
chem i
stry,bi
ol
ogy)
are m erged at nano
scal
es.
(1) E nhancem ent i
n
Japan'
s energy securi
ty
(2) E nhancem ent i
n the
w el
fare of devel
opi
ng
countri
es
(3) E stabl
i
shm ent of
energy savi
ng
technol
ogi
es and fuel
batteri
es
C oncern about
nanotechnol
ogi
e
s
E xpectati
ons for
ci
ti
zens etc.
E xpectati
ons for
pri
vate
com pani
es and
rel
evant
i
ndustri
es
P eopl
e don'
t expect
so m uch for
nanotechnol
ogi
es
A dverti
sem ent
because of the
of
fl
ouri
shi
ng
nanotechnol
ogi
e
m i
sunderstandi
ng
s so that peopl
e
that
thi
nk they are
nanotechnol
ogi
es
attracti
ve
are j
ust technol
ogi
es
i
n nanoscal
e.
Gi
vi
ng
i
nform ati
on to
T he publ
i
c shoul
d
the publ
i
c so
know the fact that that the publ
i
c
nanotechnol
ogi
es
don'
t have
have not onl
y ri
sks excessi
ve
but al
so benefi
ts.
anxi
ety about
nanotechnol
ogi
e
s
N anotechnol
ogi
es are
devel
oped by the
cooperati
ons am ong
com pani
es w i
th
Gl
ory of the i
ndustry
di
fferent areas of
speci
al
i
zati
ons (e.
g.
bi
otechnol
ogy and
el
ectroni
cs)
It i
s di
ffi
cul
t to
i
nform e the publ
i
c
wi
th ri
sks i
n a
rel
i
abl
e m anner
N egati
ve i
m pact
of products
i
ncl
udi
ng
nanoparti
cl
es on
the heal
th
C onsum ers don'
t
choose cosm eti
cs
taki
ng i
nto account
ri
sks
Japan don’
t concentrate
i
ts i
nvestm ent i
n parti
cul
ar
true nanotechnol
ogi
es.
D evel
opm ent of
new
m anufacturi
ng
processes and
m ethods for
i
ntegrati
ng
el
em ent
technol
ogi
es,i
n
pri
vate
com pani
es
(1) E stabl
i
shm ent of
fram ew orks for researches
on envi
ronm ental and
heal
th effects of
nanoparti
cl
es i
n Japan
(2) Japanese governm ent
takes i
nto account pri
vate
com pani
es’ i
ntenti
ons
A cti
ve
col
l
aborati
on
am ong com pani
es
for technol
ogi
cal
devel
opm ents
G overnm ent’
s assi
stance
for l
i
fe cycl
e assessm ent
of products
(2) Japan’
s i
ni
ti
ati
ve i
n
standardi
zati
on of carbon
nanom ateri
al
s under
E xperts’
i
nterpretati
on of D i
scl
osure of
di
scl
osed
i
nform ati
on on
i
nform ati
on and ri
sks of the
expl
anati
on to products
the publ
i
c
(1) R educti
on i
n the
num ber of hospi
tal
i
npati
ents and m edi
cal
expenses by the
pervasi
on of bi
osensors
(2) D evel
opm ent of
Inhal
e-type D D S
R esearcher of
carbon
nanotubes
(1) R educti
on i
n the
am ount of energy
consum pti
on by the
devel
opm ent and
pervasi
on of fi
el
d
em i
ssi
on di
spl
ays
(2) A dvancem ent of the
el
ectroni
cs i
ndustry
(3) M arket share grabbed
by Janan
M edi
cal
standard m ay
com e to be
strongl
y
dependent on
fi
scalheal
th of
the l
ocal
governm ent.
(1) S tri
ct regul
ati
ons about
the l
abel
i
ng on cosm eti
cs
(2) S tri
ct regul
ati
ons on
the al
ready m arketed
nanocosm eti
cs
(1) C ounci
lfor S ci
ence
and T echnol
ogy P ol
i
cy,
C abi
net O ffi
ce,pl
ays a
l
eadi
ng rol
e for m ul
ti
ti
ered
Im pl
em entati
on of nati
onal
proj
ects on soci
etal
aspects of
nanotechnol
ogi
es
(2) R egul
ati
ons etc.for the
products i
ncl
udi
ng
nanoparti
cl
es
N egati
ve i
m pact
of nanoparti
cl
es
on the heal
th
N anotechnol
ogi
es
uti
l
i
ze new physi
cal
and chem i
cal
A doctor,
properti
es of
researcher of m ateri
al
s that
DDS
em erge onl
y i
n
nanoscal
e (e.
g.
nanoparti
cl
es,nano
texti
l
e)
E xpectati
ons for the
governm ent
R eal
i
zi
ng
com pati
bi
l
i
ty i
n
com pani
es
betw een busi
ness
and
envi
ronm ental
aw areness
Em i
ssi
on of
nanoparti
cl
es to
the atm osphere
duri
ng l
i
fe
cycl
es of
products
(1) P rofi
t of the i
ndustry
from carbon
nanom ateri
al
s
(2) D evel
opm ent of
el
ectroni
cs
A staff of an
agency on
sci
ence and
technol
ogy
E xpectati
ons
for speci
al
i
sts
C onstructi
on of a
fram ew ork so
that devel
opers
asess the safety
of products
enabl
ed by
nanotechnol
ogi
es
(1) R evi
si
on of l
aw s so
that cl
i
ni
calexperi
m ents
requi
re as l
ess ti
m e as i
n
other com pani
es
(2) M edi
caldi
agnosi
s
covered by the i
nsurance
22
Schedule
2007.4 2008.4
09.4
（１）Historical Analysis
24 mos
（２）New TA Methodology
24 mos
10.4
2011.4
36 mos
（３）TA on Nanotechnologies
18 mos
（４）Recommendations
★
International WS
★
International WS
☆
Final Symposium
23