Barriers and Communication in Making Political ... - PACITA

Outline• TA and political decision-making traditions• Barriers for effective TA and politicaldecision-making• Conclusions and recommendations

TA traditions in LithuaniaTwo stages of evolvement:• Soviet stage• Post-soviet stageCurrent processes of technology assessmentand political decision-making traditions inLithuania are significantly influenced byhistoric, cultural and social factors

Soviet stage• Centralised planning and political decisionmaking• Criteria of militarised industry andtechnological perception of globalcompetition• Strong expert institutions• Establishment, implementation and control oftechnological conditions of society existenceby the government and administration

Post-soviet stageTraditions and relictsfrom the Soviet stageNew developments:• New technologies and rapidtechnological change• Unprecedented growth ofconsumption• Increasing role of commercialisationWhen soviet structure with the existinginstitutions collapsed, the interception andconversion to the new system did nothappen

Barriers for effective TA• Civic factors• Scientific institutions• Political decisions and priorities• Strategic planning• Coordination and communication betweenstakeholders• Legal basis• Qualifications and specialists

• Weak civil societyCivic factors• Unprofessional civil society organisations,which carry out mainly lobbying functions forbusiness and political interests in narrowsense

Scientific institutions• Scientific institutions do not have anyinfluence on the political TA decision-making• Universities do not implement the function offoresight and decision formation• TA studies and research is left for the expertgroups, controlled by administrators andpoliticians

Political decisions and priorities• Political decisions and priorities in the field ofTA are unprepared, chaotic and populist• Examples, such as the referendum on theatomic power plant, show the lack of abilityto make political decisions

Strategic planning• No broad (horizontal) strategies in technologicaldevelopment and TA• Lack of planning (example – regulation of solarpower technologies and biofuel)• No common strategy of state development(example – Chevron and slate gas)• New mechanisms for strategic planning, whichcould combine technological development withculture, values, social, economic and regionaldevelopment, do not exist

Coordination and communicationbetween stakeholders• Coordination and communicationmechanisms between the differentstakeholders (strategic planning, expertinstitutions, civil society organisations, publicadministration institutions and politicalinstitutions) in the technological developmentare lacking• Political decision-making is quite fragmental,occasional and not bound with strongfiltering through the CSOs

Legal basis• Legal basis, which would create system fortechnology assessment and politicaldecision-making, is lacking• Specialised institutions for strategictechnological development do not exist• The mechanisms of political decision-makingare presented mainly on the highest level ofpolitical hierarchy (Seimas and Cabinet ofMinisters) make the TA sensitive,individualised and subjective

Qualifications and specialists (1)• Not enough qualified specialists who couldparticipate in TA process• Few interest groups, which act withoutsystemic justification from the public bodiesfor strategic planning and coordination withexpert groups, social partners, CSOs andother institutions

Qualifications and specialists (2)Interest groups:•Narrow technological specialists and experts•Green movement•Political populists•Mass media•Governmental administration and its clannishinterests

Current situation (1)• Technological development is treated assystemic, but not organic, separate, but notintegrated part of social development• TA in Lithuania is divided into the several notrelated areas, spreading technologicalparadigms depending on the mental characters• Paradigms: 1) gravitation back to the industrialmodel; 2) following the EC strategies; 3)flagships of technological development are leftpost-soviet “islands”

Current situation (2)• Values, cultural and mental layers aredominated more by pragmatic, commerceand utilitarian, but not by political, state andstrategic perception• The concept of socio-technological life isnon-existent• Decision makers are more concerned withthe price and current gain but not with thedevelopment of society in general

Current situation (3)• Public opinion is formed by politicians,business sector and mass media, but not byother important stakeholders – influentialscientific institutions, professional CSOs andexperts• Only a few future foresight studies wereconducted in the last couples of years• The first examples of perception of ournational specifics emerge in the form of thediscussions about smart specialisations

Conclusions and recommendations (1)The necessary components for the TA:•Autonomy•Interdisciplinary approach (combining socialsciences and technological research)•Specialists and scientific rigidity, necessaryfor the forecastingUniversities and their think tanks can provide the necessarycomponents for the TA

Conclusions and recommendations (2)• The role of scientific institutions in the TAprocess has to be increased• Scientific institutions, such as universities orresearch institutes, can becomeintermediaries between society andgovernment

THANK YOUarunas.augustinaitis@ksu.ltauste.kiskiene@ksu.lt