Breadcrumbs

Dr Dan Weijers is looking at how to deal with the public rejection of new potentially life-saving technologies.

He is one of the speakers at the new Waikato Dialogue later this month, a symposium focusing on the implications of emerging disruptive technologies for international security and New Zealand. Key national and international speakers will be looking for solutions to some of the biggest challenges the country faces in the area. Organizers aim to make it an annual event, which will be a crucial focus for security for the Australasian region.

Dr Weijers says new technologies can offer solutions to security concerns, such as preventing terrorist attacks. Many new technologies are criticised on moral grounds, leading some potentially life-saving technologies to be left on the shelf. He’s presenting a framework for policymakers to use when a potentially beneficial new technology is deemed morally repugnant by members of the public.

Dr Dan Weijers.

It’s not about immediately de-escalating the repugnance or revulsion, Dr Weijers says, it is about conducting a moral assessment to guide how policy makers should deal with it. “The public revulsion happens, and often there is an immediate political response - like “of course we won’t do that”, and things get canceled or stopped without giving the matter any deep thought.”

One example comes from the United States. The idea was to develop a Policy Analysis Market (PAM), a futures market intended to harness collective intelligence to predict future international events. New Zealand had a similar market in the now defunct iPredict. Such markets essentially use the wisdom of the crowd to predict the future. “Anyone can make a prediction, but people are more careful with their predictions when they have money on it.” In the case of PAM, wisdom could be drawn from around the world and translated into concrete predictions in order to help prevent or deter terrorist attacks. But a  couple of senators saw it as shocking, grotesque and morally wrong, based on the interpretation that it was  frivolously “betting” on things like whether a world leader would be assassinated, or whether there will be a war in a certain country.

To Dr Weijers it was a huge over-reaction. He has closely analysed the moral problems the politicians had, and whether they were making any mistakes in judgement. “Often if we feel disgusted it could just be because we are unfamiliar with something. Like eating tarantulas. We should try to work out whether there is a genuine moral issue at the heart of it. At the heart of PAM was the possibility of preventing terrorist attacks. If the senators had focussed on this they may have decided it was amazing and run with it.”

Personally, Dr Weijers doesn’t see PAM as betting, but in the United States, legally you need a special licence to run a prediction market. “The senators saw it as betting on death. There are actually websites - death pools - that coordinate people betting on whether famous people will die in the next year. These are frivolous and morally bad. But a purpose of PAM was to prevent potential terrorist attacks, which is surely morally good.”

Crucially, the first steps in Dr Weijers’ framework are to ask whether the critics’ complaints stack up against established facts and the critics’ own moral frameworks. “In many cases, thinking carefully about these simple questions can tell us whether we should take the critics’ repugnance seriously.”

If a potentially unpopular new technology survives the moral assessment, correct framing and naming can go a long way to ensuring that the idea doesn’t gather dust on the shelf. “I would have called it the Anti-Terrorism Prediction Market. I doubt senators would have been so quick to criticise it then.”

Other speakers at the symposium include Dr William Carter from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, Dr Joe Burton and Dr Reuben Steff.

Related stories

Sharna McCleary

Science student uses mushrooms to help clean up Whakatāne canal

Oyster mushrooms are helping to clean up an historically contaminated timber processing site in Whakatāne,…

University announced as Headline Partner of NZ Festival of the Arts Writers programme

The University of Waikato has been announced as a headline University Partner of the New…

University of Waikato researchers awarded $5.6m from Marsden Fund

Four University of Waikato researchers were today awarded Marsden Fund grants for 2019.

Jessica Pasisi

Research aims to shed light on health and wellbeing of Niuean people

Waikato University PhD student, Jessica Pasisi, is seeking to better understand the mental health and…

Research uncovers sense of belonging for refugee and immigrant families through early childhood education

Two major studies are putting refugee and immigrant children in early childhood education at the…

Maui Hudson & Tahu Kukutai

Fighting for Māori data rights

Two researchers are helping to pioneer a global initiative that seeks to restore control of…

Psychology Research Poster Session 2019

From the topic of memory and attention in everyday driving to the relationship between traumatic…

Dr Robert Townsend

University research aims to break down barriers for disabled athletes

Major research is underway at the University of Waikato designed to offer more sport and…

Legal technology project to transform legal education in New Zealand

The world that we are living in today will not be the world our children…

Lead researcher Prof Albert Bifet

Waikato Data Scientists awarded $13 million

Data scientists at the University of Waikato have been awarded $13 million from the Government.

Robotic Asparagus Harvester

Robotic asparagus picker praised by US farmers

Asparagus is one of the hardest crops to harvest. But an ingenious device created by…

UoW Rutherford Fellows

$1.6m awarded to Waikato University’s new Rutherford Fellows

Two top researchers have been awarded a highly prestigious award to carry out their research…