The Use of Implants in Ethical Surveillance Infrastructures: Towards a Transdisciplinary Ontology

An Intensive Workshop. September 3-5, 2008, ZiF, University of Bielefeld.

[Introduction] [Rationale] [References] [Schedule] [Location] [Team] [Links]

Introduction

This workshop will debate the ethical and surveillance-related consequences of the material implantation of human beings. The objective of the workshop is to define and map an inclusive and transdisciplinary ontology of implants as they are used currently, and in near and distant futures. Our focus will be on implants with biological-sensing and data-generating capabilities, as opposed to more traditional implants such as joint replacements or physiological augmentations. The development of such an ontology is important for six main reasons:

  • The political economy of implants: this is a rapidly growing area spreading across several emerging technology sectors.
  • The continuing dominance of technocentric, engineering-led discourses about desirable futures and better living in the current public discussion of implantation. There is a pressing need to add greater momentum to the currently limited debate on ethics and social relations of implantation, and to define it more precisely.
  • Implantation is still an emergent technology and all of its potential applications remain undefined and ethical interventions can thus be crucial to trajectories of development and use.
  • Use of implants, along with other technologies of surveillance and control, is increasingly justified by responsibilization discourses, trying to shift responsibility from institutions to individuals, who should take care of themselves.
  • Implantation is part of set of socio-technical changes that are changing the nature of public (especially urban) space and its use.
  • Implantation is becoming a culturally symbolic lifestyle choice for 'personal enhancement,' in ways involved in changing power relations.

Debates about implants usually discuss these issues in terms of privacy, medical safety, data security, and legal frameworks. However "ethical surveillance infrastructures" creates a different theoretical frame of reference. We understand ethical surveillance infrastructures to be those that are transparent, open and inclusive, democratically governed, and that afford power equalization among members of societies. This new term acknowledges implants as part of surveillance systems, which act everywhere to normalize certain behaviours. Given this definition, our guiding research questions are

  1. What is the current and projected range of implants with surveillance functionality?
  2. What specific social relations, institutional structures, and cultural sensibilities are catalyzed and/or normalized by implants?
  3. Which types of implants promise to be the most (or least) "ethical"?

There has been little work done on implants in the context of surveillance. However this is an essential way to progress debate because of the rise of the surveillance society, the lack of discussion of consequences of surveillance, and the need for better understanding of surveil-lance. In addition the range of implants and their ontological status and relationships have not yet been mapped. Without this one cannot begin to consider social consequences with any consistency, from the dominant cultural uses (medical etc.) to subcultural reactions, power and resistance.

Our ultimate aim is to provoke debate beyond academics and commentators to include the general public, those who are developing implants in a growing but secretive industry, and policymakers and investors who regulate and market such projects. At present, ethical debates are merely an add-on but "ethical surveillance infrastructures" sees ethics as core around which development should occur. The emergent nature of the industry makes it particularly important to embed ethics within the design process from the start. The Surveillance Studies Network (SSN) has particular experience in this area, having conducted globally-influential consultancy work on the surveillance society.

Last change: 07/03/2008.