Co-evolutionary scenarios for creative prototyping of future robot systems for civil protection

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 84, Issue , 2014, Pages 93-100

  Carlsen, Henrik ^a   Johansson, Linda ^b   Wikman Svahn, Per ^a   Dreborg, Karl Henrik ^a  

^a SWEDISH DEFENCE RESEARCH AGENCY   (Sweden)

^b ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Autonomous systems; Co evolutionary; Robots; Safety; Scenarios; Security

Indexed keywords

ACCIDENT PREVENTION; ITERATIVE METHODS; PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECTS;

AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS; CO-EVOLUTIONARY; DOMESTIC SECURITY; EVOLUTIONARY PATH; PARTICIPATORY WORKSHOPS; SCENARIO APPROACH; SCENARIOS; SECURITY;

ROBOTS;

CIVIL SOCIETY; ETHICS; FUTURE PROSPECT; NATIONAL SECURITY; ROBOTICS; SAFETY;

EID: 84898409064     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.07.016     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Christensen C. The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail 1997, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
2. Christensen C., Raynor M. The Innovator's Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth 2003, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
3. European Commission, Council Directive 2008/114/EC On the identification and designation of European critical infrastructures and the assessment of the need to improve their protection. Off. J. Eur. Union December 8 2008, L345:75-82.
4. Schmidt C.T.A., Kraemer F. Robots, Dennett and the autonomous: a terminological investigation. Mind and Mach 2006, 16:73-80.
5. Pfeifer R., Scheier C. Understanding Intelligence 2001, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
6. Matthias A. The responsibility gap: ascribing responsibility for the actions of learning automata. Ethics Inf. Technol. 2004, 6:175-183.
7. Asaro P. Robots and responsibility from a legal perspective. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Robotics and Automation, Workshop of Roboethics, Rome April 14, 2007.
8. Pfeifer R., Lungarella M., Iida F. Self-organization, embodiment, and biologically inspired robotics. Science 2007, 318:1088-1093.
9. Turing A. Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 1950, 59:433-460.
10. Johansson L. The functional morality of robots. Int. J. Technoetic 2010, 1:65-73.
11. Carlsen H., Dreborg K.H., Godman M., Hansson S.O., Johansson L., Wikman-Svahn P. Assessing socially disruptive technological change. Technol. Soc. 2010, 32:209-218.
12. Schumpeter J. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy 1975, Harper and Row, New York. Third ed.
13. von Hippel E. The dominant role of the users in the scientific instruments innovation process. Res. Policy 1976, 5:212-239.
14. Toumi I. Networks of Innovation. Change and Meaning in the Age of the Internet 2002, Oxford University Press, New York.
15. Berners-Lee T., Fischetti M. Weaving the Web: The Original Design and the Ultimate Destiny of the World Wide Web by Its Inventors 1999, Harper Collins, San Francisco.
16. Tiwana A., Konsynski B., Bush A. Platform evolution: coevolution of platform architecture, governance, and environmental dynamics. Inf. Syst. Res. 2010, 21:675-687.
17. Schilling M. Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2000, 25:312-334.
18. Ropohl G. Ethik und Technikbewertung 1996, Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt am Main.
19. Tran T.A., Daim T. A taxonomic review of methods and tools applied in technology assessment. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2008, 75:1396-1405.
20. Geels F. Co-evolution of technology and society: the transition in water supply and personal hygiene in the Netherlands (1850-1930) - a case study in multi-level perspective. Technol. Soc. 2005, 27:363-397.
21. Hodgson G. Economics and Institutions: A Manifesto for a Modern Institutional Economics 1988, Polity Press.
22. North D. Structure and Change in Economic History 1981, Norton, New York.
23. Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences 2009, North Holland, Amsterdam. A. Meijers (Ed.).
24. Tonkens R. A challenge for machine ethics. Minds and Mach 2009, 19:421-438.
25. Anderson S.L. Asimov's three laws of robotics and machine metaethics. AI & Soc. 2008, 22:477-493.
26. Davison C., Macintyre S., Smith G.D. The potential social impact of predictive genetic testing for susceptibility to common chronic diseases: a review and proposed research agenda. Sociol. Health Ill. 1994, 16:340-371.
27. Stemerding D., Swierstra T., Boenink M. Exploring the interaction between technology and morality in the field of genetic susceptibility testing: a scenario study. Futures 2010, 42:1133-1145.
28. Robinson D.K.R. Co-evolutionary scenarios: an application to prospective futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2009, 76:1222-1239.
29. Kahn H., Wiener A.J. The Year 2000 1967, MacMillan, New York.
30. Wack P. Scenarios: shooting the rapids. Part 2 of the gentle art of reperceiving. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1985, 63:139-150.
31. van der Heiden K. The Art of Strategic Conversation 1996, Wiley, Chichester.
32. Ringland G. Scenario Planning: Managing for the Future 2006, Wiley, Chichester. 2nd ed.
33. Bradfield R., Wright G., Burt G., Cairns G., van der Heijden K. The origins and evolution of scenario techniques in long range business planning. Futures 2005, 37:795-812.
34. Eriksson E.A., Weber Adaptive K.M. Foresight. Navigating the complex landscape of policy strategies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2008, 75:462-482.
35. Moravec H. Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind 2000, Oxford University Press, New York.
36. Joy B. Why the Future Doesn't Need Us, Wired 8.04 2000.