|_ thesis Why we need risk innovation If emerging technologies such as nanotechnology are to reach their full potential we need to radically change our approach to risk, argues Andrew D. Maynard. In October 2014, Google announced it was ‘working on an innovative nanotechnology based approach to avoiding and managing disease The idea was to create a pill that ‘would deliver magnetic, functionalized nanoparticles from the gut tothe bloodstream. Once there, they would circulate — presumably for days, or longer — picking up biomarkers of disease along the way. The partiles would then be remotely interrogated directly by the patient, perhaps using a wrist-mounted ‘moniter. In effect, the plan was to create the ultimate in wearable tech: a personal device that could give you up-to-the-minute {information on health and wellness, much as wrist-worn devices provide feedback on fitness today. ‘Google's nanosensor concept is certainly audacious. Is success though will depend on. ‘overcoming a number of challenges — not least, addressing potential risks, Based on ‘what is currently known about nanoparticle bbehavious, the technology faces a plethora of possible health and environmental challenges. Failure to address these could leave the company witha non-starteron its hhands. Yet the probability of causing harm is not the only risk that could prevent these nanosensors frm becoming a reality. In the expanded list of potential risks, there fs also the chance of outmoded or overly restrictive regulations blocking progress; or the possiblity of investor ambivalence, ‘consumer suspicion, ot social media backlash, These hint at a much larger and ‘murkier risk landscape that emerging technologies will have to navigate to be successful ‘An emerging risk landscape Google's nanoparticle sensors are indicative ofa growing numberof technologies that ate facing increasingly complex rsk-related challenges. Recent the Future of Life Institute avarded close to USS? milion for research aimed a ensuring the bust and beneficial development of artificial intelligence? — funding prompted by how sunexpected risks could undermine the technology's development. Ealier this year, published researc into using the ene editing technique CRISPR/Cas9 on Fhuman embryos sparked an international 720 discussion around the ethics and safety of such techniques', And as self-driving cars move towards becoming a reality on public roads, debate around potential risks is intensifying? ‘These and many more emerging technologies face an uncertain future because of a growing disconnect between the rate at which we are innovating, and ‘our ability to assess and manage the adverse consequences of this innovation. And this {snot simply a problem of minimizing risks toluman health and the environment. Important as evidence-based health and environmental risk assessment and ‘management are, they fail to capture the full panoply of personal, social, environmental, technological, economic political and corporate risks that determine the fate of new technologies. All play a significant and growing role in determining the successor failure of emerging products and capabilities and together form a complex and interconnected risk landscape that cannot be navigated without a similaely complex and multidimensional ‘understanding of risk ‘Aba-made’ Inthe Nigerian city of Aba, entrepreneurs are becoming adept at reverse-engincering and repurposing products forthe local smarket. I's phenomenon known as. ‘Aba-made’ and is synonymous with the city’s informal economic vitality and entrepreneurialsm, While Aba-made is predominantly associated with recreating designer shoes, bags and clothing, there are signs that the city’s artisans are becoming ‘more sophisticated in the use of new technologies’. How far Aba entrepreneurs will extend their technological sil isnt yet clear, Yets technology innovation and entrepreneurship continue to blossom in sub-Saharan Africa’, Aba-made applications of emenging technologies certainly present a plausible future, and one thats likely to flourish with litle formal risk oversight ‘This plausible Aba-madé future echoes «growing trend in technology innovation democratization around the world, stimulated by an ever lower entry bartier to using cutting-edge technologies tsa trend that potentially allows local needs and opportunities tobe responded to, pie because ters the hinges formal regulatory frameworks. Yeti also raises the spectre of unanticipated risks and sinintended consequences. And in today’s interconnected world, local adverse impacts can have a profound influence on the technology's global development. Inthe USand beyond, do-it-yoursel” science and technology is similarly shaking up te risk landscape, The Maker Moverent, for instance is leading 2 revolution in opening up individ and community acces to sophisticated technologies. Similar; community labs are increasingly enabling individuals to play around — quit erally — with technologies suchas synthetic biology. ‘These movements operate largely outside the confines of established organizations and oversight frameworks. But despite often slipping through the regulatory net, they are rarely rsk-agnosic Far from it — there isolten a community ethic that takes the consequences of ations seriously For instance, DIYBio.ong — a self-identified “Tnstitution for Do-t-Yourset Biologists’ — ‘encourages members o ask a panel of professional biosafety experts about their ‘questions on safety and risk Yet these ‘movements are changing perspectives on risk ways that potentially destabilize an already tragile network of formal regulations land policies. And atthe heart of this disruption are shifts in whats considered tobe of value, and how itis potentially threatened by risk, Within this moving rik landscape, human health and environmental security remain critically important. But they are joined bya long list of adaltional factors that include, but are not limited to, social justice, community resilience, fiscal independence, and personal discovery and pleasure, The results a broadening ‘out of what constitutes risk, and a need for innovation in how to successfally navigate an evolving rsk landscape. ‘The democratization of influence At the same time, the evolation of this landscape is being stimulated by increasing ‘global democratization of influence and ‘information, Social media, andthe internet ‘more broaaly, have all but eliminatedgeographical national and cultural barriers tw organization, advocacy and inluence. Citizens ftom different counties and cultures now have the capacity to band together within virtual constituencies, and influence action on sks fr from thee physical location. Increasingly, this iniluence is felled by perceptions, beliefs and values that are not always grounded in scientific evidence, yet nevertheless have societal legitimacy. To complicate matter farther, even evidence-based approaches to assessing, ‘managing and regulating risk ae often grounded in values, with community ‘orm guiding how risk s defined and ccaluated, For example the current European definition of nanomaterials for regulatory purposes, which helps frame theidentification of risks and subsoqucnt responses to them, reflects a belief in ‘whats important an implementable ‘ot necessarily what has the potential to cause harm" Risk innovation If weareto succeed in building value through emerging technologies such as nanotechnology, we need a radical new approach to risk — one that matches and complements the inventiveness and transformative nature of technology {nnovation, and provides the means to navigate successfally through an evolving risk landscape. We need, in effect, parallel innovation in how we conceptualize risk and use this knowledge to good effect — ‘wenneed, I eould argue, a new domain of research and practice: risk innovation, Risk innovation can be thought of as an ‘organizing framework for generating new understanding, insights and inventions around risk; and translating these into products, tools and practices that protect social and environmental value, as well as enabling its creation and growth. Irsan approach that has the potential to generate radical new insights into navigating the risk landscape. As a framework it gives license to what might be described as risk entrepreneurship, where the ultimate measure ofan idea’ worth is whether it hasan impact, not whether itadheres to convention. And asin technology entrepreneurship, it enconrages a culture of experimentation —a culture grounded in ransdisciplinarity, creativity and ‘imagination; and epitomized by serendipity anda ‘ail fast fil forward! mentality that recognizes the importance offalare in developing robust solutions to both challenges and opportunites. "Asa concept, sk innovation frames Fisk asa threat to existing or future value, where value is brozdly and multiply defined within personal, societal and organizational contexts. This in tra supports definition of innovation, from the perspective of isk, asa process of generating new knowledge, ideas, and inventions, and translating these into cancepts, products or processes that protect this vale. Risk innovation in practice ‘In 2014, 1 was involved in organizing a workshop with the Dutch design organization V2_Institte for the Unstable ‘Media on exploring the nature and meaning of ‘responsible innovation’ Participants represented a broad range of disciplines, including engineering, business, medicine, art and design, and language. The outcome ‘was a book of seventeen haiku, combining poems, abstract images and expositions around responsibility in innovation — an “unusual result from an academic meeting ‘The book was designed to capture the naances of our insights in a way that an academic paper could not. But it was also aimed at stimulating new ideas in its readers that would lead to further innovation in responsible technology development among ‘entrepreneurs and innovators. Asan output, {thas more in common with rts and literature than it does risk analysis. And yet just as these modes of communication and ‘engagement reveal novel perspectives the ‘book potentially opens up risk navigation pathways to its readers that would otherwise remain hidden, Such artistic collaborations define ‘one end ofthe risk innovation spectrom. Atthe other end lie initiatives that are almost exclusively grounded in science and technology. In 2008 for instance, the Us Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institutes of Health launched an ambitious new programme to transform toxicology testing. The Toxicology in the 2ist Century programme is designed to use ‘emerging techniques in high-throughput screening, computational biology and data processing to evaluate the potential risks ‘of ens of thousands of untested chemicals. ‘san innovative initiative that is already leading to changes in how potential risks associated with chemicals ae identified and addressed, and is paving the way towards the safer, more effective use of substancesin consumer and commercial products ‘These two very different examples ilusteate how creative collaborations and novel pplication within the framework of risk innovation can shake up conventional thinking in ways that opens up new possibilities. Yet they only scratch the Suriace of whats posible. Riskinnovation has the potential to reveal new pathways through complex risk landscapes. It encourages a sophisticated dialogue around building and maintaining value in a world ‘where risks not only endemic, but integral to progress. It complements approaches to ensuing the sae and responsible use of emerging technologies sich as responsible innovation" and anticipatory governance ‘And it has the potential to open up routes twaddressing rik that would othervsise be closed — wither these are technological, social, economic or political. ‘Without risk innovation, all we are left with is business as sual. And for technologies suchas Googles nanoparticle sensors, this sn likely tbe good news, Anew D. Maynard ait the Rsk Inevaton Lal ‘at Arizona State Univer, PO Box 875603, ASU, Temp, Arizona 85387-5603, USA, email andremmaynardeusu ce References 7 ini herr