Anticipatory Governance

Anticipatory governance is one of the concepts that indicate a need for more forward-looking approaches to governing science and technology (S&T). This article will elaborate on the historical context in which such a need has been formulated, present different concerns with regard to which actors have attempted to govern the development of S&T in advance, and outline key elements of an approach to anticipatory governance particularly relevant for emerging nanoscale S&T.

S&T, together with the innovations resulting from them, have effected manifold changes in society and the environment—some intended and others unintended, some expected and others unexpected. While, throughout history, it has often been the fate of human inventions that they unfold in unpredicted and also contradictory ways, the vast accumulation of consequences and challenges resulting from S&T-based innovations during the extended period of rapid economic growth after World War II led to a widespread recognition especially among decision makers in the most advanced industrial countries that there was a systemic need to develop and institutionalize procedures of technology assessment (TA).

One foundational idea for TA was to establish an early warning system about probable or possible developments in S&T that are potentially highly significant to society. Most commonly, the institutional purpose of TA has been to inform and advice governmental decision making at the parliamentary, executive, or judicial levels. In addition to governmental offices, private corporations and civil society organizations, too, have become engaged in the assessment of S&T—be it to [Page 18]forecast developments that may be relevant for an organization's own future prospect, or to address issues that may also be of broader societal interest.

While the consequences of S&T obviously can be better assessed the more a field of S&T has been developed, conversely, it is harder to shape the configuration and course of S&T the more they have become entrenched in society. For this reason, its ambition notwithstanding, TA has often been criticized for coming too late. It is therefore critically important to try to assess the characteristics and potentialities of S&T as early as possible, while at the same time taking into account the manifold uncertainties and indeterminacies involved. As a consequence, TA is faced with the challenge of balancing temporal and knowledge gaps with different kinds of appropriate actions, such as repeatedly updating and expanding the knowledge basis.

Besides TA, there are also other means by which actors attempt to anticipate and govern S&T. For example, the governmental agencies or ministries concerned with funding or regulating S&T try to identify the areas of high future significance in order to allocate public funds accordingly or, respectively, to adapt regulatory frameworks in order to meet upcoming challenges concerning various public and private interests.

As the notion of governance suggests, S&T are governed within numerous institutional and organizational contexts, that is, contexts that extend beyond those commonly attributed to the state and government. Thus, potentially all actors concerned in one way or another with innovation may experience a need for improved foresight and future-oriented agency. The challenges addressed relate to the characteristics of new and emerging fields of S&T—especially as regards the generation of innovations and their potential significance for economic sectors and everyday life, environmental and health risks, security, privacy, equity, human dignity, and public perceptions and attitudes.

...