Technology Assessment in East Asia: Experiences and New Approaches

Integrating social and ethical concerns in innovation practice is a well-documented and debated issue in the United States and in Europe (namely through the EU-wide PACITA project). Related developments in other parts of the world are less discernible – at least to Westerns. Yet, as witnessed by the emergence of technology assessment (TA) in countries like Japan, TA and TA-like activities have a unique and long history and continue to play a role in contemporary STI processes (e.g. in the area of citizen engagement with nanotechnologies, or energy policy). Taking these observations as its entry point, this panel asks how STI governance is locally enacted in Asian knowledge-driven economies. Like their Western counterparts, nations like China, Indonesia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, etc., have undergone, and continue to undergo, rapid science- and technology-driven industrialization. In these processes, TA and TA-like activities develop with STI policies and programs and typically do so in nation- and region-specific ways.
To render these processes, policies, and programs visible, and understand their implications for STI governance, this panel will discuss contributions that:
• Describe and conceptualize how TA and TA-like activities have emerged in Asian KBEs, and in what particular forms (e.g. academic and parliamentary TA programs, linked to certain technologies and/or actors, which methods are used and why, etc.).
• Reflect how these activities has evolved with, sustained, and/or countered, STI policies on the regional, national, and international level.
• Compare and contrast how TA is, or is not, institutionalized in Asian countries and regions, e.g. through initiatives to initiate or abolish various TA forms, such as health TA, early-warning TA, and parliamentary TA; and/or point to prospects for TA capacity building.
• Situate the above processes within a broader theory of, and movement towards, new STI governance frameworks, such as anticipatory governance, responsible innovation, public engagement, and/or others.
By placing the development in historical, sociological, and comparative perspective, the panel seeks to open a space for critical reflection on the potential, problems, and limitations of initiating TA in Asia and draw connections to STI governance processes in other KBEs across the globe.