2021
Stone, Taylor
Design for values and the city Journal Article
In: Journal of Responsible Innovation, vol. 8, iss. 3, pp. 364-381, 2021.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: design for values, philosophy of the city, responsible innovation, smart cities, urban innovation, urban technology, value sensitive design
@article{nokey,
title = {Design for values and the city},
author = {Taylor Stone},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2021.1909813},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-04-21},
urldate = {2021-04-21},
journal = {Journal of Responsible Innovation},
volume = {8},
issue = {3},
pages = {364-381},
abstract = {This paper undertakes a critical and constructive investigation into the applicability of value sensitive design (VSD) and design for values (DfV) methodologies for urban technologies, as a means to envision and enact responsible urban innovations. In particular, this paper focuses on the identification and analysis of values in urban technologies. First, an important methodological critique is highlighted, namely the vague articulation of ‘values' in VSD and DfV discourse. Next, cities are characterized as open, dynamic, and evolving systems, with ‘urban technologies’ as co-shapers of this process. This highlights the unique conditions requiring attention in order to arrive at a robust understanding of the relationship between values and urban technologies. Finally, these insights are combined to propose and sketch six heuristic principles aimed at surfacing and analysing values in urban technologies, offering a refinement of value-sensitive methodologies for the context of urban technological innovation.},
keywords = {design for values, philosophy of the city, responsible innovation, smart cities, urban innovation, urban technology, value sensitive design},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
This paper undertakes a critical and constructive investigation into the applicability of value sensitive design (VSD) and design for values (DfV) methodologies for urban technologies, as a means to envision and enact responsible urban innovations. In particular, this paper focuses on the identification and analysis of values in urban technologies. First, an important methodological critique is highlighted, namely the vague articulation of ‘values' in VSD and DfV discourse. Next, cities are characterized as open, dynamic, and evolving systems, with ‘urban technologies’ as co-shapers of this process. This highlights the unique conditions requiring attention in order to arrive at a robust understanding of the relationship between values and urban technologies. Finally, these insights are combined to propose and sketch six heuristic principles aimed at surfacing and analysing values in urban technologies, offering a refinement of value-sensitive methodologies for the context of urban technological innovation.
Nagenborg, Margoth González Woge Taylor Stone Michael; Vermaas, Pieter (Ed.)
Technology and the City: Towards a Philosophy of Urban Technologies Book
Springer International Publishing, 2021, ISBN: 9783030523138.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: design for values, philosophy, responsible innovation, urban design, value:democracy
@book{Nagenborg2021,
title = {Technology and the City: Towards a Philosophy of Urban Technologies},
editor = {Margoth González Woge Taylor Stone Michael Nagenborg and Pieter Vermaas},
url = {https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-52313-8#about},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52313-8},
isbn = {9783030523138},
year = {2021},
date = {2021-02-25},
urldate = {2021-02-25},
volume = {36},
number = {1},
publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
abstract = {The contributions in this volume map out how technologies are used and designed to plan, maintain, govern, demolish, and destroy the city. The chapters demonstrate how urban technologies shape, and are shaped, by fundamental concepts and principles such as citizenship, publicness, democracy, and nature. The many authors herein explore how to think of technologically mediated urban space as part of the human condition. The volume will thus contribute to the much-needed discussion on technology-enabled urban futures from the perspective of the philosophy of technology. This perspective also contributes to the discussion and process of making cities ‘smart’ and just. This collection appeals to students, researchers, and professionals within the fields of philosophy of technology, urban planning, and engineering.},
keywords = {design for values, philosophy, responsible innovation, urban design, value:democracy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {book}
}
The contributions in this volume map out how technologies are used and designed to plan, maintain, govern, demolish, and destroy the city. The chapters demonstrate how urban technologies shape, and are shaped, by fundamental concepts and principles such as citizenship, publicness, democracy, and nature. The many authors herein explore how to think of technologically mediated urban space as part of the human condition. The volume will thus contribute to the much-needed discussion on technology-enabled urban futures from the perspective of the philosophy of technology. This perspective also contributes to the discussion and process of making cities ‘smart’ and just. This collection appeals to students, researchers, and professionals within the fields of philosophy of technology, urban planning, and engineering.
2018
Flipse, Steven M; Puylaert, Steven
In: Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 49–72, 2018, ISSN: 1471-5546.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: automated vehicles, co-creation, constructive dialogue, design requirements, responsible innovation
@article{Flipse2018,
title = {Organizing a Collaborative Development of Technological Design Requirements Using a Constructive Dialogue on Value Profiles: A Case in Automated Vehicle Development},
author = {Steven M Flipse and Steven Puylaert},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9877-3},
doi = {10.1007/s11948-017-9877-3},
issn = {1471-5546},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-02-01},
journal = {Science and Engineering Ethics},
volume = {24},
number = {1},
pages = {49–72},
abstract = {Following societal and policy pressures for responsible innovation, innovators are more and more expected to consider the broader socio-ethical context of their work, and more importantly, to integrate such considerations into their daily practices. This may require the involvement of `outsiders' in innovation trajectories, including e.g. societal and governmental actors. However, methods on how to functionally organize such integration in light of responsible innovation have only recently started to emerge. We present an approach to do just that, in which we first develop value profiles of the involved actors, and second, design a workshop setting that allows innovators to develop design requirements in collaboration with representatives of parties that are not usually involved in such innovation design practices. Using a case study in automated vehicle development, we positively demonstrate the possibility and utility of our approach. We stress that in this study we wish to demonstrate the functionality of our developed method, and did not search for scientifically valid outcomes regarding this technical field.},
keywords = {automated vehicles, co-creation, constructive dialogue, design requirements, responsible innovation},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Following societal and policy pressures for responsible innovation, innovators are more and more expected to consider the broader socio-ethical context of their work, and more importantly, to integrate such considerations into their daily practices. This may require the involvement of `outsiders' in innovation trajectories, including e.g. societal and governmental actors. However, methods on how to functionally organize such integration in light of responsible innovation have only recently started to emerge. We present an approach to do just that, in which we first develop value profiles of the involved actors, and second, design a workshop setting that allows innovators to develop design requirements in collaboration with representatives of parties that are not usually involved in such innovation design practices. Using a case study in automated vehicle development, we positively demonstrate the possibility and utility of our approach. We stress that in this study we wish to demonstrate the functionality of our developed method, and did not search for scientifically valid outcomes regarding this technical field.
Sio, Filippo Santoni; Hoven, Jeroen
Meaningful Human Control over Autonomous Systems: A Philosophical Account Journal Article
In: Frontiers in Robotics and AI, vol. 5, pp. 15, 2018, ISSN: 2296-9144.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: artificial intelligence, guidance control, lethal autonomous weapon systems, meaningful human control, moral responsibility, responsible innovation, value sensitive design, value:autonomy
@article{10.3389/frobt.2018.00015,
title = {Meaningful Human Control over Autonomous Systems: A Philosophical Account},
author = {Filippo Santoni Sio and Jeroen Hoven},
url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/frobt.2018.00015},
doi = {10.3389/frobt.2018.00015},
issn = {2296-9144},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-01-01},
urldate = {2018-01-01},
journal = {Frontiers in Robotics and AI},
volume = {5},
pages = {15},
abstract = {Debates on lethal autonomous weapon systems have proliferated in the last five years. Ethical concerns have been voiced about a possible raise in the number of wrongs and crimes in military operations and about the creation of a “responsibility gap” for harms caused by these systems. To address these concerns, the principle of “meaningful human control” has been introduced in the legal-political debate; according to this principle humans not computers and their algorithms should ultimately remain in control of, and thus morally responsible for relevant decisions about (lethal) military operations. However, policy-makers and technical designers lack a detailed theory of what “meaningful human control” exactly means. In this paper we lay the foundation of a philosophical account of meaningful human control, based on the concept of “guidance control” as elaborated in the philosophical debate on free will and moral responsibility. Following the ideals of “Responsible Innovation” and “Value-sensitive Design” our account of meaningful human control is cast in the form of design requirements. We identify two general, necessary conditions to be satisfied for an autonomous system to remain under meaningful human control: first, a “tracking” condition, according to which the system should be able to respond to both the relevant moral reasons of the humans designing and deploying the system and the relevant facts in the environment in which the system operates; second, a “tracing” condition, according to which the system should be designed in such a way as to grant the possibility to always trace back the outcome of its operations to at least one human along the chain of design and operation. As we think that meaningful human control can be one of the central notions in ethics of robotics and AI, in the last part of the paper we start exploring the implications of our account for the design and use of non-military autonomous systems, for instance self-driving cars.},
keywords = {artificial intelligence, guidance control, lethal autonomous weapon systems, meaningful human control, moral responsibility, responsible innovation, value sensitive design, value:autonomy},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Debates on lethal autonomous weapon systems have proliferated in the last five years. Ethical concerns have been voiced about a possible raise in the number of wrongs and crimes in military operations and about the creation of a “responsibility gap” for harms caused by these systems. To address these concerns, the principle of “meaningful human control” has been introduced in the legal-political debate; according to this principle humans not computers and their algorithms should ultimately remain in control of, and thus morally responsible for relevant decisions about (lethal) military operations. However, policy-makers and technical designers lack a detailed theory of what “meaningful human control” exactly means. In this paper we lay the foundation of a philosophical account of meaningful human control, based on the concept of “guidance control” as elaborated in the philosophical debate on free will and moral responsibility. Following the ideals of “Responsible Innovation” and “Value-sensitive Design” our account of meaningful human control is cast in the form of design requirements. We identify two general, necessary conditions to be satisfied for an autonomous system to remain under meaningful human control: first, a “tracking” condition, according to which the system should be able to respond to both the relevant moral reasons of the humans designing and deploying the system and the relevant facts in the environment in which the system operates; second, a “tracing” condition, according to which the system should be designed in such a way as to grant the possibility to always trace back the outcome of its operations to at least one human along the chain of design and operation. As we think that meaningful human control can be one of the central notions in ethics of robotics and AI, in the last part of the paper we start exploring the implications of our account for the design and use of non-military autonomous systems, for instance self-driving cars.
2017
Hoven, Jeroen
Ethics for the Digital Age: Where Are the Moral Specs? Proceedings Article
In: Werthner, Hannes; Harmelen, Frank (Ed.): Informatics in the Future, pp. 65–76, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2017, ISBN: 978-3-319-55735-9.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: computer ethics, data protection, digital ethics, privacy, responsible innovation, value sensitive design, value:justice
@inproceedings{10.1007/978-3-319-55735-9_6,
title = {Ethics for the Digital Age: Where Are the Moral Specs?},
author = {Jeroen Hoven},
editor = {Hannes Werthner and Frank Harmelen},
url = {https://link-springer-com.tudelft.idm.oclc.org/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-55735-9_6
https://www.delftdesignforvalues.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Van-den-Hoven_Ethics-For-The-Digital-Age-Where-Are-the-Specs.pdf},
isbn = {978-3-319-55735-9},
year = {2017},
date = {2017-01-01},
urldate = {2017-01-01},
booktitle = {Informatics in the Future},
pages = {65–76},
publisher = {Springer International Publishing},
address = {Cham},
abstract = {In the middle of the twentieth century scholars in the social sciences and humanities have reflected on how the telegraph, the telephone and TV have shaped our societies (A good example is the work of Ithiel de Sola Pool in the mid twentieth century. See for example Politics in Wired Nations, Selected Writings, Transaction Publishers, London/New York.). In the last 30 years, researchers in a variety of disciplines such as technology assessment, computer ethics, information and library science, science and technology studies and cultural and media studies have conducted research into the way new media, computers and mobile phones have turned a wired society into a full-fledged digital society. In the last 10 years we have entered a new phase of the digital shaping of society. We are trying to come to grips with artificial intelligence, big data, social media, smart phones, robotics, the Internet of Things, apps and bots, self-driving cars, deep learning and brain interfaces. New digital technologies have now given rise to a hyper-connected society. IT is not only getting in between people, but it is also getting under our skin and into our heads—often literally. Our standard ways of keeping tabs on technology by means of information technology assessment, tech policy and regulation, soft law, ethical codes for IT professionals, ethical review boards (ERBs) for computer science research, standards and software maturity models and combinations thereof, are no longer sufficient to lead us to a responsible digital future. Our attempts to shape our technologies are often too late and too slow (e.g. by means of black letter law) or too little or too weak (e.g. codes of conduct). The field of privacy and data protection is an example of both. Data protection lawyers are constantly trying to catch up with the latest in big data analysis, the Internet of things, deep learning and sensor and cloud technology. On any given day, we often find ourselves trying to regulate the technology of tomorrow with legal regimes of yesterday. This gives rise to the question `How should we make our ethics bear upon high impact and dynamical digital phenomena?'},
keywords = {computer ethics, data protection, digital ethics, privacy, responsible innovation, value sensitive design, value:justice},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {inproceedings}
}
In the middle of the twentieth century scholars in the social sciences and humanities have reflected on how the telegraph, the telephone and TV have shaped our societies (A good example is the work of Ithiel de Sola Pool in the mid twentieth century. See for example Politics in Wired Nations, Selected Writings, Transaction Publishers, London/New York.). In the last 30 years, researchers in a variety of disciplines such as technology assessment, computer ethics, information and library science, science and technology studies and cultural and media studies have conducted research into the way new media, computers and mobile phones have turned a wired society into a full-fledged digital society. In the last 10 years we have entered a new phase of the digital shaping of society. We are trying to come to grips with artificial intelligence, big data, social media, smart phones, robotics, the Internet of Things, apps and bots, self-driving cars, deep learning and brain interfaces. New digital technologies have now given rise to a hyper-connected society. IT is not only getting in between people, but it is also getting under our skin and into our heads—often literally. Our standard ways of keeping tabs on technology by means of information technology assessment, tech policy and regulation, soft law, ethical codes for IT professionals, ethical review boards (ERBs) for computer science research, standards and software maturity models and combinations thereof, are no longer sufficient to lead us to a responsible digital future. Our attempts to shape our technologies are often too late and too slow (e.g. by means of black letter law) or too little or too weak (e.g. codes of conduct). The field of privacy and data protection is an example of both. Data protection lawyers are constantly trying to catch up with the latest in big data analysis, the Internet of things, deep learning and sensor and cloud technology. On any given day, we often find ourselves trying to regulate the technology of tomorrow with legal regimes of yesterday. This gives rise to the question `How should we make our ethics bear upon high impact and dynamical digital phenomena?'
2016
Dignum, Marloes; Correljé, Aad; Cuppen, Eefje; Pesch, Udo; Taebi, Behnam
Contested Technologies and Design for Values: The Case of Shale Gas Journal Article
In: Science and Engineering Ethics, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1171-1191, 2016, ISSN: 1471-5546.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Tags: energy policy, public values, responsible innovation, shale gas, theme:value-conflicts, value sensitive design
@article{Dignum2016,
title = {Contested Technologies and Design for Values: The Case of Shale Gas},
author = {Marloes Dignum and Aad Correljé and Eefje Cuppen and Udo Pesch and Behnam Taebi},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9685-6},
doi = {10.1007/s11948-015-9685-6},
issn = {1471-5546},
year = {2016},
date = {2016-08-01},
urldate = {2016-08-01},
journal = {Science and Engineering Ethics},
volume = {22},
number = {4},
pages = {1171-1191},
abstract = {The introduction of new energy technologies may lead to public resistance and contestation. It is often argued that this phenomenon is caused by an inadequate inclusion of relevant public values in the design of technology. In this paper we examine the applicability of the value sensitive design (VSD) approach. While VSD was primarily introduced for incorporating values in technological design, our focus in this paper is expanded towards the design of the institutions surrounding these technologies, as well as the design of stakeholder participation. One important methodological challenge of VSD is to identify the relevant values related to new technological developments. In this paper, we argue that the public debate can form a rich source from which to retrieve the values at stake. To demonstrate this, we have examined the arguments used in the public debate regarding the exploration and exploitation of shale gas in the Netherlands. We identified two important sets of the underlying values, namely substantive and procedural values. This paper concludes with two key findings. Firstly, contrary to what is often suggested in the literature, both proponents and opponents seem to endorse the same values. Secondly, contestation seems to arise in the precise operationalization of these values among the different stakeholders. In other words, contestation in the Dutch shale gas debate does not arise from inter-value conflict but rather from intra-value conflicts. This multi-interpretability should be incorporated in VSD processes.},
keywords = {energy policy, public values, responsible innovation, shale gas, theme:value-conflicts, value sensitive design},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The introduction of new energy technologies may lead to public resistance and contestation. It is often argued that this phenomenon is caused by an inadequate inclusion of relevant public values in the design of technology. In this paper we examine the applicability of the value sensitive design (VSD) approach. While VSD was primarily introduced for incorporating values in technological design, our focus in this paper is expanded towards the design of the institutions surrounding these technologies, as well as the design of stakeholder participation. One important methodological challenge of VSD is to identify the relevant values related to new technological developments. In this paper, we argue that the public debate can form a rich source from which to retrieve the values at stake. To demonstrate this, we have examined the arguments used in the public debate regarding the exploration and exploitation of shale gas in the Netherlands. We identified two important sets of the underlying values, namely substantive and procedural values. This paper concludes with two key findings. Firstly, contrary to what is often suggested in the literature, both proponents and opponents seem to endorse the same values. Secondly, contestation seems to arise in the precise operationalization of these values among the different stakeholders. In other words, contestation in the Dutch shale gas debate does not arise from inter-value conflict but rather from intra-value conflicts. This multi-interpretability should be incorporated in VSD processes.