Skip to main content

Author: admin_tech_ethos_strong

Newsletter #6: Spotlight on the multi-stage and multi-stakeholder methodology

Newsletter #6
Spotlight on our multi-stage and multi-stakeholder methodology

Newsletter | 09 November 2022

In short

Welcome to the sixth instalment of the TechEthos newsletter. This issue highlights the results of the project’s multi-stage and multi-stakeholder methodology.  Learn more the revised European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, and citizen awareness towards emerging technologies and the key ethical challenges coming out of our citizen & expert engagement activities. Curious to know more? Save the date for our final Policy Event on 14 November 2023

Date of publication

25 September 2023

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

ALLEA publishes 2023 revised edition of The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity

ALLEA publishes 2023 revised edition of The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity

Authored by: Mathijs Vleugel (ALLEA)
Reviewed by: Greta Alliaj (Ecsite)

News | 13 September 2023

On 23 June 2023, ALLEA released the 2023 revised edition of “The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity”, which takes account of the latest social, political, and technological developments, as well as trends emerging in the research landscape. These revisions took place in the context of the EU-funded TechEthos project, with the aim to also identify gaps and necessary additions related to the integration of ethics in research protocols and the possible implications of new technologies and their applications.

Together, these changes help ensure that the European Code of Conduct remains fit for purpose and relevant to all disciplines, emerging areas of research, and new research practices. As such, the European Code of Conduct can continue to provide a framework for research integrity to support researchers, the institutions in which they work, the agencies that fund them, and the journals that publish their work.

The Chair of the dedicated Code of Conduct Drafting Group, Prof. Krista Varantola, launched the new edition under the auspices of ALLEA’s 2023 General Assembly in London, presenting the revised European Code of Conduct to delegates of ALLEA Member Academies in parallel with its online release to the wider research community.

The 2023 revised edition

The revisions in the 2023 edition of the European Code of Conduct echo an increased awareness of the importance of research culture in enabling research integrity and implementing good research practices and place a greater responsibility on all stakeholders for observing and promoting these practices and the principles that underpin them. It likewise accommodates heightened sensibilities in the research community to mechanisms of discrimination and exclusion and the responsibility of all actors to promote equity, diversity, and inclusion.

The revised European Code of Conduct also takes account of changes in data management practices, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), as well as recent developments in Open Science and research assessment. In the meantime, Artificial Intelligence tools and social media radically change how research results are produced and communicated, and the revised European Code of Conduct reflects the challenges these technologies pose to uphold the highest standards of research integrity.

The revisions process

From early 2022, the Drafting Group, consisting of members of the ALLEA Permanent Working Group on Science and Ethics, set about exploring what changes would be needed to update the 2017 edition of the European Code of Conduct to ensure it reflects the current views on what are considered good research practices. Their work culminated in October 2022 in a draft revised document being sent for consultation to leading stakeholder organisations and projects across Europe, including representative associations and organisations for academia, publishers, industry, policymaking, and broader societal engagement.

The response to this stakeholder consultation was exceptional, indicating a sense of ownership and engagement with the European Code of Conduct amongst the research community. As part of this stakeholder consultation process, the views of the TechEthos consortium partners were collected both in writing and during an online workshop.

All feedback was captured and discussed in detail in February 2023 by the Drafting Group. A summary of the stakeholder feedback process and how this informed the 2023 revision can be found at: https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/.

 

 

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Highlighting key ethical issues determined from scenario creation, expert engagement and citizen engagement via game-based methodology and workshops

Highlighting key ethical issues determined from scenario creation, expert engagement and citizen engagement via game-based methodology and workshops

12 September 2023

Authored by: Robyn Sahota (Ecsite)
Reviewed by: Greta Alliaj (Ecsite) and Wenzel Mehnert (AIT)

Article | 12 September 2023

Introduction to the multi-stage and multi-stakeholder scenario methodology

This article, summarizing the report D3.1, discusses the involvement of various stakeholders, including the research community and the general public, in considering the ethical implications of new and emerging technologies. This process is outlined as a multi-stage and multi-stakeholder approach within the TechEthos project. The approach involves three stages: creating basic technology scenarios, enriching these scenarios through engagement with experts, and further enhancing them through engagement with the public. This method aims to facilitate the expression of stakeholders’ attitudes, values, and expectations regarding the ethical dimensions of uncertain technologies.

The methodology for societal acceptance analysis includes mapping innovation ecosystems for selected technology families based on horizon scanning, creating basic scenarios for each technology family, and developing scenario exercises and games (see: the ‘TechEthos game: Ages of Technology Impact’). This is done in collaboration with science engagement professionals, gathering expert opinions on ethical implications through the basic scenarios, and obtaining public perspectives on ethical implications through engagement with citizens from various European countries. This approach ensures a comprehensive understanding of different stakeholder viewpoints.

The mapping of innovation ecosystems involves identifying stakeholders associated with three chosen technology families: climate engineering, digital extended reality, and neurotechnologies. The report provides brief descriptions of each family, its relevant technologies and case studies, and the stakeholders involved. The mapping process considers the technological context, relevant stakeholders such as researchers, technology experts, legal and policy experts, ethics experts, civil society organizations, media, and EU-funded projects.

The development of basic scenarios using the STEEPV framework

To evaluate the results, the STEEPV heuristic was applied, to form a common ground between the three stages mentioned above (basic scenarios, expert engagement, citizen engagement). The STEEPV framework is an analytical tool designed to comprehend external environmental changes amid uncertainty, information overload, and disruptions. The acronym covers six dimensions: Social, Technological, Economical, Ecological, Political & Legal, and Human Values developments (see D3.1, section 6.1). These dimensions explore factors like demographics, innovation, market dynamics, ecological impacts, regulations, and cultural influences. By dissecting these facets, STEEPV offers a comprehensive view of the evolving external environment, aiding in understanding past, present, and potential future trends.

The process involves several steps. First, trends and driving forces related to three technology families are identified, focusing on short, medium, and long-term impacts. This is informed by literature review and the results of the ecosystem mapping, yielding an overview of future developments based on STEEPV factors. Second, key factors characterized by “high impact” and “high uncertainty” are chosen from the trend list. This differentiation aids in forming projections for potential futures. Third, projections are developed using a 2×2 matrix, placing each key factor in the center and selecting two dimensions of uncertainty. About 4 projections per key factor per technology result. Fourth, a contingency analysis clusters these projections across STEEPV factors to form raw scenarios, capturing diverse yet plausible potential futures. This yields 3 contrasting raw scenarios per technology. Fifth, partner validation and feedback refine the scenarios, resulting in 3 contrasting basic scenarios per technology.

The basic scenarios were then advanced through a consultation with experts, where they contemplated the ethical concerns linked with the technology families as depicted in the scenarios. The suggested expert solutions to these ethical matters are elaborated upon in document D3.5. Next, the citizens’ awareness and perspectives were considered in the format of science cafes and game workshops. In the remainder of this article we will discuss the general outcomes from this process.

Key takeaways per technology family:

Climate Engineering (CE)

In the social dimension, discussions revolved around inequality, equity, and global consequences, with experts focusing on geopolitical and environmental instability, while citizens expressed concerns about human health impacts. Safety and reliability were highly valued by citizens but received less attention in basic scenarios and expert opinions. In the technological dimension, effectiveness and efficiency were central themes, and both groups emphasized “techsolutionism,” prompting discussions on alternative solutions and the need for trustworthiness and transparency. The ecological dimension emphasized ecosystem health and biodiversity, with citizens favouring natural approaches. Economic discussions centered on growth and local impacts for citizens, while experts addressed power dynamics. Both groups emphasized distributive justice in the political dimension, and citizens also discussed liability concerns. In the value dimension, lifestyle changes and moving away from consumerism were suggested alternatives, with varying perspectives on “techsolutionism” between experts and citizens.

Digital Extended Reality (XR)

In the social dimension, fears of a social divide, increased mental health challenges, and lack of authentic human connections due to virtualization were prominent. Technologically, ensuring safety, reliability, and trustworthiness of the were crucial, while ecological concerns involved increased CO2 emissions, rare earth mining, and changes in urban forms due to virtualization. Economically, XR’s impact on education, labour markets, and work-life balance raised both excitement and concerns. The political dimension highlighted data protection, democracy issues, and the lack of regulation for digital companies. In the value dimension, concerns included dignity of posthumous data, enhanced social isolation, biases (e.g., gender, race) in technology, and the potential loss of authentic human connections and experiences.

Neurotechnologies (NT)

In the social dimension, human health is prioritized, but concerns arise about altering definitions of disabilities or enhancements, potentially leading to discrimination. Technology gaps between users and non-users in different fields of application, like labour markets and individual enhancement, must be addressed for equal accessibility. Autonomy and agency are crucial, focusing on avoiding manipulative influences and ensuring data privacy. The technological dimension stresses responsible use, safety, reliability, and data privacy. The ecological dimension emphasizes ecosystem health, energy consumption, maintenance, and sustainability. The economic dimension discusses private company power, and data use transparency. The political dimension raises concerns about responsible use, neurodiscrimination, governance of big data, and infringement of autonomy. The value dimension calls for a human-centered approach, considering diverse perspectives, including neurodiversity.

Conclusions

Three overarching themes emerged from the analysis: equity, reliability, and environmental sustainability.

  1. Equity: The fair and just distribution of benefits and risks associated with emerging technologies. This includes considerations of accessibility, affordability, and fair distribution of benefits to prevent potential social divides and ensure responsible innovation.
  2. Reliability: Concerns about the feasibility, safety, and accountability of technologies and their applications. It involves ensuring that technologies work as intended, with minimal unintended side-effects, and companies being held accountable for their actions if necessary.
  3. Environmental Sustainability: Focusing on the minimal negative impact of technologies on the environment while promoting biodiversity and healthy ecosystems. This includes addressing climate change, pollution, resource depletion, and habitat destruction in the development and use of technologies, as well as rising energy consumption and CO2 emissions by providing a globally accessible infrastructure for digital applications.

The report’s multi-stakeholder approach showcased the complexity of ethical issues and the importance of considering diverse perspectives when responsibly developing emerging technologies. The findings contribute to the ongoing discussion on ethical and social impacts of these technologies and inform the operationalization of guidelines in future projects.

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Citizen awareness and attitudes towards emerging technologies: key takeaways from engagement workshops

Citizen awareness and attitudes towards emerging technologies: key takeaways from engagement workshops

12 September 2023

Authored by: Robyn Sahota (Ecsite)
Reviewed by: Greta Alliaj (Ecsite) and Wenzel Mehnert (AIT)

Article | 12 September 2023

An important perspective the TechEthos project wanted to highlight alongside expert opinions was the citizen perspective. To encourage participation and facilitate conversation, an interactive game (D3.2) was developed to discuss the ethical issues related to climate engineering (CE), digital extended reality (XR), neurotechnologies (NT), and natural language processing (NLP). The goal of this exercise was to understand citizens awareness and attitudes towards these emerging technologies to provide insight into what the general public finds important.

First Science cafes were held, providing a casual forum for conversation in order to give the public general knowledge and build interest about the three technology families. These science cafes were conducted in: Vienna (Austria), Liberec (Czech Republic), Bucharest (Romania), Belgrade (Serbia), Granada (Spain), and Stockholm (Sweden). These sessions lasted around 90 minutes and consisted of short pitches from invited speaks, Q&A sessions, icebreakers, and open conversation.  

Following these science cafes was then the scenario game workshops (D3.1, section 5) held in the aforementioned countries, for a total of 20 events. These workshops engaged a wide audience from varied backgrounds, with an average of 16 participants per workshop with a duration of four hours. These workshops involved an introduction, warm-up, game play, reflection and a post-participation survey. Most participants were motivated to join these workshops due to their curiosity about technology (47.1%), followed by the desire to be involved in how technology develops (16.2%). 40 participants said they took part to the workshop because of their passion for the technology (12.5%). The gender representation in participation was fairly balanced when considering the combined country data per technology family workshop. 

Awareness

Overall, there was an even distribution of awareness (very aware, somewhat aware, not really aware) among the technology families. 70% of the participants had heard of the technology families discussed, with affective computing being the least known field (48.9% not really aware) and chatbots being the most known field (47.9% very aware), both within the NLP family. The awareness of chatbots can be linked to the prevalence in the general public’s daily life (e.g., Apple’s Siri, Amazon’s Alexa, ChatGPT). In discussions about virtual reality (89% are somewhat or very aware) and brain-computer interfaces (74% are somewhat or very aware), Science-Fiction served as a prominent frame of reference, shaping awareness, perception, and value of these technologies. Looking at the specific technologies in each technology family, we see that the most prominent technologies in CE are nature-based carbon dioxide removal (CDR), in NT brain-computer interfaces, and in NLP and XR it is chatbots and virtual reality.

The least known technologies within the technology families are similar distributed. Every third participant has not heard of solar radiation management (SRM) and Engineered CDR in CE, all three technologies in NT, and affective computing and digital twins in NLP and XR.

Citizens’ attitudes

Nature-based CDR emerged as the most favored technology, being perceived as environmentally friendly and balanced with nature. Conversely, SRM raised significant concerns among participants due to potential unforeseen disasters and pollution.

Neuroimaging generated the most enthusiasm, promising enhanced disease diagnosis and prevention. However, the brain-computer interface elicited worries about manipulation and data protection.

Among NLP technologies, chatbots and text analysis excited participants, offering simplicity and improved work efficiency. On the other hand, affective computing raised concerns about misuse and data privacy.

In the XR family, virtual reality excited participants, providing immersive experiences of distant or historical places. Meanwhile, the metaverse caused apprehension due to potential loss of human connection and data privacy issues.

Acceptance

The results indicate that participants generally accept the presented technologies, as the votes for excitement outweigh the votes for concerns. However, it’s important to note that participants often hold both excitement and concerns simultaneously, making their acceptance more complex.

In the post-survey conducted after game exercises and group deliberations, over 70% of participants expressed excitement or high excitement about possible future developments of the technologies. Simultaneously, approximately 50% of participants conveyed concerns or slight concerns regarding the technologies’ future developments.

Accepting emerging technology is complex as it involves shaping the yet-to-be-created intervention. Participants accept technology if certain conditions (X) are met or issues (Y) are prevented. Their mixed feelings of excitement and concerns reveal the need to understand shared values when discussing acceptance of emerging technologies. Reflecting on citizens’ values helps to comprehend their acceptance and to develop technologies more responsible.

Citizen values

From the workshop comments the citizen value categories (D3.1, Table 24) were extracted through qualitative coding, allowing for comparisons across all workshops.

Each technology family exhibits distinct prominent values. In the NT domain, human health, safety, and responsibility are emphasized due to its focus on the brain and nervous system. NLP and XR prioritize authentic human connection, experience, and responsible use, considering their aim to simulate human interactions.

CE highlights ecosystem health, followed by safety, reliability, effectiveness, efficiency, and justice, given its focus on manipulating natural systems. Safety and reliability are important across all three families. Responsible use and accountability are vital in NT, NLP, and XR. Ecosystem health is a shared concern across all families.

Conclusion

These workshops explored public awareness, attitudes, and citizen values towards emerging technologies. The goal was to elicit citizens’ excitements and concerns to inform ethical guidelines, which are then discussed in WP5, and to involve a diverse audience, including vulnerable groups, often underrepresented in expert processes. Overall, the “TechEthos game: Ages of Technology Impact” facilitated open and creative discussions.

Common value categories emerged across the technology families through these discussions:
  1. Safety and reliability: Participants expressed worries about unknown effects, potential dangers, and health impacts in CE, XR, and NT.
  2. Equity, diversity, and inclusion: Concerns centered on global distributive justice, access for all social groups, and respecting neurodiversity.
  3. Responsible use and accountability: Participants stressed the importance of accountability for potential disasters, consequences, and data privacy in CE, XR, and NT.

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

TechEthos Policy Event: Ethics for the Green and Digital transition

Event | 14 November 2023
TechEthos policy event: Ethics for the Green and Digital Transition

The TechEthos project presents their final one-day policy event in Brussels on the ethical governance of emerging technologies for the green and digital transition.

Interested to attend the event?

Event description

TechEthos will hold an in-person policy event in Brussels, Belgium, on 14 November 2023, co-hosted by Barbara Thaler, Member of the European Parliament & STOA Panel. The event focuses on the ethical governance of emerging technologies in the digital transformation and green transition. The event will bring together high-level experts in these fields, including EU policymakers, researchers from academia, and industry representatives to discuss the ethical governance of emerging technologies for the digital transformation and green transition.

The morning session will focus on ethics for the digital transformation, whilst the afternoon programme is dedicated to ethics for the green transition (see full programme below). Both the morning and afternoon programme feature keynote speeches and expert panel discussions on the ethical governance of emerging technologies in the digital and green transition. This conference will tap into ongoing ethical debates as well as existing and expected EU policy debates such as the proposed AI Act, the implementation of the Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act, the European Green Deal, and the EC proposal for a Carbon Removal Certification Framework

Whether you’re a policymaker, industry professional, researcher, or simply interested in the ethical implications of the green and digital transition, this event offers a unique opportunity to learn from experts, engage in meaningful discussions, and network with like-minded individuals.

Don’t miss out on this exciting event! Mark your calendars and join us for a day of learning, collaboration, and exploration.

Details

Event date: Tuesday, 14 November 2023

Location: Sparks meeting centre, 60 rue Ravenstein – 1000 Brussels, Belgium and online

Event facilitator: Vivienne Parry

Draft programme


10:00–10:30

Registration & Networking Coffee

10:30–10:50

Welcome
Opening remark: Barbara Thaler, MEP & STOA member
Introductory statement: Joanna Drake, Deputy Director General at DG for Research and Innovation

10:50–11:00

TechEthos in a nutshell: Eva Buchinger, TechEthos Coordinator

Ethics for the digital transformation

11:00–11:45

Keynote: Laura Weidinger, Senior Research Scientist at DeepMind

11:45–12:15

Coffee break

12:15–13:15

Panel discussion on key ethical, social and regulatory challenges of Digital Extended Reality

13:15–14:15

Networking lunch

Ethics for the green transition 

14:15–15:00

Keynote: Behnam Taebi, Full Professor of Energy & Climate Ethics at Delft University of Technology

15:00-15:15

Coffee break

15:15–16:15

Panel discussion on key ethical, social and regulatory challenges of Climate Engineering

Highlights & Outlook for the ethical governance of emerging technologies 

16:15–16:45

TechEthos in the larger context of the ALLEA Code of Conduct: Maura Hiney (UCD Institute for Discovery)
Legacies: foundation and continuation: Eva Buchinger (AIT), Laurence Brooks (University of Sheffield), Renate Klar (EUREC)

16:45

Adjourn


Questions?

Get in touch

teamGreta Alliaj
Ecsite – European Network of Science Centres and Museums

galliaj@ecsite.eu

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Manuscript for an Article Outlining the Refine and Revised Methodology

Deliverable
Societal Readiness Manuscript for an Article Outlining the Refined and Revised Methodology

Deliverable | 28 October 2023

In short

This report presents a manuscript detailing the revised ‘TechEthos’ Anticipatory Ethics Model (TEAeM) – useful for researchers, analysts, and policy-makers wanting to assess the ethical issues of emerging technologies and mitigate these risks.

The paper examines the concept of ethics of emerging technologies based on the analysis of a number of key ethical frameworks. Since all these approaches lacked some elements, this paper attempts to improve the ethical analysis with the integration of policy and empirical content, and therefore shape the TEAeM framework – based on the analysis of the three emerging technology families in focus.

Authors

Brooks L, Bhalla N, Cannizzaro S, and Richardson K.

Date of publication

30 August 2023

Status

Draft version submitted to the European Commission for review

Cite this resource

Brooks, L., Bhalla, N., Cannizzaro, S., and Richardson, K., (2023). Manuscript for an article outlining the refined and revised methodology. TechEthos Project Deliverable 2.3. Available at: www.techethos.eu.

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

TechEthos Anticipatory ethics Matrix (TEAeM)

Tool

Enhancement of ethical frameworks and outline of detailed ethics framework

The enhanced ethical framework, known as the ‘TechEthos Anticipatory ethics Matrix’ (TEAeM), offers a systematic approach for researchers, academics, and policy makers to assess and address ethical concerns related to emerging technologies by combining empirical studies from the TechEthos methodology.

Have a closer look at the enhanced ethical framework:
‘TechEthos Anticipatory ethics Matrix’ (TEAeM)

What is an ethical framework?

An ethical framework is a set of principles that can provide a solid base for the development of applications that are consistent with the accepted social norms and moral principles and values in society. Agreeing on an ethical framework or a combination of frameworks will help to guide the developers and users of these technologies.

Why the need for an ethical framework?

The central problem for the ethics of emerging technologies is that we humans cannot predict the future, and therefore do not know which ethical issues will play out once the technology is fully developed and entrenched in society. As the emerging technology is still evolving, many questions can arise about its nature, its future use, and its social consequences. However, if an ethical framework is to be useful in an area of emerging technology, it needs to be accepted by researchers/academics and policy makers prior to any activity that uses the technology or during the technology’s development phase. Furthermore, the framework should be used in consultation at every stage of development and not just considered as an afterthought.

Audience – who is this framework for?

The ‘TechEthos Anticipatory ethics Matrix’ (TEAeM) will be useful for researchers, academics and policy makers wanting to assess the ethical issues of emerging technologies and to mitigate these risks. The ordering of the various matrix elements in the TEAeM framework can be done in a range of ways, depending on the specific emerging technology under scrutiny.

The TechEthos Anticipatory ethics Matrix (TEAeM)

In order to achieve an outcome capable of being applied across a range of emerging technologies, we have chosen to take one approach, which uses a combination of empirical studies carried out as part of the method used within TechEthos.

Share:

Continue reading

Enhancement of ethical frameworks and outline of detailed ethics framework

Deliverable

Enhancement of ethical frameworks and outline of detailed ethics framework

In short

This report outlines the enhanced ethical framework, known as the ‘TechEthos Anticipatory ethics Matrix’ (TEAeM). TEAeM offers a systematic approach for researchers, academics, and policy makers to assess and address ethical concerns related to emerging technologies by combining empirical studies from the TechEthos methodology.

The methodology for ethical framework development is discussed, outlining the ethical frameworks to be considered for enhancement. Next the ethical frameworks are selected to be enhanced for emerging technologies following an ATE approach, Future Studies approach, and an Ethical Impact Assessment (EIA). Lastly, the framework that supports the ethical governance of new technologies is presented.

Author

Nitika Bhalla (DMU), Sara Cannizzaro (DMU) Kathleen Richardson (DMU), Laurence Brooks (Sheffield/DMU)

Date of publication

30 June 2023

Status

Draft version submitted to the European Commission for review

Cite this resource

Bhalla, N., Cannizzaro, S., Richardson, K., and Brooks, L., (2023), TechEthos Deliverable D5.1: Enhancement of Ethical Frameworks and Outline of Detailed Ethics Framework. Available at: www.techethos.eu

Deliverable | 30 June 202

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Newsletter #5: Spotlight on policy briefs for European policymakers

Newsletter #5
Spotlight on policy briefs for European policymakers

News | 17 may 2023

In short

Welcome to the fifth instalment of the TechEthos newsletter. In this issue, we share policy briefs with recommendations on enhancing EU law on new and emerging technologies, as well as a suggested approach to transition from values and principles to norms and standards. You will also  learn about our national legal case studies and discover our serious game. Finally, this issue contains a reflection about fair employment for data labelers

Date of publication

17 May 2021

Share:

go to top

Continue reading

Multi-stakeholder evolution of TechEthos scenarios

Deliverable
Multi-stakeholder evolution of TechEthos scenarios on ethical issues in climate engineering, digital extended reality and neurotechnologies

Publication | 26 May 2023

In short

In this report, scenarios are used to explore ethical implications of emerging technologies, engaging stakeholders’ awareness and values. The report outlines a multi-stage, multi-stakeholder methodology applied in climate engineering, digital extended reality, and neurotechnologies. Scenarios stimulate reflections, while experts and citizens contribute their perspectives. Three stages involve scenario creation, expert enrichment, and citizen enrichment via game-based methodology and workshops. Findings are categorized by STEEPV dimensions, guiding ethical guidelines for each technology family. Addressing equity, reliability, and environmental sustainability, the report adds to the empirical study of ethical concerns at the intersection of foresight and ethical assessment of emerging technologies.

Authors

Eva Buchinger, Wenzel Mehnert, Alexandra Csábi, Masafumi Nishi, Michael J. Bernstein (AIT), Gustavo Gonzales, Andrea Porcari (AIRI), Alexei Grinbaum, Laurynas Adomaitis (CEA), Dominic Lenzi (UT), Stephen Rainey, Steven Umbrello, Pieter Vermaas (TUD), Cristina Paca, Greta Alliaj, Andrew Whittington-Davis (ECSITE) 

Date of publication

26 May 2023

Status

Final version submitted to the European Commission for review as D3.1

Cite this resource

Buchinger E, Mehnert W, Csabi A, Nishi M, Bernstein MJ, Gonzales G, Porcari A, Grinbaum A, Adomaitis L, Lenzi D, Rainey S, Umbrello S, Vermaas P, Paca C, Alliaj G, Whittington-Davis A (2023). D3.1 Evolution of advanced TechEthos scenarios. TechEthos Project Deliverable to the European Commission. Available at: www.techethos.eu

Share:

go to top

Continue reading