THE ASSESSMENT OF TECHNOLOGY

IN RESPONSE TO A REQUEST BY A CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CONSIDERING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT BOARD, A PANEL WAS CONVENED BY THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES TO EXAMINE THE PROCESSES OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT AND CHOICE. ALTHOUGH THE PANEL PROCEEDED WITH THE BELIEF THAT THE BENEFITS OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS VASTLY OUTWEIGHED THE SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL INJURIES, ITS MISSION WAS TO EXPLORE HOW THE BENEFITS MIGHT BE ACHIEVED WITH LESS INJURY. IT WAS RECOGNIZED THAT SOME PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED AS UNDESIRABLE EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT COULD HAVE BEEN THE RESULT OF FAILURE TO DEVELOP OR APPLY OTHER TECHNOLOGIES. ALSO, THE TWO IMPORTANT ASPECTS OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT ARE EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE MEANS TO THE SAME END AND A COMPARISON OF THEIR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC COSTS. CHOICES BETWEEN ALTERNATIVES ARE PARTY ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL DECISIONS AND NO EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO CIRCUMVENT POLITICAL PROCESSES OR THE CONFLICTS OF THE MARKETPLACE. THREE GENERAL APPROACHES TO THE PROBLEM OF ASSESSING TECHNOLOGIES ARE CONSIDERED: (1) COMPUTING NET SOCIAL BENEFITS (USEFUL ONLY AS A ROUGH FIRST EFFORT SINCE ALMOST ALL DEVELOPMENTS AFFECT SOME BENEFICIALLY AND OTHERS ADVERSELY); (2) MAINTAINING LATITUDE FOR FUTURE CHANGES (EVEN REVERSALS) AND PRESERVING OF OPTIONS FOR FUTURE ACTIONS; AND (3) CONSIDERING WHERE THE BURDEN OF UNCERTAINTY SHOULD FALL (SHOULD THE PROPONENT OF THE INNOVATION OR THE AFFECTED GROUPS PROVIDE EVIDENCE OF POSSIBLE EFFECTS). EXISTING PROCESSES OF TECHNOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ARE DIFFUSED THROUGHOUT PRIVATE AND GOVERNMENT SECTORS OF SOCIETY. BOTH ARE OFTEN PREVENTED FROM CONSIDERING THE COMPLETE PROBLEM BY LIMITATIONS OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM, AND WITH BOTH, THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AND BENEFITS OF ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES IS NORMALLY UNDERTAKEN BY THOSE WHO SEEK TO EXPLOIT THEM. RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PANEL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: (1) ESTABLISHMENT OF FEDERAL MECHANISMS FOR RESPONSIBLE MANAGEMENT OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE; (2) THIS GROUP SHOULD NOT HAVE POLICY-MAKING AUTHORITY, REGULATORY POWERS, OR ANY TECHNOLOGICAL RESPONSIBILITY; (3) IT MUST BE ALBE TO EVALUATE BUT NOT TO SPONSOR OR PREVENT; AND (4) IT MUST BE LINKED WITH BOTH THE PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS (FOR THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, THE RECOMMENDED LINK IS THE OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, AND FOR THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH, A JOINT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE). MILITARY TECHNOLOGY WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THE PANEL.

• Availability:
  • Find a library where document is available. Order URL: http://worldcat.org/issn/00368733
• Supplemental Notes:
  • Vol 222, No 2, PP 13-21, 1 FIG, TABS, 4 PHOT
• Authors:
  • Brooks, H
  • Bowers, R
• Publication Date: 1970-2

Media Info

• Serial:
  • Scientific American
  • Publisher: Scientific American Incorporated
  • ISSN: 0036-8733

Subject/Index Terms

• TRT Terms: Alternatives analysis; Assessments; Benefit cost analysis; Decision making; Economics; Environmental impacts; Evaluation; Politics; Social factors; Technology
• Old TRIS Terms: Governmental processes
• Subject Areas: Economics; Environment; Finance; Highways; Research; Society;

Filing Info

• Accession Number: 00242985
• Record Type: Publication
• Files: TRIS
• Created Date: May 13 1970 12:00AM