Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2019 | 2 | 612--623
Tytuł artykułu

Designing Technology in the Age of Digitalization: Needs for Technology Assessment and Ethics

Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
Technology research, design, and development is confronted with rapidly advancing digitalization in two respects: (1) digitally supported or enabled technologies need to be designed and developed, and (2) the respective R&D processes themselves will happen in a much more digitalized environment. Technology design generally must take into account the values involved and possible consequences of the development and use of the resulting products, services, and systems. In a digitalizing environment, the issue of values gains even more significance because more and more close and intimate interfaces between humans and technology have to be shaped. Designing human-machine interfaces is not only a functional issue but touches upon ethical questions such as the distribution of responsibility, but also upon anthropological issues related to the human self-image and ideas about future society as well. In the respective research, design, and development processes, value-laden issues such as control, privacy, empathy, responsibility, and accountability must be taken into account beyond technical issues of efficiency and reliability. The need for designing and shaping digital future technologies involving ethics and technology assessment will be demonstrated by three examples: future industrial production and the fields of self-driving cars and care robots. Value sensitive design and responsible research and innovation will be introduced as approaches to deal with these challenges. (original abstract)
Opis fizyczny
  • Instiute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS)
  • Abels, G. and Bora, A. (2016). Ethics and Public Participation in Technology Assessment. [online] DOI 10.13140/RG.2.2.35586.89282.
  • Bijker, W. and Law, J. (eds) (1994). Shaping Technology Building Society. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  • Bijker, W., Hughes, T. and Pinch, T. (eds) (1987). The Social Construction of Technological Systems. New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Cambridge/London: MIT Press.
  • Bimber, B.A. (1996). The Politics of Expertise in Congress: the Rise and Fall of the Office of Technology Assessment. New York: State University of New York Press.
  • Börner, F., Kehl, C. and Nierling, L. (2018). Chancen und Risiken mobiler und digitaler Kommunikation in der Arbeitswelt. TAB-Arbeitsbericht Nr. 174. Berlin: Büro für Technikfolgenabschätzung beim Deutschen Bundestag.
  • Brey, P. (2009). Values in Technology and Disclosive Computer Ethics. In: L. Floridi, ed., The Cambridge Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 41-58.
  • Decker, M. and Fleischer, T. (2010). When Should There Be Which Kind of Technology Assessment? A Plea for a Strictly Problem-Oriented Approach from the Very Outset. Poiesis & Praxis, 7, pp. 117-133, DOI:10.1007/s10202-010-0074-6.
  • Decker, M. and Ladikas, M. (2004). Technology Assessment - Method and Impact. Berlin: Springer
  • Decker, M., Weinberger, N., Krings, B. and Hirsch, J. (2017). Imagined Technology Futures in Dmand-oriented Technology Assessment. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 4(2), pp. 177-196.
  • Ethics Commission (2017). Automated and Connected Driving. Final Report. Berlin: Federal Ministry of Transportation and Digital Infrastructures. Available at: [Accessed 19 Aug. 2018].
  • Friedman, B., Kahn, P. and Borning, A. (2006). Value Sensitive Design and Information Systems. In: P. Zhang and D. Galletta, eds, Human-Computer Interaction in Management Information Systems: Foundations. New York/London: M.E. Sharpe.
  • Funtowicz, S.O., Ravetz, J. (1993). Science in the Post-Normal Age. Futures, 25(7), pp- 739-756.
  • Grunwald, A. (2011). Responsible Innovation: Bringing Together Technology Assessment, Applied Ethics, and STS Research. Enterprise and Work Innovation Studies, 7, pp. 9-31.
  • Grunwald, A. (2018). Self-Driving Cars: Risk Constellation and Acceptance Issues. DELPHI - Interdisciplinary Review of Emerging Technologies, 1, pp. 8-13.
  • Grunwald, A. (2019a). Technology Assessment in Practice and Theory. London: Routledge.
  • Grunwald, A. (2019b). Der unterlegene Mensch. Die Zukunft der Menschheit angesichts von Algorithmen, künstlicher Intelligenz und Robotern. Munich: RIVA Verlag.
  • Grunwald, A. and Achternbosch, M. (2013). Technology Assessment and Approaches to Early Engagement. In: N. Doorn, D. Schuurbiers, I. van de Poel, M. Gorman, eds, Early Engagement and New Technologies: Opening Up the Laboratory. Dordrecht et al.: Springer, pp. 15-36.
  • Hermann, M., Pentek, T., Otto, B. (2016). Design Principles for Industrie 4.0 Scenarios. In: IEEE, 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 3928-3937, doi:10.1109/HICSS.2016.488.
  • Joss, S. and Bellucci., S. (eds) (2002). Participatory Technology Assessment - European Perspectives. London: Westminster University Press.
  • Mainzer, K. (2016). Künstliche Intelligenz - Wann übernehmen die Maschinen? Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.
  • Manzlei, C., Schleupner, L. and Heinz, R. (eds) (2016). Industrie 4.0 im internationalen Kontext. Berlin: VDE Verlag.
  • Maurer, M., Gerdes, J., Lenz, B. and Winner, H. (eds) (2016). Autonomous driving. Technical, Legal and Social aspects. Heidelberg: Springer Open.
  • Merton, R. (1948). The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy. The Antioch Review, 8(2), pp. 193-210.
  • Orwat, C., Raabe, O., Buchmann, E., Anandasivam, A., Freytag, J.-C., Helberger, N., Ishii, K., Lutterbeck, B., Neumann, D., Otter, T., Pallas, F., Reussner, R., Sester, P., Weber, K. and Werle, R. (2010). Software als Institution und ihre Gestaltbarkeit. Informatik-Spektrum, 33(6), pp. 626-633.
  • Owen, R., Bessant, J. and Heintz, M. (eds) (2013). Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society. London: Wiley.
  • Rip, A., Misa, T. and Schot, J. (eds) (1995). Managing Technology in Society. London: Pinter. Siune, K., Markus, E., Calloni, M., Felt, U., Gorski, A., Grunwald, A., Rip, A., de Semir, V. and Wyatt, S. (2009). Challenging Futures of Science in Society. Report of the MASIS Expert Group. Brussels: European Commission.
  • Smits, R. and den Hertog, P. (2007). TA and the Management of Innovation in Economy and Society. International Journal on Foresight and Innovation Policy, 3, pp. 28-52.
  • van de Poel, I. (2009). Values in Engineering Design. In: A. Meijers, ed., Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences, 9, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 973-1006.
  • van de Poel, I. (2013). Translating Values into Design Requirements. In: D. Mitchfelder, N. McCarty and D. Goldberg (eds): Philosophy and Engineering: Reflections on Practice, Principles and Process. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 253-266.
  • van den Hoven, J. (2007). ICT and Value Sensitive Design. In: P. Goujon, S. Lavelle, P. Duquenoy, K. Kimppa and V. Laurent, eds, The Information Society: Innovations, Legitimacy, Ethics and Democracy. Boston: Springer, pp. 67-72.
  • van den Hoven, J., Vermaas, P. and van de Poel, I. (eds) (2015). Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design. Sources, Theory, Values and Application Domains. Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Wallach, W. and Allen, C. (2009). Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right from Wrong. New York: Oxford University Press.
Typ dokumentu
Identyfikator YADDA

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.