The document discusses how conventional approaches to risk regulation and technology governance tend to portray innovation as a linear process with a single optimal path, suppressing discussions of alternative options and knowledge about uncertainties. It argues that a more open, democratic approach is needed that acknowledges multiple feasible trajectories, considers a diversity of perspectives and priorities, and broadens the types of knowledge and stakeholders involved in decision making. This would help open up debates about alternative innovation pathways rather than closing down discussions based on narrow framings of risk.

1. From Risk Regulation to Innovation Governance: reconciling rationality, progress, precaution & democracy presentation to conference on ‘ Challenging Models in the Face of Uncertainty’, Clare College, Cambridge 28 th – 29 th September 2010 Andy Stirling SPRU – science and technology policy research

3. unproblematic problematic unproblematic problematic knowledge about likelihoods knowledge about possibilities Power and Knowledge contrasting aspects of incomplete knowledge after: Knight, Keynes, Shackle, Collingridge, Smithson, Ravetz, Wynne ... RISK UNCERTAINTY AMBIGUITY IGNORANCE

4. unproblematic problematic unproblematic problematic knowledge about likelihoods knowledge about possibilities RISK UNCERTAINTY AMBIGUITY decision rules aggregative analysis deliberative process command structure political closure reductive modeling stochastic reasoning rules of thumb Insurance overwhelming force ` evidence-basing agenda-setting intelligence-led horizon scanning transdisciplinarity liability law harm definitions indicators / metrics institutional remits rules of engagement Power and Knowledge Beck’s “organised irresponsibility” IGNORANCE not critical – shows pressures not only in use but also shaping of risk science

8. - indeterminacy: effective knowledge does not preclude surprise . G öd el, Dosi, Collingridge ”known knowns” foster hubris – HHCs and EDCs - incompleteness: knowledge enabling utility is limited on wider effects The Missing Politics of Knowledge ` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge: ` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action Conventional ‘risk practices’ suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’

9. - incompleteness: knowledge is always limited as a basis for action - ‘ inversity’: increased knowledge can increase ignorance . Einstein, Ravetz, Beck… area / perimeter of known – nonlinear dynamics ` - indeterminacy: effective knowledge does not preclude surprise The Missing Politics of Knowledge ` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge: ` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action Conventional ‘risk practices’ suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’

10. - ‘inversity’: increased knowledge can increase ignorance - intractability: knowledge-commitments compound vulnerability . Ellul, Wynne, Tenner not existence but exposure to unknown – nuclear - incompleteness: knowledge is always limited as a basis for action ` - indeterminacy : effective knowledge does not preclude surprise The Missing Politics of Knowledge ` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge: ` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action Conventional ‘risk practices’ suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’

11. - intractability: knowledge-commitments compound vulnerability - incommensurability: knowledges are plural and often conflicting . Kuhn, Arrow, Jasanoff… knowledge often not linear / additive – GM crops - ‘inversity’: increased knowledge can increase ignorance - incompleteness: knowledge is always limited as a basis for action ` - indeterminacy : effective knowledge does not preclude surprise The Missing Politics of Knowledge ` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge: ` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action Conventional ‘risk practices’ suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’

12. - incommensurability: knowledges are plural and often conflicting representing incomplete knowledge as ‘risk’ is deeply problematic - ‘ inversity’: increased knowledge can increase ignorance - intractability: knowledge-commitments compound vulnerability - incompleteness: knowledge is always limited as a basis for action ` - indeterminacy: effective knowledge does not preclude surprise The Missing Politics of Knowledge ` marginalises, elides, ignores and (often) denies realities of knowledge: ` - insufficiency: knowledge efficacy is not normative basis for action Conventional ‘risk practices’ suppress our ‘knowledge about knowledge’

13. unproblematic problematic unproblematic problematic knowledge about likelihoods knowledge about possibilities RISK UNCERTAINTY AMBIGUITY IGNORANCE risk assessment cost-benefit analysis decision theory optimising models Power and Knowledge resist institutional pressures by broadening out appraisal methods

14. unproblematic problematic unproblematic problematic knowledge about likelihoods AMBIGUITY IGNORANCE RISK UNCERTAINTY risk assessment , cost-benefit analysis decision theory optimising models uncertainty heuristics interval analysis sensitivity testing knowledge about possibilities From ‘Risk’ to Precaution resist institutional pressures by broadening out appraisal methods

15. scenarios / backcasting interactive modeling mapping / Q-methods participatory deliberation unproblematic problematic unproblematic problematic knowledge about likelihoods AMBIGUITY IGNORANCE RISK UNCERTAINTY risk assessment , cost-benefit analysis decision theory optimising models uncertainty heuristics interval analysis sensitivity testing knowledge about possibilities resist institutional pressures by broadening out appraisal methods From ‘Risk’ to Precaution

16. unproblematic problematic unproblematic problematic knowledge about likelihoods AMBIGUITY IGNORANCE RISK UNCERTAINTY risk assessment , cost-benefit analysis decision theory optimising models uncertainty heuristics interval analysis sensitivity testing scenarios / backcasting interactive modeling mapping / Q-methods inclusive engagement humility, monitoring, surveillance, targeted research / enquiry diversity, flexibility, resilience, learning, adaptability knowledge about possibilities resist institutional pressures by broadening out appraisal methods From ‘Risk’ to Precaution

17. unproblematic problematic unproblematic problematic knowledge about likelihoods precautionary appraisal participatory deliberation reductive aggregation RISK UNCERTAINTY AMBIGUITY IGNORANCE knowledge about possibilities resist institutional pressures by broadening out appraisal methods From ‘Risk’ to Precaution

20. time The Missing Politics of Technology SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY ‘ linear’ technical understandings of innovation still dominate eg: …“w e'll restore science to its rightful place”... - US President Barack Obama PAST FUTURE …“ history is a race to advance technology ” - UK Royal Academy of Engineering …“ you can’t stop progress” …

21. Treats innovation as homogeneous: no distinctions … no alternatives… no politics … no choice ! The Missing Politics of Technology ‘ linear’ technical understandings of innovation still dominate PAST FUTURE time eg: …“w e'll restore science to its rightful place”... - US President Barack Obama …“ history is a race to advance technology ” - UK Royal Academy of Engineering …“ you can’t stop progress” …

22. time Treats innovation as homogeneous: no distinctions … no alternatives … no politics … no choice ! Scope for debate restricted to: yes or no? … how much? how fast? … who leads? The Missing Politics of Technology ‘ linear’ technical understandings of innovation still dominate PAST FUTURE eg: …“w e'll restore science to its rightful place”... - US President Barack Obama …“ history is a race to advance technology ” - UK Royal Academy of Engineering …“ you can’t stop progress” …

23. time Treats innovation as homogeneous: no distinctions … no alternatives … no politics … no choice ! Scope for debate restricted to: yes or no? … how much? how fast?’ … who leads? Seriously neglects questions over: which way? …what alternatives? says who? …why? The Missing Politics of Technology ‘ linear’ technical understandings of innovation still dominate PAST FUTURE eg: …“w e'll restore science to its rightful place”... - US President Barack Obama …“ history is a race to advance technology ” - UK Royal Academy of Engineering …“ you can’t stop progress” …

24. space of technological possibilities time Technology Choice as Optimisation Mainstream policy represents technology as optmising thro’: - ‘sound science’ - material constraints - technical standrads - market equilibrium diverse starting points converge to ‘optimal’ configurations in each area: diversity converges to optimality Methods and institutions of risk regulation as aids to optimisation – disproportionate focus on modes for implementing incumbent path

25. Closing Down Choice in Innovation Governance Common picture arising in all studies of technology in society – it’s the other way around! multiple diverging directions time from any single starting point, there typically branch out many equally possible (technically feasible and socially viable) innovation pathways ‘ best path’ is not about optimisation but political choice - imagined ontologies of action – ‘parameterise knowledge space’ - provide axes for polarisation … - provide axes for polarisation … but also basis for pluralistic realism

26. BUT: a diversity of processes ‘close down’ possible directions of change innovation is ‘vector’ not ‘scalar’ time Closing Down Choice in Innovation Governance

27. BUT: a diversity of processes ‘close down’ possible directions of change economics: homeostasis ( Sahal, 85 ) lock-in ( Arthur, 89 ) regimes ( Nelson & Winter, 77 ) trajectories ( Dosi, 82 ) time Closing Down Choice in Innovation Governance innovation is ‘vector’ not ‘scalar’

28. BUT: a diversity of processes ‘close down’ possible directions of change economics: homeostasis lock-in regimes trajectories history: contingency (Mokyr, 92) momentum (Hughes 83) path-dependence (David, 85) path creation (Karnoe, 01) time Closing Down Choice in Innovation Governance innovation is ‘vector’ not ‘scalar’

29. BUT: a diversity of processes ‘close down’ possible directions of change economics: homeostasis lock-in regimes trajectories history: contingency momentum path-dependence path creation philosophy/politics: autonomy (Winner, 77) closure (Feenberg, 91) entrapment (Walker, 01) alignment (Geels, 02) time Closing Down Choice in Innovation Governance innovation is ‘vector’ not ‘scalar’

30. BUT: a diversity of processes ‘close down’ possible directions of change philosophy/politics: autonomy closure entrapment alignment social studies: shaping (Bijker, 85) co-construction (Misa, 03) expectations (Lente, 00) imaginaries (Jasanoff, 05) time economics: homeostasis lock-in regimes trajectories history: contingency momentum path-dependence path creation Closing Down Choice in Innovation Governance innovation is ‘vector’ not ‘scalar’