"Technology isn't neutral: it's always designed to suit particular interests and values"

Eduard Aibar is a professor and researcher in the Philosophy for Contemporary Challenges (MUSSOL) research group at the Faculty of Arts and Humanities of the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC). He is also president of the newly founded Catalan Association of Science and Technology Studies (STS-CAT), which launched on 28 February. In this interview, he discusses the creation of STS-CAT, which aims to foster and raise the profile of interdisciplinary research in science and technology.

The new association comes at a crucial time, marked by the rise of AI and the spread of denialist narratives, which, as Aibar explained, "aren't just passing fads fuelled by social media, but systematic campaigns orchestrated and funded by powerful political or industrial lobbies".

Challenging the fatalistic view of technology, Aibar's proposed approach recognizes that "every technology is developed around the intentions and interests of specific social groups. […] If we want to exercise democratic control over technology, we must first accept that it's not an autonomous process."

What role does the new Catalan Association of Science and Technology Studies (STS-CAT) intend to play in the academic sector? What are its founding objectives?

STS-CAT has two core objectives: firstly, to foster academic and interdisciplinary research in science and technology, with a particular focus on how they interact with different areas of society; and secondly, to strengthen communication and exchange within this field of study, raise its profile among the wider public and boost its impact on policymaking.

Due to the traditionally siloed nature of research in Spain, where rigid disciplinary walls enclose "fields of knowledge", interdisciplinary research often struggles to find a place at universities. STS-CAT aims to create a space where people currently working in the field but scattered across different departments and centres in Catalan universities, can connect, discuss and interact in a productive way.

What aspects of science and technology studies does STS-CAT aim to strengthen? What social impact do you hope to achieve?

As is already the case in other countries, science and technology studies can serve as a decisive tool for designing more informed science and technology policies. They are particularly useful in identifying and analysing the social and ethical consequences of scientific research and technology, which is an urgent need in areas such as AI. They also help to assess the role of expert knowledge in policymaking, a topic that's often controversial, as seen during the recent pandemic. In addition, they can promote public participation in such decisions, involving not only the general public but also representatives from civil society. Finally, they serve to re-evaluate public funding of scientific research to ensure that its social returns are considered.

Do you think that STS-CAT can help to bring science closer to society? Does science get the recognition it deserves in today's world?

There are different ways of bridging the gap between science and society. The traditional approach has been the public communication of science, what used to be known as dissemination. While those of us in STS don't discount this one-way strategy, we believe it's equally important to bring society closer to science. This can be achieved through various mechanisms that involve the public, especially interested groups, affected parties and other stakeholders, in determining what research should be funded or prioritized.

Science continues to be highly regarded in our societies, but it's true that various forms of denialism have eroded public trust over the past decade. STS scholars have been at the forefront of demonstrating that many of these denialist movements aren't just passing fads fuelled by social media, but systematic campaigns orchestrated and funded by powerful political or industrial lobbies, climate change denialism being a fine example. It's an entirely new field of study that we call agnotology: the systematic production of ignorance.

The impact of digital technology is a recurring topic of debate. Do you think this debate is really helping us to address the challenges posed by new technologies?

The social impacts of technology are undoubtedly a crucial issue. However, we often forget that impact is in itself a metaphor that can sometimes lead to misunderstandings. While technologies certainly have social impacts, these impacts are not "mechanical", hinging on the social context and many other factors, or "immediate", often taking years or even decades to unfold. Nor should they always be understood in hyperbolic terms. Today there's a growing tendency to see every technological change as a revolution.

And how do STS scholars see this?

From an STS perspective, we also emphasize the other side of the coin: the impact of society on technology. In other words, we look at how technologies are shaped by various social factors (goals, interests, values and ideologies), often in intricate ways that aren't immediately obvious. This has two critical implications. Firstly, technology isn't neutral. The idea that "it all depends on how it's used" is simply not true. Secondly, all technologies could've been developed differently. In technology, as perhaps in all aspects of life, you can never say "that's just the way it is". This is a common refrain in discussions of AI, implying that it can't be changed and that we must simply adapt to it. STS scholars have shown that this fatalistic view of technology is a contemporary myth.

The regulation of artificial intelligence is a growing concern. Do you think unchecked technological development could threaten social cohesion and even established democracies?

Discussions about the risks associated with certain technologies and their integration into society very often focus narrowly on ethics or on defining particular ethical uses. Take AI, for example. Many current debates revolve around determining in which contexts its use is legitimate or ethical, as if regulation were the only possible strategy. But this overlooks several crucial issues. First, AI biases have more to do with how systems are designed and the datasets used to train them than with their specific contexts of use. Second, there's a widespread belief that these technologies are immaterial and therefore far more sustainable.

And what is the truth?

The truth is that AI isn't being developed in some ethereal cloud, but rather in huge industrial facilities that require enormous amounts of energy, minerals, water, and human labour, as well as various forms of exploitation. STS author Kate Crawford highlights this in her book Atlas of AI (Yale University Press, 2021). It's a prime example of how to comprehensively assess all the risks and opportunities around a specific technology.

STS scholars have been challenging the notion that technological development is uncontrolled or "autonomous". On the contrary, every technology is developed around the intentions and interests of specific social groups (institutions, corporations, etc.). If we want to exercise democratic control over technology, we must first accept that technology is never neutral or inevitable. It's always designed to suit particular interests and values that could've been different. Its development is always contingent. AI, like any other technology, can always be designed differently.

Is the regulation of certain digital technologies a necessity, or is it like trying to hold back the tide?

The metaphor of "holding back the tide" assumes that technological development is a natural, autonomous process beyond our control. Not only is this view scientifically inaccurate, but it's also politically paralysing. The problem with regulating use – which may indeed be legitimate and useful in many ways – is that it overlooks the design and construction phases, where social and political values and biases are embedded in the technology.

What are some of the first projects that STS-CAT plans to launch?

Our priority is to bring together all the researchers working in this field in Catalonia and to forge closer links with them, while also involving colleagues from the rest of Spain, who have shown great interest. We'll organize a series of regular meetings and seminars to exchange ideas, share research results and foster collaboration. A particular focus will be on providing intellectual support and refuge for young researchers.

Does STS-CAT plan to collaborate with other institutions? How will it interact with existing scientific societies?

Yes, this is also a priority for us. Science and technology studies are inherently interdisciplinary, and their purpose has always been to establish links with other societies and fields of research. Historically, the closest relationship has been with the history of science and technology. This has been the case internationally as well as here. We have strong links with the Catalan Society for the History of Science and Technology, and we are keen to establish collaborative agreements with other scientific and engineering societies. In the field of AI, for example, there's a growing interest among engineers and scientists in the social, ethical and political issues that also concern us. We'd certainly welcome the opportunity to create hybrid spaces that foster mutual learning.

How can interested researchers and professionals participate in STS-CAT activities?

The first step is to become a member, which simply involves filling in a form and paying the fee. From then on, members will not only receive updates on our activities, but will also have the opportunity to participate in meetings and working groups, helping to shape new initiatives and playing an active role in the association's future.

What role will communication of science play within STS-CAT?

Traditionally, STS scholars have had a strong interest in the public communication of science and the related field of public understanding of science. One of the leading STS scholars, Brian Wynne, was one of the first to challenge the so-called "deficit model" – the idea that the public lacks sufficient knowledge to make decisions about science and technology or that sceptical or negative attitudes stem from scientific ignorance.

In reality, many studies suggest that the very concept of the public, in a general sense, is somewhat misleading. In fact, one could say there are multiple publics, or audiences, and when specific groups feel directly engaged (whether as those affected or as interested parties, such as patient associations), they can often develop a high level of knowledge.

How can science better connect with today's society?

Often, these audiences possess forms of knowledge that are not certified (or "official"), but which ultimately prove very useful in complementing, correcting or enriching formal scientific knowledge. Examples include patients' knowledge about their diseases or farmers' knowledge about their crops. Many studies show that communication between science and society should be seen as a two-way process and not simply as a matter of literacy.

Other studies also show that even more important than information itself is the existence of real mechanisms for participation in decision-making on science and technology issues – something for which there are still very few initiatives here. Science and technology studies have explored many such mechanisms, including citizens' panels and consensus conferences, in which members of the public, especially key representatives from civil society, can engage with experts and policymakers on an equal footing in hybrid forums.

Has STS-CAT taken inspiration from similar associations? Are there international models that have served as a reference?

Yes, absolutely. Internationally, we have the Society for Social Studies of Science (4S) and the European Association for the Study of Science and Technology (EASST). In fact, many current members of STS-CAT have been long-standing members of these two societies, and we received sponsorship from EASST to organize our launch event. Many national STS societies have also existed for years across Europe, including in Italy, the UK, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Belgium and Portugal. During the last 4S/EASST conference, held in Amsterdam in July 2024, we participated in a coordination meeting with all the national STS societies even though we hadn't yet been officially established at that time.

From your experience as a researcher, how has interest in science and technology studies evolved in recent years?

Internationally, the field has grown tremendously. The latest conference in Amsterdam attracted 3,000 researchers from all over the world, including over 300 early career researchers attending for the first time. Institutionally, science and technology studies are firmly established at most of the world's top universities, including MIT, Harvard, Stanford, Cornell, Oxford, Cambridge and the École des Mines in Paris, with dedicated departments, research centres and academic programmes.

Research in this field has played an important role in shaping the shift towards responsible research and innovation (RRI), which has influenced European science policy (through various framework programmes and Horizon initiatives) and US policy (through the National Science Foundation, NSF) over the last 15 years. In Spain, however, the situation is very different, with almost everything still to be done. This is partly due to the rigidly siloed structure of academic disciplines, as I mentioned earlier, and partly because science and technology policy has not taken social issues into account.

UOC R&I

The UOC's research and innovation (R&I) is helping overcome pressing challenges faced by global societies in the 21st century by studying interactions between technology and human & social sciences with a specific focus on the network society, e-learning and e-health.

Over 500 researchers and more than 50 research groups work in the UOC's seven faculties, its eLearning Research programme and its two research centres: the Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3) and the eHealth Center (eHC).

The university also develops online learning innovations at its eLearning Innovation Center (eLinC), as well as UOC community entrepreneurship and knowledge transfer via the Hubbik platform.

Open knowledge and the goals of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development serve as strategic pillars for the UOC's teaching, research and innovation. More information: research.uoc.edu.