Nanotechnologies

Precaution for Responsible Innovation: New Options to Move Forward

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Thu, 20 Jan 2022 10:32:52 +0000

full image

Precaution for Responsible Innovation: New Options to Move Forward

RECIPES Dissemination Conference

On May 11, the RECIPES project has held its dissemination conference “Precaution for Responsible Innovation: New Options to Move Forward”.

At the conference, the RECIPES project presented and discussed some of the ideas on how to improve the use of the precautionary principle that were developed in consultation with several stakeholders at various points during the project period (the RECIPES guidance). The conference brought together around 90 participants from a range of different actor groups including several of those who had participated in one or more of the RECIPES workshops. The conference was carried out in hybrid format, so the participants joined it onsite or online.

Several of the speakers and panellists stressed that the topicality of the precautionary principle has increased in the past, e.g., due to the increasing transgression of planetary boundaries. They considered the principle to be even more important in the future. They appreciated that the RECIPES guidance reconfirms the importance of the precautionary principle and reinstates its innovative potential, especially by stressing its dual role as a legal principle and safeguard and as a policy principle and compass. They identified the RECIPES guidance as a timely document.

It was emphasised that the use of the precautionary principle requires political discussions at all levels (local, regional, national, EU, global). These would need to open up complex issues to the wider public, involve the knowledge and perspectives of a wide diversity of actors, and deal with (uncertain) risks as well as (uncertain) benefits, and address questions such as “(uncertain) risks and potentially serious harm for whom?” and “(uncertain) benefits for whom?” and “what are sustainable and public-interest-oriented pathways out of interlinked multiple crises such as climate change and loss of biodiversity?”.

It was highlighted that recent reports by IPBES, IPCC and UNEP, CBD and WHO on biodiversity, climate change and environment, agree that solutions for these wicked challenges of a systemic nature, characterized by uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguities, can only be achieved by systemic, multidimensional, cross-sectoral, interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary and participative approaches. The benefit of the precautionary principle would be that it enables solutions for (uncertain) risks in a systemic way that not simply shifts responsibility to the individual level.

For more information, you can find the programme of the conference HERE and the presentations held at the conference below. Moreover, you can find statements by some panellists below (the panellists were not asked to provide a written statement but some have made it available to the RECIPES team).

Welcome note by the coordinator: Guidance for the future use of the precautionary principle, Ellen Vos & Kristel de Smedt (University of Maastricht)
The RECIPES engagement approach: Reaching out to society and policy for developing the guidance - Aske Palsberg & Niels-Kristian Tjelle Holm (The Danish Board of Technology Foundation)
Discussion input no. 1 from the RECIPES guidance: The precautionary principle works best in a double role: safeguard and compass - Tijs Sikma (Rathenau Institute)
Discussion input no. 2 from the RECIPES guidance: The precautionary principle is a knowledge and participation issue - Jeroen van der Sluijs (University of Bergen) and Pia-Johanna Schweizer (Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies)
Intervention by Christine von Weizsäcker
Intervention by Carolina Vigo

In the videos below Christine von Weizsächer and Nina Holland, RECIPES Advisory Board Members, offer their perspectives on the RECIPES project, during the final conference held in May 2022:

Organiser

Dialogik, DBT, IASS, UM, Ecologic Institute with support from KNAW, UiB, K&I and ARC

Contact

Dr. Marion Dreyer, Dialogik

Email: dreyer@dialogik-expert.de

Themes

Artificial Intelligence in healthcare, CRISPR-based gene drives, Endocrine disruptors, Environment, Financial risks and urban waste planning, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s), Glyphosate, Health, Innovation, Microplastics, Nanotechnologies, Neonicotinoid insecticides, Precaution, Regulation, Safety, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, Funding Sources & Finance, NGOs & Associations, Citizens & Civil Society Organisations

RECIPES Event

Event Date

11 May 2022

Location

Hybrid Format: Online & Brussels

Language

English

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Thu, 04 Nov 2021 18:26:38 +0000

full image

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

On February 22 and 23, the RECIPES project will organize the European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”.

The workshop aims to review the pre-final version of the RECIPES guidance on how to ensure the PP’s ability to drive responsible innovation. It will take place online and will address, as main target groups, EU policy makers, European agencies, EU policy support organizations and bodies and similar experts.

Participants will have the chance to discuss a pre-final version of the RECIPES guidance (Sent in advance to registered guests). A series of Break-out sessions taking place on both days will allow participants to discuss the guidance to further improve its clarity, plausibility, policy relevance and future-orientation, as well as to brainstorm on the exploitation of the document.

For more information, you can find the programme of the Workshop HERE.

The workshop will be moderated by the RECIPES partners.

Organiser

Dialogik, DBT, IASS with support from UM, KNAW, UiB, K&A and ARC

Contact

Frank Dratsdrummer, Doalogik

Email: dratsdrummer@dialogik-expert.de

Themes

Artificial Intelligence in healthcare, CRISPR-based gene drives, Endocrine disruptors, Environment, Financial risks and urban waste planning, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s), Glyphosate, Governance, Health, Innovation, Microplastics, Nanotechnologies, Neonicotinoid insecticides, Precaution, Regulation, Safety, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia

RECIPES Event

Event Date

22 February 2022 - 23 February 2022

Location

Online

Language

English

Analysis of the case studies

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Thu, 11 Mar 2021 10:02:10 +0000

full image

Analysis of the case studies

To fully understand the complexities and the controversies around the application of the precautionary principle, the RECIPES project conducted nine case studies. The aim was to understand and explain the potential differences in the application depending on the topic and the context. A comparison across the different cases indicates that the application of the precautionary principle had positive effects on innovation and contributed to more responsible pathways.

Back in 2019, the RECIPES project finalised the selection of the case studies and developed a conceptual framework focusing on the role of the case studies within the project as well as a methodological framework for the individual case study analyses.

An overview of all case studies can be found HERE, while the conceptual framework and the methodological framework can be found HERE.

Gender Analysis

The RECIPES project is committed to take gender aspects into account when conducting its research. To this end, a note has been developed to inform case study authors on how to reflect gender considerations in the different research steps. The note is available HERE.

Case Studies documentation

Over the course of 2020, the case study authors have engaged in research and drafting. They prepared a report, a factsheet and a short video for all nine cases:

Case study 1: CRISPR-based gene drives
Case study 2: Genetically modified organisms
Case study 3: Endocrine disruptors
Case study 4: Neonicotinoid insecticides
Case study 5: Nanotechnologies
Case study 6: Glyphosate
Case study 7: Financial risks in water infrastructure planning
Case study 8: The use of artificial intelligence in healthcare
Case study 9: Microplastics in food products and cosmetics

All case studies have been bundled in one report, which can be found HERE.

As a last step, the RECIPES project compared the different case studies and identified complexities and controversies surrounding the application of the precautionary principle in the different cases. The report, which combines the inter-case study analysis and the identification of cross-cutting issues is available HERE.

Lessons learnt

When comparing the nine case studies, the RECIPES project identified several lessons learnt in regard to the relevance of the precautionary principle, procedures for its application and effects of the precautionary principle. Lessons learnt include the following:

Relevance: It is necessary to take a broader array of potential consequences into account when developing a new technology and to openly communicate the limitations of scientific knowledge as well as of technological solutions.
Procedures: Although deliberative methods and procedures have proven valuable for public involvement, more guidance is needed on the scope of procedures and methods to acknowledge differences e.g. in the evidence base.
Effects: While the case studies indicated that there is a need to stimulate pathways for innovation, more empirical research is required to test the claim that the precautionary principle hinders innovations in the European Union.

The RECIPES project also compared the results of the case study analysis with the results of the stocktake of the precautionary principle conducted in 2019. The results of the stocktake can be found HERE. The comparison of results can be found HERE.

Authors

Please refer to the individual reports for the list of authors.

ISBN/ISSN/DOI

N/A

Themes

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, Funding Sources & Finance

Case Study

Report

Publishing Date

11 March 2021

Language

English

Case Study 5: Nanotechnologies

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Wed, 11 Nov 2020 16:42:23 +0000

full image

Case Study 5: Nanotechnologies

About the case

As an emerging technology and an important group within the so-called advanced materials, nanotechnologies are characterized by manifold areas of application and high uncertainty.

The Case Study factsheet can be downloaded HERE

The full Case Study can be downloaded HERE

There is uncertainty about nanotechnologies and advanced materials, which makes the definition of risks difficult. Why? While risks allow knowledge on possible outcomes and an expression of probabilities, uncertainty does not allow the assignment of probabilities to outcomes.

Brief summary of the case study

The European Commission pointed out that nanotechnologies and nanosciences will offer promising solutions for a wide variety of technical problems in a socially acceptable and environmental-friendly way. Therefore, the nanotechnology research programmes have been associated by safety and sustainability research from the very beginning. National nanotechnology research strategies and action plans followed this policy very soon.

Moreover, it has been emphasised that a transparent public communication and a serious inclusion strategy has to be applied to inform the interested public and all concerned parties about the benefits but also about possible disadvantages of these new materials and products. Additional to the nanotechnology research programmes most of the member states opened calls for safety issues mainly focusing on worker safety, consumer protection and toxicology.

The European Commission and the European Parliament debated and published detailed nanospecific regulation on topics of high concern like cosmetics, novel food and food contact materials at an early stage. Finally, these activities were carried out by establishing national and international networks to include all relevant knowledge.

This tight interaction between organising and evaluating the available knowledge on nanotechnologies and their effects on different systems, translating and disseminating these results on possible benefits and adverse effects to all interested parties and setting up specific communication and working processes such as nanotechnology commission in Austria are an illustrative example how the precautionary principle and its following concepts like responsible research and innovation can be successfully applied.

Partner: Institute of Technology Assessment of the Austrian Academy of Sciences

Authors

André Gazsó, Institute of Technology Assessment, Austrian Academy of Sciences
Anna Pavlicek, Institute of Technology Assessment, Austrian Academy of Sciences

Contributors
Gloria Rose, Institute of Technology Assessment, Austrian Academy of Sciences
Sabine Greßler, independent scientist (funded by NanoTrust at ITA-OAW)
Rene Fries, independent scientist (funded by NanoTrust at ITA-OAW)

With thanks to:
Thanks to all RECIPES partners for valuable input and discussion, especially partners at Maastricht University, The Danish Board of Technology, Rathenau Institute, and Humboldt University

Themes

Nanotechnologies, Precaution, Regulation, Safety

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, Funding Sources & Finance, NGOs & Associations

Case Study

Publishing Date

11 November 2020

Language

English

RECIPES e-Conference

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Fri, 21 Aug 2020 13:37:37 +0000

full image

RECIPES e-Conference

On 4 and May 2020, the RECIPES e-Conference took place. During the first day, members of the Advisory Board provided feedback on the nine draft case studies on the precautionary principle and gave input to the scenarios on the future application of the precautionary principle that will be developed with stakeholders during workshops in June and September 2020. On the second day, the consortium discussed the cross-case comparison and prepared the scenario workshops.

Nearly one and a half years after the RECIPES project was kicked off in Maastricht, the Consortium convened virtually to look at interim results and discuss the next steps.

On the first day, the Advisory Board members were invited to provide feedback on the nine draft RECIPES case studies on the precautionary principle. In parallel sessions, the case study authors presented their preliminary findings and discussed remaining issues with the Advisory Board members as well as with Consortium members.

A more detailed overview of the case studies can be found here.

The first day was also used to receive feedback from the Advisory Board members on the draft scenarios prepared by the Consortium that will be discussed during scenario workshops in June and September 2020. The draft scenarios for the future application of the precautionary principle included the continuation of the current practice as a baseline and the focus on precaution or the focus on innovation as two possible directions.

During the second day, the Consortium reflected on the feedback received from the Advisory Board members and discussed the next steps, i.e. the finalization of the case studies, the cross-case comparison as well as the preparation of the scenario workshops.

An overview of the steps can be found here.

The RECIPES project is funded under the European Union's Horizon 2020 Programme for Research and Innovation and is implemented by 11 consortium partners from all geographical regions of Europe. Involved are three leading academic groups in the field of the precautionary principle (from Maastricht University, University of Bergen, and Humboldt-University Berlin), three major European players in Technology Assessment (Rathenau Institute, the Danish Board of Technology and the Austrian Academy of Sciences) and five leading non-profit research institutes (Dialogik, Ecologic Institute, IASS, ARC-FUND and K&I).

Organiser

IASS and Maastricht University

Contact

Prof. Dr. Ellen Vos and Dr. Kristel de Smedt
law-recipes@maastrichtuniversity.nl

Themes

CRISPR-based gene drives, Endocrine disruptors, Financial risks and urban waste planning, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s), Glyphosate, Innovation, Nanotechnologies, Neonicotinoid insecticides, Precaution

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Funding Sources & Finance, NGOs & Associations

RECIPES Event

Event Date

4 May 2020 - 5 May 2020

Location

Online

Language

English

Citizens meeting in the Latium Region (Italy)

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 15:47:00 +0000

full image

Citizens meeting in the Latium Region (Italy)

In June 2019, four citizens’ meetings were organised in Italy by K&I, under the RECIPES project. The meetings took place in the Latium region (central Italy), namely in Capranica – Viterbo (June 1), Latina (June 5) and Rome (June 3 and 10).

The meetings were designed to provide the participants with an occasion to reflect on technology, risks and safety, focusing on the precautionary principle in the framework of technological innovation, and starting from the examples of three cases: GMOs, nanotechnologies and neonicotinoid pesticides. In parallel, citizen meetings organized by other RECIPES partners were also held in Bulgaria, Norway, Denmark and the Netherlands .

In the weeks before, short illustrative documents were provided to the participants in the meetings to familiarize them with the issues dealt with. During the meetings, participants expressed their opinions on precaution and innovation through a questionnaire and group interviews. They started by answering a structured questionnaire, and then some of the issues dealt with in the questions were discussed in depth during group interviews (as a whole, five discussion groups were formed).

Despite the novelty and complexity of the topics at stake, the discussion was very participated and dynamic. The main reason to attend the meetings was the wish to learn more about precaution and innovation.
About GMOs (whose cultivation is forbidden in Italy, with some small and controlled exceptions), the prevailing opinion was that their use and utility should be assessed case by case, and their labeling is necessary both for food and other products. Concerning nano-technologies, while recognising their potential for industry and for healthcare, uncertainty prevailed: about one-half of people were not able to express an opinion. The need for a case-by-case assessment resulted to be the most popular answer. As for pesticides, there was an orientation towards the controlled use of these substances. The most widespread opinions, among two-thirds of the attendants, in fact, were those highlighting the need to carefully assess the risks before allowing their use, again on a case-by-case basis.

A large majority of participants showed both a strong orientation to precaution, mainly considering it as a way to promote responsible innovation, as well as a positive attitude towards innovation, which was reckoned a way to secure growth and prosperity by more than half of the citizens consulted. All in all, precaution and innovation have been considered by the majority of participants as two sides of the same coin, and the contribution of research was seen as crucial. An extended idea of precaution, covering also a consideration of the social consequences of technologies, was widely shared. Different opinions have been expressed about the degree of certainty needed to ban a product or a technology, but no extreme positions emerged during the debate.

About the involvement of stakeholders in decisions related to the precautionary principle, a major divide has been observed during all the meetings. On the one hand, there were supporters of an inclusive point of view stating that all the stakeholders affected by a decision should take part in it, while the opponents considered expertise as the main requirement to participate in the decisions. Many participants stressed the need to improve education, information, and social dialogue to improve decisions and involve citizens and other stakeholders in the decision making process. In general, a lack of trust in politicians and decision-makers was a pretty shared feature of the citizens involved in the meetings.

As for the specific issues that emerged in different contexts, specific concerns about the contamination of agricultural crops were expressed in the meeting held in the countryside, while a wider debate on knowledge and democracy took place in the two meetings held in town.

Organiser

Knowledge and innovation

Contact

Giovanna Declich | Email: giovanna.declich@knowledge-innovation.org

Themes

Environment, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s), Glyphosate, Health, Innovation, Nanotechnologies, Precaution, Regulation, Safety, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, NGOs & Associations, Citizens & Civil Society Organisations

RECIPES Event

Event Date

1 June 2019 - 10 June 2019

Location

Capranica, Viterbo, Latina, Roma

Language

English

Case Studies: Conceptual and methodological frameworks

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 14:52:58 +0000

full image

Case Studies: Conceptual and methodological frameworks

One of the RECIPES project’s aims is to understand and explain the differences in the application of the precautionary principle in 9 different case topics, in a way that reflects the particular context of the case and the arguments for invoking the precautionary principle.

In this video, Joe Rini, Research Associate at the IASS Potsdam and coordinator of the nine case studies, explains how the principle is applied in different contexts and thematic areas.

The Conceptual framework for comparative multiple case study analysis, part of the “Multiple case-study analysis” module, focuses on how the case study component fits into the overall RECIPES project, on the results of a literature review, on the case study methodology, and on the key risk properties of complexity, uncertainty, and ambiguity. Together with the case study methodology, this report lays the foundation for carrying out the case study research, as well as the comparative analysis of the 9 case studies and transitioning these findings into the rest of the RECIPES project.

The goal of the “Multiple case-study analysis” is to perform 9 case studies and a comparison of the different cases in order to develop scenarios on the future application of the precautionary principle. This will feed into the design of new tools and guidelines for the precautionary principle in respect of reconciling precaution and innovation.

Each case study topic consists of different technological risks, at different stages of development and deployment, and with completely different legal frameworks. As a result, the project team developed a flexible methodological framework that allows the research teams to learn as much as possible about the case topic using the appropriate and relevant sources. The comparative case analysis employs a number of strategies including pair-wise peer review, iterating the analysis against case study researchers, and remaining open to the best way to compare and contrast the cases.

In this project phase, researchers seek to link the precautionary principle and innovation considerations to the key risk properties of complexity, uncertainty, and ambiguity, which represent challenges for the understanding and the ability to communicate effectively about risk and innovation.

Complexity refers to the difficulty of identifying and quantifying causal links between a multitude of potential candidates and specific adverse effects. It includes the interplay of human agency within the context of regulation, innovation, legal decision-making, changing societal values, and vested interests, which result in higher-level complexity than the technological system alone.

Uncertainty is the key risk property in invoking the Precautionary Principle, as its purpose is to allow decision-makers to act despite scientific uncertainty (lack of knowledge about the outcomes or likelihoods, or both, of an event or process). In contrast, risk describes situations where possible outcomes are known, and the likelihoods of those outcomes can be described. Given the subjective complexity faced by decision-makers in the case study topics, the project highlights the functional uncertainty that emerges from highly complex technologies and societal processes.

Ambiguity refers to the fact that outcomes are potentially uncertain, and that different groups will value these outcomes differently. It is present in how scientists and risk specialists evaluate the same evidence, and in how outcomes as risks are evaluated. It implies the need to engage societal stakeholders in the discussion about the harms and benefits of technological innovations and other risks.

Part of this report also concentrates on innovation, as a crucial element for human and societal improvement, which must be regulated to prevent harm, thus leading to a complex interplay between regulation and innovation.

The Methodological framework for the case study analysis details the methodological framework for carrying out the case study research foreseen by the RECIPES project. The document serves both as a methodological framework – an explanation of what to consider in each section – and as a template for delivering the final analysis at the end of the case study research.

Authors

Dino Trescher

Credits

With thanks to: Project coordination by Maastricht University

Valuable input provided by the RECIPES research partners at Maastricht University, DBT, Rathenau Institute, and Humboldt University

Attachments

Conceptual Framework for comparative multiple case study analysis

Themes

CRISPR-based gene drives, Endocrine disruptors, Environment, Financial risks and urban waste planning, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s), Glyphosate, Governance, Health, Nanotechnologies, Neonicotinoid insecticides, Precaution, Regulation, Safety, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Research & Academia, Industry & Business

Case Study

Report

Publishing Date

6 January 2020

Language

English

Multi-Speed Europe, Differentiated Integration and The Future of the European Union

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Tue, 26 Nov 2019 13:33:42 +0000

full image

Multi-Speed Europe, Differentiated Integration and The Future of the European Union

The 2019 edition of the Maastricht Centre for European Law academic opening event focused on the precautionary principle in the European legal order. The speakers discussed different aspects of the principle, its relevance for environmental law, as well as its relationship with innovation.

A starting point of the discussion was an overview of how many acts have been adopted on the EU level and how far the European Court of Justice has applied the principle, given by Prof. Ellen Vos Professor of European Union Law. The overview will is based on the findings of a report on the “The effect of the Precautionary Principle (PP) since 2000”, which is currently being prepared by the Consortium partners of the RECIPES project (www. recipes-project.eu), under the lead of the Maastricht University.

“One of the problems of the precautionary principle is the difficulty in defining it. And it has been one of those areas where it is easy to criticise the principle because you can very quickly make a foolish interpretation. There`s plenty of people who say that precaution means that unless you are absolutely certain, you shouldn't be doing something. Whilst, in fact, it really only means that it’s not because we are not absolutely certain that we might not potentially address some of the challenges over new technology”, says Prof. Geert Van Calster, Professor University of Leuven.

As technology can come with risks to society and the environment, Maja Brkan, Associate Professor of EU law, asks “whether the precautionary principle should play a role in regulating technology in EU law”. Indeed, as mentioned by Van Calster, when looking at the attempt of the industry to introduce a so-called “Innovation principle”, we see industries setting the priority on industrial development over the environment and public health.

These and many other questions often arise when considering new products and technologies that could affect health and the environment, like GMOs, nano-technologies, insecticides, artificial intelligence, and similar. For this reason, the RECIPES project examines the application of the principle, based on eight case studies. They all represent areas in which the stakes are high and which are thus particularly well suited for examining the complexity and controversy around the precautionary principle.

Organiser

Maastricht University, Faculty of Law

Contact

Prof. Dr. Ellen Vos and Dr. Kristel de Smedt | Email: law-recipes@maastrichtuniversity.nl

Further Links

MCEL/CERIM Academic Opening Conference

Themes

Environment, Health, Innovation, Nanotechnologies, Precaution, Regulation, Safety, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Regulatory Authorities & Agencies, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, NGOs & Associations

External Event

Event Date

12 September 2019

Location

Maastricht

Language

English

RECIPES Citizen meeting in Bergen (Norway)

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Thu, 07 Nov 2019 11:57:13 +0000

full image

RECIPES Citizen meeting in Bergen (Norway)

On May 28, 2019, a citizen meeting was held in Bergen (Norway), where 26 people of different ages and professions met to discuss precaution and innovation in relation to (new) technologies.

On the day, a group of 26 people with different demographics met in Bergen to discuss precaution and innovation. The purpose of the meeting was to provide some insights into citizen perceptions of precaution and innovation. Similar citizen meetings were held in Italy, Bulgaria, Netherlands, and Denmark.

Before the meeting, a short informational material was developed by the RECIPES consortium and sent to the participants. The information material provided information on the Precautionary Principle (PP) and innovation, as well as the dilemmas and controversies connected to three selected cases: GMO, Nanotechnology, and pesticides.

In the meeting, the RECIPES project was first presented shortly, including a brief introduction to three of the RECIPES cases. Thereafter, participants filled out a survey on precaution and innovation in the areas of GMOs, nanotechnology, and pesticides, followed by group discussions of 10 of the questions in the survey.

The discussions were lively as participants included both those fascinated by new technologies and those who were more concerned about emerging risks. Generally, there seemed to be a agreement that PP and innovation should be balanced. However, regarding the question of prioritizing between the two, most of the participants tended towards a more precautionary approach.

Of the three cases, participants expressed more concerns about pesticides than about GMOs and nanotechnologies. Some controversies on GMOs emerged in the discussions. While many participants expressed worries about the developments of these technologies, some also highlighted the possibilities of these technologies and that the regulations in some cases may be too strict, holding back innovation.

Lastly, some controversies emerged around the questions on the possibilities of controlling technology. Participants disagreed about the possibilities to steer or regulate the development of technologies at an international level but mainly agreed that there are possibilities to direct innovations towards more sustainable directions on a national scale.

Organiser

University of Bergen

Contact

Laura Drivdal and Jeroen van der Sluijs | Email: Laura.drivdal@uib.no

Further Links

https://www.uib.no/svt/126821/møte-om-risiko-og-teknologisk-innovasjon

Themes

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s), Governance, Innovation, Nanotechnologies, Neonicotinoid insecticides, Precaution, Regulation, Safety

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Citizens & Civil Society Organisations

RECIPES Event

Event Date

28 May 2019

Location

Bergen

Language

norwegian

RECIPES Citizen meeting in Sofia

chiara.mazzetti@ecologic.eu — Tue, 29 Oct 2019 15:55:57 +0000

full image

RECIPES Citizen meeting in Sofia

The half-day citizen meeting in Sofia brought together 27 participants representing different social groups, professions, cities, and age. Similar meetings were organised in four other countries – Norway, Italy, Denmark and the Netherlands. The aim of the meetings was to learn how EU citizens perceive fairness, risk and safety in relation to research, precaution, and innovation.

Prior to the event in Sofia, participants received information material that aimed to assist them in their reflections before and during the citizen meeting. The material briefly presented the essence of the precautionary principle, its implementation in the EU and the relationship between precaution and innovation. It also presented the topics of GMOs, nanotechnology, and pesticides in order to exemplify precaution and innovation.

During the meeting, the participants expressed their opinions on precaution and innovation through a questionnaire and group interviews. Although the discussions showed that the precautionary principle is still a new topic for participants, they were eager to share their thoughts on questions such as: which of the two – precaution or innovation – should have a higher priority; what are the ethical and moral aspects of the precautionary principle, and who should be involved in its application and further development. They also discussed their trust in politicians regulating technologies and provided their insights about what should be required to ban a certain product/technology.

Main findings and conclusions from the discussions during the citizen meeting in Bulgaria:

- Participants were mostly motivated by their desire to learn more about precaution and innovation, as well as by their concerns about the potential risks posed by emerging technologies.
- Genetically modified organisms: strict control measures should be introduced in order to avoid harm on the environment; a case-by-case assessment of the potential effects of GMOs on environment, people’s health and consumers’ safety should be conducted before permitting their release on the market.
- Nanotechnologies: participants expressed concerns similar to the ones related to GMOs but, at the same time, they recognised the enormous potential of nanotechnologies to improve health and prosperity in the future.
- Pesticides: the participants had deep concerns about the current and future use of pesticides. The dominating opinion was that stringent control measures should be introduced to avoid the harmful effects on environment and public health.
- Decisions on banning a product/technology should be based on scientific evidence, and experts and scientists should have the leading role in decision-making.
- Ethical and moral aspects, as well as assessments of possible negative effects on society at large, should be considered when applying the precautionary principle.
- All relevant stakeholders should be involved when the precautionary principle is invoked, as well as in the further development of the principle to ensure that all interested parties receive a fair opportunity to present their arguments.
- The burden of proof of safety of products/technologies should be on the manufacturers, while the role of the state is to develop the legal framework.
- The precautionary principle was almost universally recognised as an appropriate and effective tool to regulate uncertainties arising from the development of technologies.

The results of the citizen meeting in Bulgaria were summarised in a national report and will feed into an analytical report covering the information from all five national reports. The concluding report will be presented to policy-makers and the EU Commission.

The meeting in Sofia was held as part of the RECIPES project, which is a Horizon 2020 project that ARC Fund participates in together with ten other partners from Europe.

Organiser

Applied Research and Communications Fund (ARC Fund)

Contact

Ventseslav Kozarev | e-mail: ventseslav.kozarev@online.bg

Desislava Asenova | e-mail: desislava.asenova@online.bg

Further Links

RECIPES' Citizens meetings

RECIPES' Case Studies: Aligning Precaution and Innovation

“Precaution and innovation in Europe” – a citizen meeting in Sofia

Themes

Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s), Innovation, Nanotechnologies, Precaution, Regulation, Safety, Science

Interesting for

Policy Makers, Research & Academia, Industry & Business, NGOs & Associations, Citizens & Civil Society Organisations

Nanotechnologies

Precaution for Responsible Innovation: New Options to Move Forward

Precaution for Responsible Innovation: New Options to Move Forward

Themes

Interesting for

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

European Policy Workshop: “Precaution for responsible innovation”

Themes

Interesting for

Analysis of the case studies

Analysis of the case studies

Gender Analysis

Case Studies documentation

Lessons learnt

Themes

Interesting for

Case Study 5: Nanotechnologies

Case Study 5: Nanotechnologies

About the case

Brief summary of the case study

Partner: Institute of Technology Assessment of the Austrian Academy of Sciences

Themes

Interesting for

RECIPES e-Conference

RECIPES e-Conference

Themes

Interesting for

Citizens meeting in the Latium Region (Italy)

Citizens meeting in the Latium Region (Italy)

Themes

Interesting for

Case Studies: Conceptual and methodological frameworks

Case Studies: Conceptual and methodological frameworks

Themes

Interesting for

Multi-Speed Europe, Differentiated Integration and The Future of the European Union

Multi-Speed Europe, Differentiated Integration and The Future of the European Union

Themes

Interesting for

RECIPES Citizen meeting in Bergen (Norway)

RECIPES Citizen meeting in Bergen (Norway)

Themes

Interesting for

RECIPES Citizen meeting in Sofia

RECIPES Citizen meeting in Sofia

Themes

Interesting for

Tags