-
Chapter 4. The Decision Framework
- The MIT Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
4 The Decision Framework Jonathan B. Tucker This chapter presents a decision framework that policy makers can use to assess the risk that individual emerging technologies will be misused for hostile purposes, and to develop tailored governance strategies. The model was developed through an iterative process that combined deductive reasoning with feedback from the analysis of empirical case studies. For reasons of clarity, the decision framework is first discussed in this chapter and then applied to fourteen emerging dual-use technologies in the following section. The decision framework comprises three interconnected processes: (1) technology monitoring to detect emerging dual-use innovations with a potential risk of misuse, (2) technology assessment to determine the likelihood of misuse and the feasibility of regulation for individual technologies, and (3) the selection of governance measures based on the technology assessment and a cost–benefit analysis. These three processes and the methodology for applying the decision framework are explained in detail hereafter. Technology Monitoring A prerequisite for effective technology governance is a technology-watch program that monitors emerging technologies in the public and private sectors and identifies the potential for misuse. Some rudimentary mechanisms for technology monitoring already exist. The regular five-year review conferences of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) and the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) include surveys of advances in science and technology that have implications for the respective treaty regimes. Given the rapid pace of developments, however, the BWC expert Nicholas Sims contends that “five years is too long an interval” for the science and technology reviews and that they should be conducted every year in an expert forum.1 A few other organizations also conduct assessments of dual-use technologies in the biological and chemical fields. The Australia Group has established ad hoc committees to review certain technologies of concern, such as chemical microreactors 68 J. B. Tucker and gene synthesis, to advise on whether these items should be added to the group’s harmonized export-control lists. Independent scientific advisory bodies such as the National Research Council (an arm of the U.S. National Academies) and the British Royal Society also assess emerging technologies when asked to do so by their governments , but they do not have an ongoing mandate to perform this function. Finally, a small number of scholars in academia and the think-tank world monitor emerging technologies and assess their dual-use risks. Examples include the Program on Emerging Technologies (PoET) at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the Synthetic Biology Engineering Research Center (SynBERC) at the University of California, Berkeley; the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University; the Synthetic Biology Project at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C.; and the Action Group on Erosion, Technology , and Concentration (ETC Group) in Ottawa, Canada. In the future, it would be desirable to establish an institutionalized technologywatch program that is permanent, centralized, and comprehensive in scope; that draws on a wide range of expertise from government, industry, and academia; and that reports to a key agency involved in regulatory decision making, such as the Office of Management and Budget, or an interagency group that exerts significant influence on U.S. government regulatory processes. Technology Assessment Once an emerging dual-use technology has been identified, it is important to assess its characteristics in a systematic manner. As illustrated in figure 4.1, the decision framework focuses on two key dimensions of a technology: its risk of misuse and its governability. Each of these dimensions is evaluated with a set of specific parameters. Assessing the Risk of Misuse The risk of misuse is assessed on the basis of four parameters: accessibility, ease of misuse, magnitude of potential harm resulting from misuse, and imminence of potential misuse. Accessibility This parameter measures how easy it is to acquire the technology. The first step in the misuse of a technology is obtaining the hardware, software, and intangible information that enable its use. These components and information may be commercially available, proprietary if developed in the private sector, or restricted because of classification or some other reason. The accessibility parameter also takes into account the amount of money needed to purchase the technology and whether this level of expenditure is within the means of an individual , a group, or nation-state. (Of course, a scientist working in a research [34.201.37.128] Project MUSE (2024-03-28 20:05 GMT) The Decision Framework 69 Figure 4.1 Decision framework for technology governance. 70 J. B. Tucker laboratory...