West Pacific Satellite
· Public debate invited on scientific innovations
· Groups will be invited to discuss scenarios for 2025
James Randerson, science correspondent
Friday January 26, 2007
The Guardian
The government hopes to head off public rows over controversial scientific advances with a project aimed at gauging the public's attitude to future technologies, it was announced yesterday.
The idea is to avoid, or at least anticipate, hostile public reaction such as that seen with GM food and the recent controversy over human-animal hybrids.
"Clearly the GM episode was not a good one in terms of public understanding and public debate," said the minister for science and innovation, Malcolm Wicks, at the launch of the "science horizons" public consultation exercise yesterday. "There's certainly a great difference between well-informed public debate that can affect decision makers and a particular lobby getting organised.
"Some of the biggest issues facing us now have a really strong science and technology dimension. It's actually crucial that that's not just a debate for elites. It's important that we engage a wider public on some of these issues," he said. "Science is too important to leave to the scientists."
He said that climate change and an ageing population would present technological dilemmas for which society must be ready.
The consultation is based on a series of futuristic scenarios set around technologies shaping society in 2025.
The public will be invited to attend open sessions to give their views on a variety of scenarios. The futuristic stories include a man at risk of a heart attack being offered a custom-made replacement organ grown in a lab, a mother agonising over whether she can afford the "premium enhancement" medical package that will turn her daughter into a star athlete, and an in-car computer that tells the driver off for bad driving and can take over the wheel.
The predictions are based on suggestions about likely scientific developments from leading scientists in academia, government and business. The Department of Trade and Industry, which is organising the project, wants small groups of people to discuss the scenarios and respond.
One scenario involves George, a man in the early stages of Alzheimer's disease. He is prone to forgetting his way home and getting lost, so his wife has fitted his clothes with tiny GPS tags so that she can find him whenever he goes missing. He also carries his own personal satnav in the form of a cap that gives him directions when he is out. Mr Wicks asked whether these are liberating developments that allow George greater freedom or an infringement of his rights.
In another scenario, Malcolm's new car is fitted with an onboard computer and sensor system that communicates with other cars, smart traffic signals and road-side sensors. It reprimands Malcolm when he drives badly and on certain routes it can take over the wheel altogether. The scenario also raises the possibility that the onboard spy could remove Malcolm's licence altogether if he makes too many driving errors. When he reaches the supermarket, Malcolm's fridge communicates remotely with an electronic display on his trolley that tells him what to buy to satisfy his chosen diet plan without duplicating what is already on his shelves.
In a third case, Rajpal is about to embark on a journey home to India, but doesn't have enough personal carbon credits to get back. He will either have to use some of those allocated to his Indian relatives, or buy some on the international market.
"The public are not stupid. They don't want something forced on them. But equally, they are not the experts, that's why we have scientists," said Martin Earwicker, director of the Science Museum, who is coordinating the consultation.
He said people were often cautious or hostile when faced with new technology. For example, the first cars had to be preceded by a person on foot to stop them going too fast. "The public will accept a certain level of risk so long as there's a corresponding benefit."
