EPOCH Ethics and Public pOlicy making, the Case of Human enhancement Collaborative Project, 7th Framework Program, Science

1
EPOCHEthics and Public pOlicy making, the Case
of Human enhancementCollaborative Project, 7th
Framework Program, Science in-Society

• An overview of the project
• Ruud ter Meulen
• Centre for Ethics in Medicine
• University of Bristol

2
Participants

1. University of Bristol (UK)
2. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (D)
3. University of Padua (I)
4. CNRS-University of Paris Descartes (Fr)
5. Maastricht University (NL)
6. University of Ljubljana (Sl)
7. Swansea University (UK)
8. National University of Singapore (Si)
9. University of Aarhus (DK)
10. University of Calgary (Cnd)

3
Goal of the project

• The overall goal of the project is to gain better
  insights into the potential contributions of
  ethics and ethical expertise in relation to the
  development of public policies on science and
  technology in the European context, in particular
  on issues of human enhancement by way of new and
  emerging technologies.

4
Objectives

• To provide sophisticated, practically relevant,
  insight into the relationship between normative
  issues, ethical expertise and science and
  technology policy making.
• To develop a framework, informed by
  multi-disciplinary perspectives, that can guide
  EU policy development in relation to a variety of
  issues concerning the use of ST for the purpose
  of human enhancement

5
Research questions

• what types of ethical expertise are needed for
  the development of public policies?
• what models of governance are needed (also
  specifically regarding the involved expertise)?

6
Research methodology

• a comparative perspective which will include EU
  Member States as well as other parts of the world
  (America and Asia) where relevant
• an overview of the kinds of evidence and
  expertise that are currently used by ethics
  committees and utilisation thereof
• an exploration of how the input of ethics
  committees and public dialogue activities is used
  in decision and law-making processes
• a focus on emerging fields of research and
  development and emerging trends in the
  relationship between normative issues, ethical
  expertise, and science and technology policy
  making.

7
Results (envisaged)

• The project will provide an overview on how
  selected enhancement issues (in particular
  physical and cognitive enhancements) are dealt
  with EU Member States, at EU level and elsewhere
  in the world.
• It will generate insight into cultural
  differences and shared values with regard to
  human enhancement.
• It will generate a normative framework which will
  be derived from ethical expertise and
  non-academic, public discourses on enhancement
  issues.
• It will identify cases of good or even best
  practice in the governance and regulation of
  enhancement issues.

8
Results (continued)

• The project will also seek to identify possible
  shortcomings in existing normative and regulatory
  frameworks and conflicts of policy objectives
  (for example the tension between progress in
  physical enhancement technologies and global
  anti-doping policies)
• The research is designed to provide insights
  into, and new ideas for, the regulation of
  enhancement technologies and for the governance
  of the topic of human enhancement in general.

9
Three main areas of the project

1. Ethics and Governance of Science and Technology
   Bristol (lead), Maastricht, Ljubljana and Paris,
   supported by Work Packages 1,2,3,9
2. Human Enhancement and European Policy Making
   Karlsruhe (lead), Bristol, Swansea, Aarhus and
   Calgary, supported by Work Packages 4,5, 6,7
3. Challenges to Regulatory and Legal Frameworks
   Padua (lead), Swansea, Paris, Karlsruhe,
   Singapore and Bristol, supported by Work Packages
   7, 8,9,10

10
Area 1 Ethics and GovernanceResearch questions

• What is the impact of the empirical turn in
  bioethics on the role of theoretical and applied
  ethics, particularly in the context of public
  policy-making?
• Is their a role for ethical theory, normative
  ethics and ethical expertise in participatory
  approaches to public decision-making on science
  and technology?
• What are the roles of social scientists and
  ethicists in the governance of normative issues
  in science and technology?
• Does the disciplinary status of bioethics change
  in its interface with social science when
  assessing and governing science and technology?
• What will be the role of more traditional
  institutions such as ethics committees and other
  advisory bodies in assessing and governing new
  technologies and what is the role of ethical
  expertise in these committees?

11
Area 2 Human Enhancement and European Policy
Making Research questions

• What is the relevance of the distinction between
  therapeutic and non-therapeutic uses of
  technologies for policy-making on the use of
  technology for human enhancement?
• How can societal and cultural aspects, be taken
  into account, taking into account in discourses
  and governance activities dedicated to the topic
  of human enhancement?
• How can the position of vulnerable groups and
  disabled people be taken into account in the
  governance of technology for human enhancement?
• Is there a need for additional governance
  frameworks for physical enhancement in sport in
  addition to existing international doping
  policies?
• In which way will the regulation and governance
  of science and technology be affected by the
  possibilities of the use of these technologies
  for non-therapeutic, including human enhancement
  purposes?
• How can the discourses on human enhancement
  profit from a more systematic inclusion of gender
  aspects?

12
Area 3 Challenges to Regulatory and Legal
Frameworks Research Questions

• how can public participatory approaches and
  collective responsibility be integrated in
  socially inclusive models of governance of
  science and technology?
• is there a conflict between the normative
  approach of applied ethics on the one hand and
  empirical and participatory approaches on the
  other hand in the governance of science and
  technology?
• how can so-called soft approaches to the
  governance of science and technology be combined
  with hard and explicit models of regulation?
• what is the current role of advisory bodies in
  the assessment and governance of science and
  technology and what other governance models can
  or should be applied in this context?
• is there a role for vision and speculation about
  the future in the assessment and governance of
  new emerging technologies, particularly in
  relation to human enhancement?
• how can we take cultural differences into
  account, and how do European regulations of
  science and technology compare with other
  approaches in the global context?

13
Workpackages

1. Ethics and policy making (Bristol)
2. Governance and ethics (Maastricht)
3. Ethical Policy Advice (Ljubljana)
4. Enhancement technologies (Karlsruhe)
5. Enhancement discourses (Aarhus)
6. Enhancement policies (Karlsruhe)
7. Sport enhancement (Swansea)
8. Regulatory challenges (Padua)
9. Implementation options (Paris)
10. Global policy (Singapore)
11. Dissemination (Karlsruhe)
12. Final Conference (Padua)
13. Co-ordination (Bristol)

14
Milestones

1. Insight in the best possible model for governance
   of normative issues of science and technology
2. Insight in actual role of ethical expertise in
   public policy making
3. Insight in specific ethical expertise needed for
   public-policy making on science and technology
4. Deeper understanding of ELSI and governance
   aspects of enhancement technologies
5. Determining the need for new normative frameworks
6. Situating the governance policies and regulatory
   structures of the European Union regarding
   enhancement technologies in the global context
7. Development of guidance for including ethical
   expertise and public consultation in public
   policy-making

15
Workshops

• Area 1 (Month 14) Reports of WP 1,2,3
• Area 2 (Month 16) Reports of WP 4,5,6
• Area 3 (Month 18) Reports of WP 7,8,9
• Global Policies Singapore (Month 20) Report WP 10
• Final Conference (Month 22)

16
Management

• Project Management Office PMO (Bristol)
• Steering Group SC (Leads of Areas 1,2,3 Bristol,
  Karlsruhe, Padua)
• Academic Workpackage Management
• Management and Other Workpackages (WP 11,12,13)

17
Project Management Office

• Day-to-day project operation
• Communication with Commission
• Project infrastructure
• Knowledge and risk management
• Quality Assurance

18
Steering Committee

• Overall responsibility for Project
• Meets four times during project, with regular
  interim correspondence
• Agree project processes and frameworks
• Evaluate process and results

19
Management of the Project

• Monitoring
• Communication
• Dissemination

20
Monitoring

• WP Leads will monitor WP deliverables, milestones
  and financial matters.
• WP Leads will serve as the primary point of
  contact between the Coordinator/Project
  Management Office and the partners.
• WP Leads will contact the PMO on a regular basis
  (at least each quarter) to provide an informal
  update.
• SC will oversee progress at SC meetings.
• WP Leads will submit a formal progress report for
  each SC meeting (6 monthly), detailing progress
  towards tasks, deliverables and milestones.

21
Communication

• The project will be managed with principles of
  consistent and transparent communication between
  the PMO and all partners.
• The main mechanism of communication will be
  e-mail, with a shared mailbox email address to be
  established in Bristol, to which the coordinator,
  project officer and project manager will have
  access.
• Email will be supplemented by the EPOCH website,
  which will contain a password-protected area for
  access by consortium members only as well as a
  repository for reports (non-public).
• All matters of interest to the consortium will be
  shared, including meetings, workshop and annual
  reports.
• Any communications from the Commission with
  implications for the consortium as a whole will
  also be shared.

22
Dissemination

• Dissemination Plan (to be developed by SC)
• Website (public and restricted)
• Involvement with public meetings and debates
• Releasing statements to the press articles for
  popular consumption (including on the EPOCH
  website)
• Academic papers in scientific and bioethics
  journals and conference contributions.

23

• Please visit
• Epochproject.com