For example, the establishment of the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) in 1972 in the United States provided a real institutional innovation. In the TAMI project (Decker and Ladikas, 2004) this led to a wider reflection on the type of impacts that TA processes can have on different clients in different situations and how the institutional context of a PTA organization served to the impact that TA can have on various publics (Cruz Castro and Sanz-Menéndez, 2005).
ARC-FUND's institutional strategy is to act as a network secretariat ('staff' in our modelling) for TA-like activities in Bulgaria. ARC FUND aims to raise both awareness about TA as well as the level of social debate (relevant to the 'client' category in our modelling).
Institutional re-adjustment in Austria
This one-year study will produce concrete proposals for the future relationship between the Nationalrat and especially the ITA. Second, the ITA became a member of the European TA Group (ETAG), which carries out projects for the Science and Technology Options Assessment (STOA) panel of the European Parliament.
Placing a TA project in a cross-national context
At the institutional level, the institutional conditions for effectively linking project results to policy-making were not in place. As a result, the correlation between the project results and the respective parliaments was not very robust.
Lessons learned: Implications for the democratic governance of S&T
This section examines the implications of our new approach for the future of TA and, more generally, for the democratic governance of S&T. Lesson : Recognize the reliance on TA organizations to obtain independent advice with impact.
Connecting to four spheres
To understand the complexity of the management of V&T, we need to reflect on the interaction between the different research and engagement processes in the different social spheres and reflect on the organizational and institutional constraints that these processes face. Relations between TA organizations and the various social spheres are developed and maintained at institutional, organizational and project level.
Note
Landscape – Lessons from Seven European Countries
The PACITA project, by organizing explorations of existing barriers and opportunities to establish TA in seven European countries, succeeded in starting debates about TA among relevant actors and revealed a set of boundary conditions for introducing TA in the national R&I policy systems. The exploratory activities revealed that, despite existing barriers, there is a role to play for TA in adapting and offering support to the existing gaps and problems related to V&T policy. Concerns about problems related to S&T policy often result in an explicit call for "knowledge-based policy-making", in which context the concept of TA is welcomed as a means of underpinning decisions with the best available knowledge in an unbiased manner.
Background
Regarding structural changes in the R&D system, a gradual increase in the shares of universities and industry can be considered the most positive trend in many Central and Eastern European countries. In the Western European countries in the sample there are already experiences with 'TA-like activities': in Portugal there has already been some discussion about TA in the national parliament and in the academic community. It is important to note that the country explorations were carried out from the perspective of different organizations, ranging from Academies of Sciences (Czech Republic and Hungary) to research centers at universities (Ireland, Portugal and Wallonia) and to non-governmental organizations.
Societal premises for the setup of TA institutions
On the one hand, the economic situation is difficult in most of the countries involved. It contributes to the idea of a lack of public debate that public interest in S&T issues is reportedly low in most countries. The deficit in terms of societal involvement in R&I policymaking is aptly reflected in the fact that the role of parliaments in R&I policymaking is reportedly quite low in most of the countries we surveyed.
Ways forward: Possibility structures for TA
In both countries there was very little previous experience with TA or TA-like activities. Both countries consider it useful to start with a pilot project (similar to the start-up phase of some established TA institutions in the 1980s and 1990s; cf. Ganzevles and van Est, 2012) to 'prove' the national relevance and to increase understanding of the TA concept and its 'products'. Furthermore, the national academies in both countries have been in contact with TA or TA-like activities (especially foresight and scientific research).
Future perspectives for national TA capacities across Europe
Barriers to be addressed include the lack of options for national funding, the lack of trained personnel, but also the general lack of interest from the decision-making sector in S&T as well as from the public. In all the studies of our country, the lack of democratic structures in S&T policies is often perceived, as well as the lack of communication and cooperation between relevant actors (academia, government, parliament and civil society organizations (CSOs)). In all the countries we researched, there is, to varying degrees, a lack of tradition in public debates on S&T, as well as a relative lack of structured channels or platforms for public debate (including media and CSOs).
Notes
In general, technical assistance must respond to the given political context and the expectations and demands expressed in the countries we researched. But an equally universal prerequisite for the adoption of such new forms is the successful adaptation of these forms to the national context. In this chapter, we approached the process of trying to adapt technical assistance to the institutional realities of Central and Eastern European partner countries.
The inside scoop: taking TA on board in existing organizations
But again, this should be seen as a natural extension of the already pervasive institutional role of the Center in the national STI policy system. The Academy's culture is one of strong traditions and a high regard for the role of the scientific expert. This was partly due to the involvement of the potential partners in the parliamentary period.
Possible new approaches to the adoption of TA
At the same time, developments in science and technology are challenging existing public policies and legislation due to the impact they may have on environmental sustainability or social equity. The increasing role of science and technology in policymaking challenges the role of parliaments in democracy. In this chapter, we discuss how technology assessment (TA) and closely related approaches ('TA-like') can support parliaments in the governance of science and technology.
Parliaments and policy advice
This rationalist model of political advice, however, confronts the reality of contemporary policy making. The rationalist approach to policy advice – whereby scientists provide facts, politicians add value and bureaucrats implement policies – no longer fits current policymaking. There seems to be a need for a space where all the actors involved (policy makers, stakeholders and civil society) can come together so that their views can contribute to policy making on science and technology issues.
Technology assessment for innovation governance
In such projects, TA promotes a sustained dialogue between research, industry, stakeholders, society and parliaments about innovation and related societal challenges.
Technology assessment in a globalized world
The European Parliamentary Technology Assessment Network (EPTA) was founded in 1990 by TA institutions willing to exchange their practices and bridge the global dimension of science and technology with the specific context of national policy making. Since its inception, the network regularly invites parliamentarians from European countries to discuss key scientific and technological trends, and produces reports that synthesize the work of its members on specific scientific and technological issues.2 Cross-European projects organized within the PACITA project are being implemented represent a more structured and institutionalized way of providing cross-border and supranational policy advice to both national parliaments and European institutions (see Chapter 5 and Part II). Findings within the PACITA project also suggest that European projects provide an opportunity for institutions that are, strictly speaking, not TA institutions, to join the TA community and develop new skills and new advisory services currently available in their country are not taken into consideration.
Putting TA to the political reality test
Science in general (and TA in particular) is quite well equipped to provide policy advice to decision makers on long-term issues such as innovation strategies or regulation. However, participants of the Parliamentary TA debates were convinced that the long-term perspective of TA is an essential and unique feature that must be maintained. Several speakers recalled that democracy needs long-term political thinking and that TA is an essential tool to integrate long-term and strategic thinking into politics.
Reinforcing communication between parliaments and TA
In countries where TA is less developed, the growth of TA practices is often slow, not because policy makers do not really want it, but because TA is not formally part of the decision-making process and thus as an unnecessary barrier to rapid policy-making. But building a common understanding of the role and value of TA for policy-making requires more than explaining to parliamentarians what TA is and can offer them. For example, parliamentarians may be involved in setting the agenda for TA activities, may be consulted during the course of the project or may launch TA activities.
Parliamentary TA in a context of limited resources
This is, for example, the case of the French OPECST, where the MPs themselves carry out the TA, and their staff members have an auxiliary function;. This work could be supported by grants, as in the case of the Parliamentary Office for Science and Technology (POST) in the UK, where researchers support the work of permanent staff. Depending on the available resources and specific skills of the TA, this possibility can be achieved by translating TA reports that represent, for example, the state of the art in a scientific field or a meta-analysis of the possibilities and risks of a particular technology. , by preparing policy briefs based on the existing work of TA institutes abroad and analysis of the national context and strategic needs of the country, or by introducing a broader process involving local policy makers and relevant national stakeholders.
Final remarks: TA bridging national and European debates
The PACITA project therefore aims to stimulate trans-European TA practices to strengthen the knowledge base for policy making in Europe. In this chapter we discuss the challenges of implementing trans-European TA in practice and the preconditions for the transnational use of TA at the European level. In the introduction to this book we saw how trans-European TA can fit within existing frameworks for European cooperation.
Cross-European technology assessment: current situation
These projects have dedicated budgets that make it easier to use more demanding methods than the EPTA projects. A consortium in these projects often involves several types of partner institutions (universities, NGOs, research institutes, TA institutions, etc.). A third type of project4 is commissioned by STOA (European Parliament's TA unit) and carried out by members of the European Technology Assessment Group (ETAG) or other consortia.
The PACITA experience
One of the challenges associated with the Future Panel method was the need for long-term commitment from MPs. The activity required some preparation from the participants (reading informational material or scenarios), but did not require a long-term commitment to the project. The results of these national events were collected in European synthesis reports, which transferred the results from the national to the European level.
Barriers to cross-European TA
In the European context, the European Commission and the European Parliament play an important role as policy makers. Therefore, all these organizations and institutions can be potential target groups for trans-European TA, both at European and national level. Results from successful European projects can be used at national level by institutions not involved in the specific project and also as encouragement for participation in future European work.
Benefits of cross-European TA
This would contribute to a larger pool of evidence for pan-European work – thus increasing the legitimacy and confidence in a pan-European approach and in TA methods. PACITA is in itself a good example of how TA institutions benefit from doing pan-European projects. Doing PACITA's three example projects showed that participation in pan-European projects is highly productive from a practitioner's point of view.
Requirements for realizing cross-European TA
In the 1970s, when TA began to become institutionalized in Europe, the influence of the American tradition of TA was evident. As the financial situation of the various national and regional institutions differs, it is difficult to ensure the diversity of TA at the European level. A more permanent and stable presence of TA at the European level will also serve as important support for TA initiatives in the future.
Final words: making an impact
Due to the shifting landscapes in Europe, it makes sense to expand the addressees to a larger group of policy makers. The approaches made available through technology assessment provided important input for policy makers and also showed the important role that technology assessment institutions can play at national and European level. Cross-border knowledge exchange and learning is highly relevant for policy makers in our societies today, and cross-European TA represents one way to make this happen.
Exemplifying Cross-European Technology Assessment
