Contested Visions for Transformation—The Visions of the Green New Deal and the Politics of Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, and Sustainability Research

Abstract

Societal transformations are contested. The goals and visions of transformations, as well as the means and strategies to achieve them, are born in political conflict and power constellations. Which transformations are seen as desirable and possible by democratic majorities changes throughout history. This is the political reality where research for transformations finds itself. Technology assessment (TA), responsible research and innovation (RRI), and sustainability research (SR) are a part of such contestations. They engage in envisioning, debating, analyzing, and evaluating different visions of and options for the future. In this article we turn to visions of the future as a key aspect of societal contestation and the shaping of interfaces between research for transformations and society. Based on the approach of vision assessment developed in TA, we situate TA, RRI, and SR within visions of research and social order. We argue that in these politicized times it is increasingly necessary to understand how research relates to larger visions of society and the contested nature of transformations. We turn to one of the major contemporary visions for societal transformation: The Green New Deal (GND). This vision imagines a large-scale transformation of society and the economy towards sustainability and justice and is currently debated in major political institutions and social movements. It presents an ongoing case of the “making of the future”, which is highly relevant for TA, RRI, and SR. We show how this vision is creating new knowledge and social arrangements and how it is opening up new possibilities for transformational research. The article discusses the implications that a possible further impact of GND visions in politics may have for TA, RRI, and SR, and, relatedly, how expertise and insights from TA, RRI, and SR could significantly add to the GND debate.

Addressing Multiple Responsibilities in the Early Stages of R&D with Provenance Assessment

“…Since many biotech projects can visibly achieve their goals in terms of technical control and effectiveness, the entire sector is seen as a driver of economic growth. At the same time, it is seen as an archetype of the very idea of sustainability as it caters the European and global visions of a green new deal [10]. This has made biotech something of a "funding magnet", capable of opening up new opportunities in all areas of application.…”

“…makes a difference. 10 This process assessment can then evaluate the quality of the task as "good," as opposed to the "correct" performance of the research project. This is a contextual assessment, judged in context, e.g., by adherence to transparency, reflexivity, and participation throughout the course of the project.…”

Ways towards Transformation—Conceptual Approaches and Challenges

“…Complementing the perspective of constant reflection, Schneider et al ( [89], this issue), as well as Büscher and Ufer ( [90], this issue), propose concepts for a normative orientation of transformative research, namely the Green New Deal (GND) as a political concept ( [89], this issue), as well as the analytical approach of a radical reduction in human activities ( [90], this issue). Schneider et al ( [89], this issue) argue for the strong role of visions debated in public as a "starting point of democratic transformation" (p. 13).…”

“…Complementing the perspective of constant reflection, Schneider et al ( [89], this issue), as well as Büscher and Ufer ( [90], this issue), propose concepts for a normative orientation of transformative research, namely the Green New Deal (GND) as a political concept ( [89], this issue), as well as the analytical approach of a radical reduction in human activities ( [90], this issue). Schneider et al ( [89], this issue) argue for the strong role of visions debated in public as a "starting point of democratic transformation" (p. 13). They use the example of the GND as a vision to which all three concepts could contribute, in order to plead for stronger public intervention by TA, SR and RRI in a reflexive but yet "more visionary way" (p. 13) towards a "democratic shaping of technological change" (p. 13).…”

“…Schneider et al ([89], this issue) show how the approach of "vision assessment" (p. 2) can serve as a tool to not only grasp the conflicting claims, demands and expectations of future developments that make up societal discourse on transformation, but also to better understand the changing political environment to which research for societal transformation constantly has to adapt. From the point of view of vision assessment, TA, SR and RRI are actors within science-politics arrangements and the related visions of society and strategic agendas for shaping the future ( [89] (p. 4), this issue). By developing visions of the future and assessing their feasibility, the three concepts are part of the ongoing political discourse which they have to analyze in order to connect their own work to social demands in a meaningful way.…”