Understanding ‘anticipatory governance’

TLDR

Anticipatory governance is a broad‑based societal capacity that manages emerging knowledge‑based technologies while they remain controllable, fostering foresight, engagement, and integration, and encouraging scientists, engineers, policymakers, and the public to reflect on their roles, despite critiques of its proximity to nanotechnology, the public, and technoscience. The article reviews the early history of the National Nanotechnology Initiative and explicates anticipatory governance by exploring its genealogy and addressing literature critiques. It does so by tracing the term’s genealogy and responding to critiques in the literature. The article concludes that amplifying previously excluded voices through anticipatory governance can help steer technoscience toward more humane ends, though it is not a complete solution.

Abstract

Anticipatory governance is ‘a broad-based capacity extended through society that can act on a variety of inputs to manage emerging knowledge-based technologies while such management is still possible’. It motivates activities designed to build capacities in foresight, engagement, and integration – as well as through their production ensemble. These capacities encourage and support the reflection of scientists, engineers, policy makers, and other publics on their roles in new technologies. This article reviews the early history of the National Nanotechnology Initiative in the United States, and it further explicates anticipatory governance through exploring the genealogy of the term and addressing a set of critiques found in the literature. These critiques involve skepticism of three proximities of anticipatory governance: to its object, nanotechnology, which is a relatively indistinct one; to the public, which remains almost utterly naïve toward nanotechnology; and to technoscience itself, which allegedly renders anticipatory governance complicit in its hubris. The article concludes that the changing venues and the amplification within them of the still, small voices of folks previously excluded from offering constructive visions of futures afforded by anticipatory governance may not be complete solutions to our woes in governing technology, but they certainly can contribute to bending the long arc of technoscience more toward humane ends.