Downloaded 23 times
Uploaded bybis_foresight
Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
The document discusses managing risks associated with innovation. It argues that innovation is essential for economic growth and well-being but always carries risks. It advocates for framing risks rigorously to make decisions more robust, and acknowledges that context matters as science is not the only lens for assessing risks. Well-informed regulation and decision-making requires considering these factors and sustaining strong institutions for scientific advice.
More Related Content
Similar to Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
- 1. Innovation: managing risk, notavoiding it
- 2. • Innovation isessential, but always carries risk • Framing risk rigorously makes decisions more robust • Context matters: science is not the only lens • Shaping regulation and decision- making: it can be done! 2 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Innovation – managing the risks
- 3. • Increases inlife expectancy (and reductions in infant mortality) • Global gdp increases 3 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Innovation is essential to growth and wellbeing
- 4. • Cars andtrains • Contraception Combined oral contraceptive pill - first used in USA in 1960. Currently used by over 100 million women worldwide Has been called “greatest scientific invention,” of 20th century by some commentators Impacts for women include: choice as to whether to have children, further education and a career Societies respond by a mix of changing behaviours, regulation and legislation 4 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Innovation has always been contested
- 5. • Population growth(and restructuring) • Climate risks • Socio-economic trends 5 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it 21st Century context is different
- 6. • Big data •Satellites • Robotics and autonomous systems • Synthetic biology • Regenerative medicine • Agri-science • Advanced materials • Energy storage • Quantum • Internet of things 6 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Future growth, security and wellbeing depends on effective exploitation of emerging technologies
- 7. • Innovation isessential, but always carries risk • Framing risk rigorously makes decisions more robust • Context matters: science is not the only lens • Shaping regulation and decision- making: it can be done! 7 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Framing risk
- 8. Review the evidence……. …andacknowledge that all evidence is •Contingent •Uncertain Remember that the numbers you choose are not neutral 8 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Apply the “science” of risk and risk communication
- 9. We place trustfor specific purposes. We expected the trustworthy institution or individual to Critical Trust is especially important if cause and effect are difficult for the layperson to determine. •Invisible, pervasive •Long term •Highly technical • Take account of our interests • Be competent • Not be self-serving 9 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Placing trust
- 10. The system • Systematicand cross- Departmental • Rapid response • Independent verification • Credibility Recent emergencies • Ebola • Flooding 10 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it UK has a systematic approach to managing top national risks
- 11. • Innovation isessential, but always carries risk • Framing risk rigorously makes decisions more robust • Context matters: science is not the only lens • Shaping regulation and decision- making: it can be done! Context matters 11 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
- 12. If you can’tstand the heat get out of the kitchen •Hazards: bleach •Exposure: bleach in the stew •Risk = hazard x exposure: poisoning •Vulnerability: children have greater sensitivity and greater likelihood of exposure. •Uncertainty = degree of confidence in hazard, exposure and vulnerability Terminology: Risk is not the same as hazard 12 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
- 13. Individual responses torisk are shaped by: •“Availability” draws on the analytical and emotional systems in the brain •Often based on rules of thumb, reinforced by personal experience and personal networks •With a tendency to: – Fear a loss more than a foregone gain – Overestimate frequency of events that can easily be recalled We know a lot about how individuals assess cost and benefit 13 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
- 14. Anticipating types ofinnovation 14 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Five Broad Categories Examples Responses 1. Who pays? Some medical drugs NICE 2. My pain, your gain Nuclear waste Public engagement Decisions at multiple levels 3. Science meets values Early GM, geo- engineering Strengthen science base. Public engagement. Don’t confuse science with values. 4. Unanticipated consequences Internet Monitor, debate, trial and learn 5. New challenges Some nanotechnologies Monitor, adapt, regulate
- 15. Science is notthe only lens Can view “fracking” in terms of:- •Suite of technical risks e.g. seismological or well engineering (“hydraulic fracturing”) • Impact on local amenity (“not in my backyard”) • Impact on global energy and carbon policy (“growth” and “greenhouses gases”) 15 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Credit: greensefa/CC BY 2.0 Credit: Al Granberg
- 16. Cultural factors -precautionary by default? Leading to large variations in approaches to innovation and risk and on different issues in different countries National identity and values •Stem cells •Nuclear power •GM •Handguns 16 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
- 17. GM crops: practicalworking guidelines Be specific •What gene? •In what organism? •For what purpose? 17 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Have a broad view •Consider inaction as well as action •Look at multiple pathways •Science is essential, but not the only lens
- 18. • Innovation isessential, but always carries risk • Framing risk rigorously makes decisions more robust • Context matters: science is not the only lens • Shaping regulation and decision- making: it can be done! Shaping regulation 18 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
- 19. Challenges •Systemic pressures – Economicregulators (and price) •Asymmetric incentives – Neonicotinoids (unintended consequences) •Lack of proportion – Pig inspection (what you can’t see for looking) Challenges for regulation 19 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
- 20. More challenges andopportunities in the future 20 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it Challenges •Future regulation will need to become far more agile and responsive. •Technological change and the guardianship and use of information present key challenges •The governance placed on regulators themselves will need to address asymmetric incentives to action and encourage more collaborative, transparent approaches.
- 21. HFEA and mitochondriareplacement therapy HFEA: Extended consultation Multiple strategies Outcome: Shift in public and expert opinion Advised Secretary of State: clear public support for clinical use of mitochondria replacement treatment. It can be done! 21 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
- 22. UK has stronginstitutions to supply evidence and advise on risk •Government “science advisory ecosystems” •NICE •What Works Centres •National Academies •Scientific Advisory Group in Emergencies •Academic centres of excellence and leading practitioners Well informed debate requires sustained capability Strong institutions able to carry out meta-analysis and look across disciplines, working over months and years BUT the risk community is small and fragmented. Ad hoc studies as required Trusted relationships, very rapid responses 22 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
- 23. Call to action Keyareas where we can build on existing approaches:- • Investment: Aligning national priorities for investment on resilience, infrastructure and innovation with an evidence and risk-based approach; • UK coordination: Ensuring a more coherent and structured approach to assessing impact of risk in policy, regulation and crisis management; • Regulators: Putting in place the right governance structures and incentives in relation to our regulators and regulated industries; • Science-based EU: Rooting the approach to policy and decision-making in EU in robust scientific evidence. 23 Innovation: managing risk, not avoiding it
- 24. Every effort hasbeen made to trace copyright holders and to obtain their permission for the use of copyright material. We apologise for any errors or omissions in the included attributions and would be grateful if notified of any corrections that should be incorporated in future versions of this slide set. We can be contacted through [email protected] . @uksciencechief www.gov.uk/go-science
Editor's Notes
- #4 •Technological improvements will increase productivity by as much as 25% and will generate predicted $3.7 to $10.8 trillion for world economy by 2025. •Since inception, Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisations and Global Fund have worked to prevent 5.5 million and 6.5 million deaths respectively. •Chemical and pharmaceutical industries are UK’s biggest manufacturing export earner – they have a turnover of £60 billion and support 500,000 jobs. •Over past 150 years, life expectancy in UK has steadily increased 2 to 3 years each decade – from about 40 years it has doubled to 80 years. •20 years ago, fewer than 3 million people with internet access, now there are nearly 2.5 billion.
- #5 Innovation has always been contested Societies respond by a mix of changing behaviours, regulation and legislation
- #6 •As digital access increases, estimated that four billion people will be online by 2020, using up to 50 trillion gigabytes of data •African continent has twice as many mobile phones as United States. •European Union aims to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050 from 1990 levels. •In 1950, there were 200 million people over age of 60. Today, that figure is nearly 800 million. By 2050, it is projected to stand at 2 billion. •When Iceland’s Eyjafjallajökull volcano erupted in 2010 it caused several of the largest global airports to shut down, resulting in an estimated $5 billion in losses. •In 2012, UK’s Climate Change Risk Assessment identified an increase in risk of flooding as greatest threat to the country from climate change. •Winter of 2013-14 caused flooding in about 7,000 properties, but some 1.4 million properties were protected by flood defences, and there was no direct loss of life. •In 2011, global insurance industry suffered the worst year of natural catastrophe losses on record – in excess of US $120 billion
- #7 Great Technologies listed are David Willetts’ “Eight Great Technologies” plus two additional technologies identified by Horizon Scanning Work (quantum and internet of things) Technologies represented are:- Quantum Autonomous systems (experience of Docklands Light Railway) Nanotechnology (part of advanced materials) Regenerative medicine Synthetic biology – “design and engineering of biologically-based parts…” [Royal Academy of Engineering: “Synthetic Biology: scope, applications and implications” (2009)] Agri-science (GM crops) In 2004, British Standards institution pioneered development of first international standards committee on nanotechnologies. Between 2002 and 2007, UK invested over £150 million in research into development and impact of nanotechnologies
- #9 Doubling the risk” will be heard as more serious than “increasing a risk from one in a million to two in a million”. Example given is that of fictional medical example used by Tversky and Kahneman, In their story, 600 people have a fatal disease and are offered two treatment options. One option is introduced either as one that “saves 200 lives”, or as one in which “400 people will die”. Option two uses a probabilistic presentation, offering either a one-third probability that 600 people will be saved and a two thirds probability that no-one will be; or a two thirds probability that 600 people will die and a one-third probability that no-one will. If the two options were presented in terms of how many lives they saved, 72% of readers preferred option one over option two. But if the options were introduced by stating the number of resulting fatalities, only 22% preferred option one. Crucially, the quantative element of each option was the same.
- #10 Case study refers to MMR, bowel disease, autism and measles – widespread media concerns in late 1990’s.
- #11 UK’s Strengths of performance on approach to national risk identification and management:- Systematic and cross-Departmental Rapid turnaround of response COBR (Cabinet Office Briefing Room) and SAGE (Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies) Independent verification Credibility Recent emergency responses – Flooding – emergencies under both inland flooding and coastal flooding Ebola – non-pandemic human disease
- #13 Images are from case studies on Fukishima 2011 nuclear catastrophe at nuclear powerplant in Japan. Issues around radiation exposure. Bisphenol A (BPA) – banned from babies bottles under EU legislation and subject to ongoing safety review by European Food Safety Authority. Bishphenol A – European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) found risks to be low. Some member states have announced new laws and controls on BPA. Acting in advance of or contrary to an EFSA opinion risk undermining the process of risk-based decision making. Adverse unintended consequences e.g. from problems with safety and effectiveness of replacements for BPA.
- #14 Images relate to: Thames Barrier and behavioural responses to flooding. Community networks and public resilience.
- #15 Images represent geo-engineering, internet and nano-technology
- #17 We need to be more aware of these differences, so that we can have healthier and clearer debates that make better policy at all levels. For example, there are two fundamental confusions that bedevil debate on several important regulatory topics, particularly within Europe. The first is the way in which the notions of hazard and risk are differently embedded in national modes of policymaking. This is why it is so important that we share a common understanding of the distinctions between hazard, risk, and vulnerability. The second is a drift of interpretation of the precautionary principle from what was, in effect, a holding position pending further evidence, to what is now effectively a stop sign. To be meaningful, the precautionary principle requires a rational response to uncertainty (as distinct to risk).
- #18 Only three GM crops have been approved for commercial cultivation in Europe since 1990; in the United States, there have been 96 commercial GM approvals since 1990; Australia has approved 12 GM crops since 2002 Now takes approximately 10 years and up to £300 million to cover the regulatory costs for a new GM crop variety and up to £1 billion for a new drug. GM crops – Issues arising from low level of EU approvals for commercial GM crops include role of EU in international debate, loss of crops that have shown better potential soil stabilisation, more efficient water use and reduced pesticide use.
- #20 Issues and case studies in annual report on potential downside consequences of banning/not permitting various technologies:- Economic regulators – There are specific issues around encouraging innovation in the industries regulated by economic regulators where there is a specific emphasis on price. Neonicotionoids – Unclear what farmers will do in response, and how this might impact pollinators – use fewer pesticides, switch to more harmful pesticides, grow fewer crops that benefit pollinators Pig inspection regime at EU level – Controls were based on those of 100 years ago, a visual inspection to pick up parasites and defects visible to the naked eye. Did not pick up main causes of foodborne disease (which are microbiological - pathogens such as Salmonella and Campylobacter). Consultation on new regime March-May 2014 based on evidence from FSA and EFSA. New package better targets risks – removing controls that did not help but actually added to the risk (physical inspection) and tightening testing for pathogens.
- #21 Future attempts to regulate may be better focused on achieving desired outcomes, rather than how the outcome is achieved. Self-regulation, behavioural insights and social regulation e.g. online review sites (such as TripAdvisor) can achieve similar outcomes to consumer protection laws, without the need for enforcement. We will need to adapt regulatory approaches to respond to innovation as technological advancements (e.g. self drive cars, robots), new business models (e.g. sharing economies) create new challenges on the use of information e.g. ensuring data is not distorted and does not overwhelm consumers/ regulators. Government/ regulators will need to address how it manages large quantity of data and how it can help to regulate the digital economy. There are also issues around safeguarding the digitally excluded.
- #22 KEY MESSAGE: A sophisticated regulator, empowered to conduct public debate as part of its work, can deliver advice over a prolonged period while both science and technology continue to evolve to enable new interventions and treatments. Even where an area is complex, uncertain and highly contested. HFEA (Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority): UK’s independent regulator ran extended consultation 2011-2-14 – HFEA took no position Multiple strategies (deliberative workshops, public representative survey, open consultation meetings, patient focus groups) Outcome: Opinion moved from risk-averse anxiety to clearly-expressed view that benefits of mitochondrial replacement treatment outweighed possible risks and ethical misgivings. HFEA advised Secretary of State: there was clear public support for the clinical use of mitochondria replacement treatment. HFEA: UK’s independent regulator of treatment using eggs and sperm, and of treatment involving human embryos. Mitochondria replacement therapy aims to eliminate faulty DNA from reproductive process; and so address mitochondrial disease for which there is no known cure and limited treatment options. Two techniques 1.) maternal spindle transfer; and 2.) Pronuclear transfer. Both procedures involve genetic material from three parties and genetic modification.