Team:Exeter/Ethics

Banner

Methods of Investigating Human Practices

We decided early on that the most direct stakeholders in our project were experts in a variety of different fields. Interviewing these people was the best way to get informed and valuable opinions. We did not perform surveys or interact with the public at large for two reasons: We did not have the resources or the expertise carry these out, especially considering our lack of access a random samples of people. We would only be able to survey our fellow university students, which we knew would introduce its own biases. Additionally, our project (and specifically bioreactor) would not be interacting directly in people’s lives, but would be a part of a mission to mars that select people would be involved in. The people working towards this mission and in the space industry were the most relevant community of stakeholders.
The first expert we talked to was Sarah Hartley, a specialist in science communication and responsible research and innovation (RRI), from the Exeter Business School. She briefed us on what makes good human practices and RRI, telling us to converse with our stakeholders through the entirety of the project, and giving us several paradigms to view our project, ELSA, SEG, and AREA.

  1. ELSA stands for Ethical, Legal, and Social Aspects.
  2. SEG stands for Safe, Ethical, and Good for the world.
  3. AREA stands for Anticipate, Reflect, Engage and Act.

Reasons for ELSA Approach

We decided ELSA was the best framework for us because we wanted to investigate the legality and social implications of our project, given its entrepreneurial nature. We disregarded the SEG and AREA frameworks because they operated on the wrong scales for our project. AREA was too focused, being a framework that emphasises innovation in response to everyday life issues, while we knew our project would interact with much larger structures. Despite the previous Exeter iGEM team using this framework to look at their bioreactor, we knew our own bioreactor would interact much more indirectly with the publics, and we adapted our approach appropriately. SEG, in contrast, was too general; our project could affect so many areas of life that we needed more direction and specifics and the SEG framework did not raise these specific questions. Furthermore, we did not feel we had the expertise to formally decide whether something would necessarily be ‘good for the world’. Our technology could be foundational to new areas of exploration, and looking at the legal implications and precedents is necessary in investigating its possible effects. Especially in this field of genetic modification, we know that legislation is an important factor, deciding whether an innovation is used to benefit or exploit the public. This is why we chose a framework that takes a broad approach, looking at how something new interacts with our existing ethical, legal, and social structures.

What We Learnt:

We asked people in the space industry for the ethical reasoning behind their work. This involved interviewing Dr Chris McKay, a planetary scientist at NASA, who has done analysis on the ethics of space travel. He introduced us to his findings of three moral categories that epitomized widespread views: wise stewardship, inherent value, and preservationism. We also conducted our own investigation, interviewing several academics for and against space exploration.
To investigate the legal aspect of our project, we interviewed astronauts and logistics experts such as Libby Jackson, a flight director and programme manager at the UK Space agency. We asked her about her priorities in planning space travel and what legal framework is applicable in space. We found that the laws applying to space are similar to those governing the Arctic regions, in which no one country or company would be able to lay claim to land. In accordance with planetary protection laws, all contact with alien substances occurs within two way closed systems. This would have to change in order to effectively explore a planet where there is a possibility of life existing, such as Mars. There is also a lack of consideration of synthetic biological systems within the current legal framework such as those being developed by NASA and the ESA and being extremely pertinent to our bioreactor.
We consulted social scientists about our project regarding the hopes and concerns that the publics have expressed about space travel. We considered performing a survey, but on realizing our limited access to a truly random sample and the difficulty of removing bias from our survey, we decided to question people who observe societal trends. These included Paul Williams, who we interviewed about science fiction, and Ewan Woodley about science communication. Williams informed us that people are not opposed to space travel, but they would rather it not be at the expense of other governmental duties, suggesting that it would ideally be funded by private investment. With respect to finding life in space, he compared “nice” aliens with the aliens we’re more likely to find nearby: bacteria and viruses. “Nice” aliens depicted in literature are easy to communicate with; they think, feel, and are usually vaguely humanoid. However, depictions of aliens like “The Blob” epitomize people’s anxieties about an alien virus, which would infect and kill indiscriminately while being impossible to reason with.


We noticed that, while academics seem to be worried about us killing alien life, the media often portrays the narrative of aliens killing us. Ewan Woodley suggested that how people are trained to think, specifically their type of education, would drastically change how they think about space exploration. He suggested that social scientists would draw historical parallels with colonialism, while STEM students would be more data driven. In interviewing Andy Weir, author of ‘The Martian’, we found his inspiration for ‘The Martian’ was in part due to the “virtuous cycle” of interest in space resulting in more media interest, subsequently resulting in more interest in space exploration and so on. This was also noticed by Libby Jackson that the recent upturn in media representation of space travel both fictional (fims such as ‘The Martian’ and ‘Gravity) and real (Tim Peake’s time on the ISS) has resulted in a consistent upturn in space relevant internet searches and applications for jobs in space related industry.