Inclusive deliberation and action in emerging RRI practices: the case of neuroimaging in security management

ABSTRACT

What does it mean to facilitate inclusive deliberation, a core aspect of Responsible Research and Innovation, at a very early stage in a controversial field such as security? We brought neuroscientists and security professionals together in a step-by-step fashion – interviews, focus groups and dialogue – to construct imaginaries of neuroimaging applications. Neuroscientists and security professionals related differently to neuroimaging investigation. Some of what the security professionals seek in neuroscience might better be provided by social psychology. However, neuroimaging can be imagined to aid professionalization through a theory-informed security management practice. Post-hoc reflection interviews were performed to identify impacts, such as reflexivity of the stakeholders, the formation of new relationships and actions. Our use of social psychology as a low-technology alternative brought into sharper focus where potential responsible security sector uses of neuroimaging lie. However, without on-going facilitation of interactions, this imaginary is likely to dissolve.

KEYWORDS:

• Responsible innovation
• neuroimaging
• security
• inclusive deliberation
• multi-stakeholder dialogue

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Irja Marije de Jong holds master degrees in chemistry and in health and life sciences. She wrote her PhD on Responsible Research and Innovation in the context of emerging neuroimaging technologies in justice and security. This research project was funded by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research.

Frank Kupper studied biomedical sciences and science philosophy and wrote his PhD thesis reflective learning processes on animal biotechnology. He is an assistant professor of science communication and founded a company dedicated to the use of theatre and dialogue as instruments of playful reflection.

Jacqueline Broerse is a professor of innovation and communication in the health and life sciences. She holds a master degree in biomedical sciences and obtained her PhD on the interactive development of research agendas. She specializes in science-society dialogue and systemic change for more inclusive innovation processes.

ORCID

Irja Marije de Jong http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0902-4415

Frank Kupper http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1476-1911

Jacqueline Broerse http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8478-3422

Notes

1. Reports were published by WODC, an advisory body for the Ministry of Security and Justice, for example, de Kogel (2008). The Dutch Journal of Criminology published a special issue on the state of the art in bio-psychological and biosocial criminology in February 2005.

2. The programme ‘Brain & Cognition – social innovation in health care, education and safety' (HCMI) operates under the broader Dutch Initiative on Brain & Cognition, of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO). The pillar ‘safety’ is devoted to matters of security and criminality. Safety is the translation used by this programme, although ‘security’ would better fit the nature of the projects.

3. This research project, Neurosciences in Dialogue, is funded by the Responsible Innovation programme of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), and focuses on the responsible development and use of neuroimaging in three application domains, being health care, education and justice & security.

4. We follow here Lockean social contract theory. In short: citizens give up the least possible amount of personal freedom to ensure the freedom of all citizens, and trading in this personal loss of freedom and autonomy for protection by the state.

5. For the remaining five we were unable to raise this topic due to time constraints.

6. Another 55% mentioned security-related applications outside of private security, in public security and justice settings such as firefighting departments and ambulance personnel.

7. This usually means, talking to this person, asking a question such as ‘Good morning, sir. Can I help you with something?' This became even clearer during the dialogue session, although not specifically mentioned in that section in this paper. In response to concerns of other participants (mainly the neuroscientists) for reductionism, security professionals were elicited to open this ‘black box' of their daily experience. For them it was ‘obvious' that they would not label people as dangerous or remove them from a certain space on the basis of a technology alone.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) within the thematic funding program Responsible Innovation (MVI) under Grant [313-99-180].