Global Catastrophic Risk and the Drivers of Scientist Attitudes Towards Policy
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21688528 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Christopher Nathan (0000-0002-2386-3517, University of Warwick), Keith Hyams (0000-0003-3755-646X, University of Warwick, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 28 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 50-50 |
| Publication date | 2022-12-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Science and Engineering Ethics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1353-3452 • E-ISSN: 1471-5546 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s11948-022-00411-3 |
| PMID | 36305955 |
| OpenAlex | W4307839154 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 33 |
An anthropogenic global catastrophic risk is a human-induced risk that threatens sustained and wide-scale loss of life and damage to civilisation across the globe. In order to understand how new research on governance mechanisms for emerging technologies might assuage such risks, it is important to ask how perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes towards the governance of global catastrophic risk within the research community shape the conduct of potentially risky research. The aim of this study is to deepen our understanding of emerging technology research culture as it relates to global catastrophic risks, and to shed new light on how new research governance mechanisms might be developed. We analyse in-depth interviews with leading AI and biotech researchers both from universities and the private sector. We develop new insights in terms of four salient themes. First, ‘engineering mindset’, which highlights the premium placed by many interviewees on pursuing interesting research about the physical world for its own sake. Second, ‘self-government’, which looks at how self-regulation of technological development currently occurs. Third, ‘pure incentives’, focussing on how career and other incentives shapes research. Fourth, ‘norms and persuasion’, which examines the role of moral considerations in guiding the research choices of scientists. We end by considering the implications of these findings for future research on governance of anthropogenic global catastrophic risk
Corporate governance · Economics · Environmental ethics · Global governance · Globe · Incentive · Management · Mindset · Political science · Private sector · Public relations · Risk Governance · Risk society · Social science · Sociology · Law · Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations · Psychology · Space exploration and regulation · Space Science and Extraterrestrial Life
Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal
What Is “Responsible” about Responsible Innovation? Understanding the Ethical Issues
The Future of Science Governance
Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority
Viewpoint
Collingridge and the dilemma of control
A comprehensive appraisal of responsible research and innovation
Science to the rescue or contingent progress? Comparing 10 years of public, expert and policy discourses on new and emerging science and technology in the United Kingdom
Human values and the value of humanities in interdisciplinary research
Catastrophe
Public uptake of science
To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales
Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis
Reimagining responsibility in synthetic biology
Sampling in Interview-Based Qualitative Research
Creating Public Alienation
Nothing to do with the science’
Governing Boring Apocalypses
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Two Decades of Developments in Qualitative Inquiry
Responsible research and innovation
Mind the Gap
Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2025 - 2025 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |