An integrated approach to oversight assessment for emerging technologies

Jennifer Kuzma, Jordan Paradise, Gurumurthy Ramachandran, Jee Ae Kim, Adam Kokotovich, Susan M. Wolf

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Analysis of oversight systems is often conducted from a single disciplinary perspective and by using a limited set of criteria for evaluation. In this article, we develop an approach that blends risk analysis, social science, public administration, legal, public policy, and ethical perspectives to develop a broad set of criteria for assessing oversight systems. Multiple methods, including historical analysis, expert elicitation, and behavioral consensus, were employed to develop multidisciplinary criteria for evaluating oversight of emerging technologies. Sixty-six initial criteria were identified from extensive literature reviews and input from our Working Group. Criteria were placed in four categories reflecting the development, attributes, evolution, and outcomes of oversight systems. Expert elicitation, consensus methods, and multidisciplinary review of the literature were used to refine a condensed, operative set of criteria. Twenty-eight criteria resulted spanning four categories: seven development criteria, 15 attribute criteria, five outcome criteria, and one evolution criterion. These criteria illuminate how oversight systems develop, operate, change, and affect society. We term our approach "integrated oversight assessment" and propose its use as a tool for analyzing relationships among features, outcomes, and tradeoffs of oversight systems. Comparisons among historical case studies of oversight using a consistent set of criteria should result in defensible and evidence-supported lessons to guide the development of oversight systems for emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1197-1219
Number of pages23
JournalRisk Analysis
Volume28
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Biomedical Technology Assessment
Consensus
Technology
Public administration
Nanotechnology
Social sciences
Social Sciences
Risk analysis
Public Policy
Systems Analysis

Keywords

  • Expert elicitation
  • Multicriteria decision analysis
  • Multidisciplinary
  • Nanotechnology
  • Oversight assessment
  • Risk

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology (medical)
  • Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality

Cite this

An integrated approach to oversight assessment for emerging technologies. / Kuzma, Jennifer; Paradise, Jordan; Ramachandran, Gurumurthy; Kim, Jee Ae; Kokotovich, Adam; Wolf, Susan M.

In: Risk Analysis, Vol. 28, No. 5, 10.2008, p. 1197-1219.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kuzma, J, Paradise, J, Ramachandran, G, Kim, JA, Kokotovich, A & Wolf, SM 2008, 'An integrated approach to oversight assessment for emerging technologies', Risk Analysis, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 1197-1219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01086.x
Kuzma, Jennifer ; Paradise, Jordan ; Ramachandran, Gurumurthy ; Kim, Jee Ae ; Kokotovich, Adam ; Wolf, Susan M. / An integrated approach to oversight assessment for emerging technologies. In: Risk Analysis. 2008 ; Vol. 28, No. 5. pp. 1197-1219.
@article{c15cc5b3010344ce84d2eb364718378c,
title = "An integrated approach to oversight assessment for emerging technologies",
abstract = "Analysis of oversight systems is often conducted from a single disciplinary perspective and by using a limited set of criteria for evaluation. In this article, we develop an approach that blends risk analysis, social science, public administration, legal, public policy, and ethical perspectives to develop a broad set of criteria for assessing oversight systems. Multiple methods, including historical analysis, expert elicitation, and behavioral consensus, were employed to develop multidisciplinary criteria for evaluating oversight of emerging technologies. Sixty-six initial criteria were identified from extensive literature reviews and input from our Working Group. Criteria were placed in four categories reflecting the development, attributes, evolution, and outcomes of oversight systems. Expert elicitation, consensus methods, and multidisciplinary review of the literature were used to refine a condensed, operative set of criteria. Twenty-eight criteria resulted spanning four categories: seven development criteria, 15 attribute criteria, five outcome criteria, and one evolution criterion. These criteria illuminate how oversight systems develop, operate, change, and affect society. We term our approach {"}integrated oversight assessment{"} and propose its use as a tool for analyzing relationships among features, outcomes, and tradeoffs of oversight systems. Comparisons among historical case studies of oversight using a consistent set of criteria should result in defensible and evidence-supported lessons to guide the development of oversight systems for emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology.",
keywords = "Expert elicitation, Multicriteria decision analysis, Multidisciplinary, Nanotechnology, Oversight assessment, Risk",
author = "Jennifer Kuzma and Jordan Paradise and Gurumurthy Ramachandran and Kim, {Jee Ae} and Adam Kokotovich and Wolf, {Susan M.}",
year = "2008",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01086.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "1197--1219",
journal = "Risk Analysis",
issn = "0272-4332",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An integrated approach to oversight assessment for emerging technologies

AU - Kuzma, Jennifer

AU - Paradise, Jordan

AU - Ramachandran, Gurumurthy

AU - Kim, Jee Ae

AU - Kokotovich, Adam

AU - Wolf, Susan M.

PY - 2008/10

Y1 - 2008/10

N2 - Analysis of oversight systems is often conducted from a single disciplinary perspective and by using a limited set of criteria for evaluation. In this article, we develop an approach that blends risk analysis, social science, public administration, legal, public policy, and ethical perspectives to develop a broad set of criteria for assessing oversight systems. Multiple methods, including historical analysis, expert elicitation, and behavioral consensus, were employed to develop multidisciplinary criteria for evaluating oversight of emerging technologies. Sixty-six initial criteria were identified from extensive literature reviews and input from our Working Group. Criteria were placed in four categories reflecting the development, attributes, evolution, and outcomes of oversight systems. Expert elicitation, consensus methods, and multidisciplinary review of the literature were used to refine a condensed, operative set of criteria. Twenty-eight criteria resulted spanning four categories: seven development criteria, 15 attribute criteria, five outcome criteria, and one evolution criterion. These criteria illuminate how oversight systems develop, operate, change, and affect society. We term our approach "integrated oversight assessment" and propose its use as a tool for analyzing relationships among features, outcomes, and tradeoffs of oversight systems. Comparisons among historical case studies of oversight using a consistent set of criteria should result in defensible and evidence-supported lessons to guide the development of oversight systems for emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology.

AB - Analysis of oversight systems is often conducted from a single disciplinary perspective and by using a limited set of criteria for evaluation. In this article, we develop an approach that blends risk analysis, social science, public administration, legal, public policy, and ethical perspectives to develop a broad set of criteria for assessing oversight systems. Multiple methods, including historical analysis, expert elicitation, and behavioral consensus, were employed to develop multidisciplinary criteria for evaluating oversight of emerging technologies. Sixty-six initial criteria were identified from extensive literature reviews and input from our Working Group. Criteria were placed in four categories reflecting the development, attributes, evolution, and outcomes of oversight systems. Expert elicitation, consensus methods, and multidisciplinary review of the literature were used to refine a condensed, operative set of criteria. Twenty-eight criteria resulted spanning four categories: seven development criteria, 15 attribute criteria, five outcome criteria, and one evolution criterion. These criteria illuminate how oversight systems develop, operate, change, and affect society. We term our approach "integrated oversight assessment" and propose its use as a tool for analyzing relationships among features, outcomes, and tradeoffs of oversight systems. Comparisons among historical case studies of oversight using a consistent set of criteria should result in defensible and evidence-supported lessons to guide the development of oversight systems for emerging technologies, such as nanotechnology.

KW - Expert elicitation

KW - Multicriteria decision analysis

KW - Multidisciplinary

KW - Nanotechnology

KW - Oversight assessment

KW - Risk

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=52649158730&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=52649158730&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01086.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01086.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 18631303

AN - SCOPUS:52649158730

VL - 28

SP - 1197

EP - 1219

JO - Risk Analysis

JF - Risk Analysis

SN - 0272-4332

IS - 5

ER -