A new framework to assess the ethical quality of technology

Technology is an intentional human activity that the modern industry has incorporated to the market. This technology is pro-moted by strategic decisions made from different kind of institu-tions (private or public) such as enterprises, investors, universities

and research and development centers. It is evident that behind the technology there are involved interests and these interests are not only epistemic, but they respond to diverse internal and external pressures (economic, politics, commercial, military, etc.).

Additionally, technology is not simply the computer, for example, but large-scale computer networks linked through tel-ecommunications systems; it is able to control and command sys-tems; it is data banks; the know-how and the software to manipu-late them, and the power implicit in controlling them and so on.

Technology holds a lot of power, exercised by people over peo-ple or things, in view of obtaining the desired goal and, as a result of this exercise, diverse benefits and damages are derived. This means that technology as an instrument of power (Barbour, 1993) is not neutral. It is always an instrument of ambiguous power (versatile) that can generate diverse consequences depending on the context in which it is deployed. Moreover, it is accepted that technological development is in the hands of big enterprises and private institutions. Nevertheless, political power and other mechanisms of social pressure should act as an important coun-terpoint in order to hold back interests and leanings. Starting from these assumptions in order to change goals and reduce the harmful effects of technologies, we are first of all required to reconsider the priorities with the purpose of modifying our attitudes and behaviors according to the context. In this sense, this perspective calls for the effort to analyze every technology in great depth within its own circumstances, avoiding deep-seated topics, slogans and prejudgments.

Taking into account the qualifications mentioned in the previ-ous paragraph we can say that the technologies are not morally neutral. Technology is not an exclusively technical productive activity. This fact means that technologies must be socially ques-tioned from many sides. In the next section we concretise the criticism of every technology, by formulating a set of questions in order to assess the moral dimension of technology because its

incorporation, as a new social actor, into our everyday life has modified, in many ways, the social paradigm.

In our study it is essential to bear in mind how human beings and technologies are always bound together in a dynamic rela-tionship. Technologies never exist alone, but as a more or less ambiguous opportunity to open new possibilities often unknown to us at the beginning. They act both actively and passively:

actively, by imposing their requirements and restrictions, and passively, when used for attaining certain human purposes.

Having this point of view in mind, it is possible to assess the ethical quality of a particular technology by considering to what extent this technology is in accordance with an established list of relevant ethical factors. The list is fixed in the sense that it does not change from technology to technology, but it is also open and may be revised according to improvements in our ability to adjust our ethical assessments. The result of such an evaluation shows what conditions are imposed, what values promoted, and what purposes are sought from the technology under scrutiny; in short, what its script is. The current list of eleven ethical factors is as follows:

(1) Does it answer or help to answer an existing demand?

(2) Does it make understanding and cooperation easier among people trying to manage a problem?

(3) Does it point towards the characteristics and demands of its users? Is it flexible, easy to adapt to changes in its environment and to new requirements?

(4) Does it promote users’ autonomy?

(5) In what ways does it increase the welfare of its users?

(6) Does it respect valuable social practices and universal human rights?

(7) Does it keep working under human control?

(8) Can it be integrated with other well-founded technologies?

Is it easy to update and maintain?

(9) Is it constrained by a heavy demand for resources when it is manufactured or used?

(10) What are the undesired effects on people or the environ-ment?

(11) To what degree is it recyclable and/or reusable?

It is necessary to specify that here the autonomy considered in factor (4) is that showed by Shneiderman (Shneiderman, 1990)

“[...] users want to be empowered by technology to be able to apply their knowledge and experience to make judgements that lead to improved job performance and greater personal satisfac-tion”. From an ethical perspective, this is always a central issue in the relationship between individuals and technology.

It is important to emphasize that any answer to these ques-tions would be a determinant one, but the setting of them is a first approximation made in order to know what the moral impact of the technology under scrutiny is. It is a way to find out what the valuable elements are and what are the reprehensible or undesirable elements embedded within the analysed technology.

However, the process is not finished at this point. It has to be completed through new questions or through a detailed analysis of the answers received and the implications associated with them.

Now it is possible to illustrate how the analysis of these pre-vious questions inside the ICT environment shows many of the key ethical points to be considered in these technologies. For instance, the exploration could proceed as follows:

(1) Is this technology necessary or is it just another model or version of something already existing? Is it just business in its cycle of production and consumption? Does it contribute towards solving a real social necessity? Novelties seem to be indispensable in the market; “New!” appears to be the best advertising, but newer is not necessarily synonymous with better.

(2) Does this technology facilitate and enhance communica-tion among people? From an ethical analysis, communicacommunica-tion is not just transmission of information. In a communication envi-ronment, quality (what and how it is said) is often more impor-tant than quantity (how many bits are sent).

(3) To what extent does the design of these systems and devices take into account the physical and psychological structure of human beings? Do people adapt to the machine rather than the reverse?

(4) Does this technology produce an empowerment of the user in regard to working with, communicating or managing information?

(5) Are there clear benefits for people, or are we talking of benefits for systems and machines? The latter does not always imply the former.

(6) To what extent are trust, privacy, reliability and security protected?

(7) The high level of automation that computers have intro-duced should not be an excuse to elude accountability and responsibility. Nevertheless, this is possible only when there is someone making a final decision whenever it is necessary.

(8) IT opens a vast and as yet unexplored horizon of new pos-sibilities. However, its success often depends on its capacity to operate well with other digital technologies. The procedures to maintain and to update these technologies are not just technical possibilities that can be more or less fulfilled. The ethical claim is that these procedures must exist and have to be as effective as possible.

(9) Again, consumption of resources is not just an economic matter, but also an ethical one. This is because today, more than ever, we all share a world of scarce resources where saving (rational and reasonable spending) is not optional.

(10) Disposal of electronic waste damages the environment, while the accumulation of radiation emissions from electronic

products may be potentially dangerous in the long term. In addi-tion, an important point to analyse is how information trans-mission devices have an effect on human communication and human relation patterns.

Finally, (11) Recycling is also necessary to reduce the huge economical and ecological impact of IT as much as possible.

As an example, restricting ourselves to domestic goods, we can find personal computers, laptops, cellular phones, TV sets, video cameras, video games, digital players and so on.

By proceeding in this way, we believe that ethical evaluations would be fairer, more realistic and systematic because the ques-tions are always the same for each technology, whatever its par-ticular characteristics are. As we have said throughout this pas-sage, the achievement of some kind of script during the design process would be useful in prescribing how to act when using technology. In this sense, the set of ethical questions presented here could work as a script. Simultaneously, this set of questions could help us to contextualize our way of life with regard to our close relationship with technology, thinking about what is wrong, what we should improve, who we are affecting, and, what is more, what kind of person we wish to be in order to improve our daily personal and professional practices (and their implications) in order to achieve a good quality of life, in short, to live well in our societies (Aristotle).

At a later stage, extensive works have been developed in order to range over the whole field of technological assessment. These new studies (Wright, 2011) follows the same approach as we have set out above, a set of questions aimed at uncovering ethical issues related to ICT, even though it could be applied in a wider context.

This ethical framework is based on the insight that the whole of technological assessment is value laden, from the internal and external participants of a technological project (i.e.: users, man-agers, customers, stakeholders, researchers, experts, etc.) to the

different processes that constitute the technological project (i.e.:

decision-making, policy-making, designing, development, etc.). It is not sufficient to simply analyse the ethical consequences of a technology, but the ethical issues of the whole assessment proc-ess must also be considered.

Technologies may challenge moral or cultural values and beliefs, and their implementation may also have significant impact on people other than the direct consumer of the technol-ogy, meaning the user or customer. For this reason, in contrast to Wright’s framework, our set of ethical factors have a twofold address, to concrete technology and also to ICT technologies, in order to grasp the essential significance of the ethical involve-ment between human beings and technology at many different levels (domestic technology, information technology, telecom-munications, industrial technology, etc.).

Additionally, the ethical framework presented by Wright is structured around key ethical questions rather than philosophical theories, applicable to different cultures (contexts). In accord-ance with Wright the new proposal is “[…] a framework for an ethical assessment which can be performed in regard to any policy, service, project or programme involving information technology”. The ethical evaluations carried out through this framework not only consider ICT as one of the main actors, but also the stakeholders and the context within which they are involved in the technological project. Therefore it is necessary to take into account the nature of the situation, the context where a technology is deployed to enable an understanding of the ethical issues woven through the social values of that particular moment.

What is more, as we argue throughout the present research work, the new framework proposed is based on the idea that

“The ethical impact assessment is needed of new and emerg-ing technologies because technologies are not neutral, nor value free” (Wright, 2011). Technologies, through their configuration and use, are the reflection of the values of their designers,

policy-makers, developers, project managers, users, etc. and, nowadays, of their stakeholders as well. The latter, through this kind of consultation, can register and comment at any stage during the assessment process. They can nominate alternative courses of actions, drafting of scopes and guidelines, suggest safeguards and redefine some aspects of design to minimise ethical risks before a technology, service or programme is launched.

It is important to emphasize that the information gathered from the set of questions is a first approximation in order to know what the moral impact of the technology under scrutiny is.

As we have said, the process is not finished only by answering all the questions, there is yet more work to do and the significance of the ethical factors will be detailed more fully through new questions or through a detailed analysis of the answers received and the implications associated with them. In comparison with Wright, his framework also needs to be added to with additional information but only from the stakeholders that are directly related to ICT technologies, and not with the remaining existing technologies. For him, a way to engage with the stakeholders is to proactively provide information, responding to their complaints and implementing good practices when undertaking the ethical impact assessment.

From our point of view, a fact to emphasis is that Wright, on many occasions, uses debate as a communicative ethical tool, for instance, among the stakeholders. In comparison with our idea of ethical tools, we prefer to talk about dialogue instead of debate.

Dialogue, as we will see in Chapter 5 assumes that the partici-pants in the course of deliberation already have some interest in and insight into the matter at hand. It also presupposes that the participants can elaborate their interest and knowledge through an exchange of perspectives. Dialogue requires openness towards the views of others. These summarized features should be the central elements in reaching an understanding by mutual consent with the stakeholders.

In the light of this diversity, the definition of an appropriate framework for an ethical assessment, such as Wright proposes, by means of the identification of the relevant ethical issues within the whole structure of a technological project is required. In accordance with him further research on technology assessment should seek to make explicit the social, ethical, and political val-ues embedded in a given innovation (and its context) and rein-forced through its use. Such research might, for instance, exam-ine the extent to which an innovation exacerbates dependence on technological expertise, supports user autonomy, or fosters social inequalities. Finally, it could also explore how the use of certain technologies reinforces or undermines institutional values (i.e.:

efficiency, accountability and responsiveness).