Halbjährliche Berichte und Kurzstudien zu den aktuellen Themen und Trends als Service für Abgeordnete.

Dr.
Niklas Gudowsky forscht zu Foresight und partizipativen Methoden im Bereich Technologie und Nachhaltigkeit. Außerdem betreut er die Publikationsreihe ITA-Dossiers, welche aktuelle Forschungsergebnisse zusammenfasst und Handlungsoptionen für Politik und Gesellschaft aufzeigt.
Berufsbegleitendes Doktoratsstudium am Department für Anthropologie, Fakultät für Lebenswissenschaften der Universität Wien, (2011-2017). In seiner Dissertation analysierte er Entwicklung und Anwendung einer partizipativen Foresightmethode zur nachfrageorientierten Wissenschafts-, Technologie und Innovationsgovernance. Diplomstudium Biologie mit den Schwerpunkten Ökologie und Humanökologie an den Universitäten Wien, Frankfurt/Main und Lissabon, Abschluss 2010 mit einer Arbeit zur Rolle von Information in partizipativen Prozessen.
Niklas Gudowsky ist seit April 2014 als Wissenschaftler am ITA tätig. Zwischen 2013-2014 arbeitete er als Prozessberater bei der auf ambient assited living spezialisierten Beratungsfirma Innovendo. Von 2010 bis 2012 war er an verschiedenen Projekten im Bereich Technologie und Nachhaltigkeit am ITA beteiligt. Während des Studiums arbeitete er als Forschungsassistent am Department für Anthropologie und am Dekanat der Fakultät für Lebenswissenschaften der Universität Wien.
Seine Publikationen befassen sich vor allem mit der Analyse partizipativer Methoden zur Einbeziehung von ExpertInnen, Laien und Stakeholdern in Forschungsprozesse zur wissensbasierten Politikberatung.
Expectations regarding augmented realities (AR) produce a range of anticipatory imaginations, ranging from hyperbolic visions to fears of entangled risks, negative effects and dystopian futures. On the one hand, assessing visions of emerging technologies brings to the fore the political economy of research and development of such technologies. On the other, developing plausible scenarios seeks to stimulate active socio-political negotiations regarding which futures are desirable (or not) and should (not) be pursued. AR technology may become a highly influential shaper of public spaces, and therefore the futures of humanistic and democratic societies. We introduce the methodology and results of an iterative survey-based scenario-building process, collecting highly interdisciplinary perspectives on augmented reality use in public spaces within the next decade. We outline four ‘extreme ends’ of plausible futures: ‘autocratic augmented reality’, ‘big-tech monopoly’, ‘DIY proliferation’ and ‘participatory public space’, concluding with a discussion of what effects these scenarios would have on societies, and a critical reflection on the scenario-building process and its limits.
Expectations play a distinctive role in shaping emerging technologies and producing hype cycles when a technology is adopted or fails on the market. To harness expectations, facilitate and provoke forward-looking discussions, and identify policy alternatives, futures studies are required. Here, expert anticipation of possible or probable future developments becomes extremely arbitrary beyond short-term prediction, and the results of futures studies are often controversial, divergent, or even contradictory; thus they are contested. Nevertheless, such socio-technical imaginaries may prescribe a future that seems attainable to those involved in the visioneering process, and other futures may thus become less likely and shaping them could become more difficult. This implies a need to broaden the debate on socio-technological development, creating spaces where policy, science, and society can become mutually responsive to each other. Laypeople’s experiential and value-based knowledge is highly relevant for complementing expertise to inform socially robust decision-making in science and technology. This paper presents the evolution of a transdisciplinary, forward-looking co-creation process — a demand-side approach developed to strengthen needs-driven research and innovation governance by cross-linking knowledge of laypeople, experts, and stakeholders. Three case studies serve as examples. We argue that this approach can be considered a method for adding social robustness to visioneering and to responsible socio-technical change.
Traditionally, expert-based forward looking has been applied to anticipate future challenges, solutions and strategic decisions, but limitations to this approach have become obvious – especially when considering long term perspectives – e.g. failing to include a comprehensive array of opinions. Aiming at producing sustainable strategies for responsible socio-technical change, research funding can benefit from combining forward looking and public participation to elicit socially robust knowledge from consulting with multi-actors, including citizens. In this paper, we give insights into the EU project CIMULACT – Citizen and Multi-Actor Consultation on Horizon 2020. In CIMULACT, more than 4500 citizens, stakeholders and experts from 30 European countries engaged online and offline to co-create research topics. These are supposed to serve as input for the next round of calls in Horizon 2020, national research agendas as well as the ninth framework programme in the making. We investigate key results of this transdisciplinary process focussing on the topic “democratic education” with regard to two levels: What issues concerning the topic were raised? Can we find a common European imaginary for “democratic education”? Our analysis shows that the results contribute to defining and describing challenges for the currently prevailing imaginary of democratic education in Europe.
Ambient and assistive technologies (AT) have the potential to increase individual autonomy, social participation and quality of life for ageing populations. In seeking to implement these technologies, national and supranational funding schemes have strongly supported primarily market-driven research activities. This means that other societally relevant aspects, such as specific social and cultural contexts, are likely to be underestimated if not neglected. In view of the development of RI, this would be a serious misconception. We examine three recent participatory forward-looking technology assessment studies that involved experts, stakeholders and laypersons in discussions about the future of ageing and AT, and identify the diverse futures they imagine. We show different ways an ageing society of the future can be pictured, and contribute to the discourse on European demographic change as a Grand Challenge. In the light of RI, this diversity of imagined futures underlines the finding that answers to societal challenges connected to an ageing population cannot only be found by means of technological solutions, societal aspects will also play an important role.
An increasing orientation of technology assessment (TA) and adjacent fields toward future socio-technological developments is leading scholars to examine, assess and adapt different approaches of future studies on various levels. In this special issue of the Journal of Responsible Innovation, a number of members of the extended TA community in Europe seek to advance different approaches to handling the unpredictable, to consider various possible socio-technical futures and to explore a more active role in technology design and shaping of the future as required by concepts such as responsible innovation (RI) or responsible research and innovation (RRI). The three German words ‘Zukunft Macht Technik’ (the title of a TA conference in Vienna in 2015) make a nice little pun in German: they can either be interpreted as the short sentence ‘Future shapes technology’ or as the assembly of the three nouns ‘future power technology.’ Both readings are borne in mind in this special issue. A main insight of this special issue is that we need to explore how the debate on imagined socio-technical futures is enriched by concepts such as R(R)I, taking into account that no future can exist without an awareness of the present setting of innovation processes and technology development.
Current governance structures are increasingly showing inability to address complex issues such as the Grand Challenges. Dealing with these highly interrelated, cross cutting, extensive and potentially open ended issues requires research, development and innovation to be oriented towards societal needs and demands. Here, developing and applying sustainable long term strategies for socio-technical change on the basis of socially robust knowledge seems inevitable and using the tools of anticipatory governance—forward looking and participation—is essential in order to govern innovation actively and responsibly. Yet, expert-based forward looking has its limits, especially when considering long term perspectives, and may fail to include all necessary opinions. Thus, stakeholder engagement has become a norm over the last decades, but including laypeople into forward looking science, technology and innovation (STI) governance is underexplored. Here, strategy and policy programme development may be well suited to function as early entry point for public needs and values into the innovation process. This paper will briefly review the theoretical basis for transdisciplinary forward looking and provide first insights into an ongoing highly deliberative and reflexive foresight and co-creation process engaging science, society and policy makers, CIMULACT—Citizen and Multi-Actor Consultation on Horizon2020. We will especially focus on the role of technology within a collective visioning exercise that allowed for shared explorations of desirable futures, thereby collecting tacit knowledge as well as social needs and values. Integrating these with stakeholders’ and experts’ knowledge serves for co-creating socially robust knowledge for orienting policy and strategy programming towards needs based science, technology and innovation.
Technikfolgenabschätzung (TA) ist unparteilicher Expertise ebenso wie demokratischen Grundwerten verpflichtet. Und darüber hinaus? In welchem normativen Rahmen bewegt sie sich, ist dieser überall gleich oder unterscheidet er sich je nach Thema, gesellschaftlicher Aufgabe oder Land und politischer Kultur? Wie soll TA mit normativen Ansprüchen umgehen, die von außen an sie herangetragen werden, und wie mit solchen, die von innen, aus der TA selbst, kommen? Welche Möglichkeiten der Identifikation und der Verarbeitung normativer Ansprüche hat TA, und wie kann und soll sie sich im Konzert widerstreitender politischer Interessen und divergierender Weltbilder positionieren? Ist „neutrale“ Expertise dabei ein Hemmschuh oder eine Hilfe; kann es sie überhaupt (noch) geben? Auf derartige Fragen versuchen die Autoren und Autorinnen des Bandes Antworten zu geben oder sich zumindest der Problematik anzunehmen, vor der immer vielfältigere TA-Ansätze in Zeiten schärferer politischer und ökonomischer Gegensätze und beschleunigter technischer Entwicklung stehen. Mit Beiträgen von Armin Grunwald, Niklas Gudowsky-Blatakes | Christoph Kehl | Helge Torgersen, Julia Hahn, Jan-Hendrik Kamlage | Julia Reinermann, Marcel Krüger | Philipp Frey, Linda Nierling | Maria Udén, Poonam Pandey | Aviram Sharma, Diana Schneider, Stefan Strauß
People aged 65 years and older are the fastest growing section of the population in many countries. Great hopes are projected on technology to support solutions for many of the challenges arising from this trend, thus making our lives more independent, more efficient and safer with a higher quality of life. But, as research and innovation ventures are often closely linked to the market, their focus may lead to biased planning in research and development as well as in policymaking with severe social and economic consequences. Thus the main research question concerned desirable settings of ageing in the future from different perspectives. The participatory foresight study CIVISTI-AAL cross-linked knowledge of lay persons, experts and stakeholders to include a wide variety of perspectives and values into productive long-term planning of research and development. Results include citizens’ visions for autonomous living in 2050, implicitly and explicitly containing basic needs towards technological, social and organizational development as well as recommendations for implementation. Conclusions suggest that personalized health and living environments play an important part in the lay persons’ view of aging in the future, but only if technologies support social and organizational innovations and yet do not neglect the importance of social affiliation and inclusion.
Gudowsky, Niklas; Kowalski, Jacqueline; Bork-Hüffer, Tabea (17.11.2022) Augmentierte öffentliche Zukünfte: Szenarien augmentierter Realitäten in öffentlichen Räumen. Vortrag bei: Tagung „Räume Digitaler Zukünfte“, Netzwerktreffen Digitale Geographien (Institut für Geowissenschaften und Geographie Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg), Halle/GERMANY <https://digital.geo.uni-halle.de/2022/06/programm-tagung-raeume-digitaler-zukuenfte-november-2022/>.
Gudowsky, Niklas; Kowalski, Jacqueline (03.06.2022) DigitAS scenarios – four possible futures of Augmented Reality use in public spaces. Vortrag bei: The entanglements of people, materialities and technologies: A joint DigitAS / beYOND workshop (Universität Innsbruck), Innsbruck (online)/AUSTRIA <https://www.conftool.org/itd2019/index.php?page=browseSessions&form_session=43>.
Kaufmann, Katja; Bork-Hüffer, Tabea; Kollert, Andreas; Gudowsky-Blatakes, Niklas; Rutzinger, Martin (06.05.2021) Contested meanings in entangled spaces: The in-situ perception of public places by social media users. Vortrag bei: 4th International Geomedia Conference – Off the Grid (Universität Siegen), online/GERMANY.
Kaufmann, K.; Rauhala, M.; Gudowsky-Blatakes, N.; Rutzinger, M.; Bork, T. (30.10.2020) Integrating mobile eye-tracking in a mixed methods research design: Ethical standards and practical requirements. Vortrag bei: 21st Annual Conference of the Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR), online/AUSTRIA <https://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/spir/article/view/11117>.
Kaufmann, K.; Bork-Hüffer, T.; Gudowsky-Blatakes, N.; M., Rutzinger (25.09.2020) How digital media and augmented reality change the perception of public spaces. Presentation of the go!digital Next Generation funded research project "The Digital, Affects and Space (DigitAS). Vortrag bei: dha go!es digital Day 2020, online/AUSTRIA <https://dha2020.acdh.oeaw.ac.at/2020/06/17/dha-goes-digital-day/>.
Kaufmann, K.,; Gudowsky, N.,; Bork-Hüffer, T.,; Rutzinger, M. (05.11.2019) The Digital, Affects and Space: Methodological Advances in Researching the Relation of Augmented Realities, Spatial Perception and Societal Impacts. Vortrag bei: 4th European Technology Assessment Conference, Bratislava/SLOVAKIA (Slovak Republic).
Sotoudeh, M.; Bettin, S.; Gudowsky, N (05.11.2019) Power of visions on digitalisation for food security from farm to grocery and landfill. Vortrag bei: Fourth European Technology Assessment Conference, Bratislava/SLOVAKIA (Slovak Republic).
Gudowsky, Niklas; Sotoudeh, Mahshid (11.09.2019) Transdisciplinary agenda setting for research and innovation. Vortrag bei: ITD 2019 – International Trandisciplinary Conference 2019, Göteborg/SWEDEN <https://www.conftool.org/itd2019/index.php?page=browseSessions&form_session=43>.
Bork-Hüffer, T.,; Rutzinger, M.,; Kaufmann, K.,; Gudowsky, N. (30.08.2019) Creative methodologies for researching the socio-spatial impact of augmented urban futures. Vortrag bei: Royal Geographical Society – Institute of British Geographers Annual International Conference 2019, London/UNITED KINGDOM.
Bork-Hüffer, T.,; Rutzinger, M.; Kaufmann, K.,; Gudowsky-Blatakes, N., (23.05.2019) The Digital, Affects and Space (DigitAS). Vortrag bei: DFG-Netzwerktreffen Digitale Geographien, Frankfurt/GERMANY.
Bork-Hüffer, T.,; Rutzinger, M.; Kaufmann, K.,; Gudowsky-Blatakes, N., (17.05.2019) The Digital, Affects and Space (DigitAS), Opening Lecture. Vortrag bei: Reflections on the Societal Consequences of a Future in Mixed Realities, Innsbruck/AUSTRIA.
Peissl, Walter; Gudowsky, Niklas (25.04.2019) Wünschenswerte Zukünfte. Vortrag bei: Workshop zur Gestaltung der Seestadt – Etappe Nord, Hotel Altes Kloster/Hainburg/AUSTRIA.
Gudowsky, Niklas; Sotoudeh, Mahshid (08.11.2018) Informationsmaterial als normative Herausforderung in partizipativer TA. Vortrag bei: NTA8 – Gesellschaftliche Transformationen: Gegenstand oder Aufgabe der Technikfolgenabschätzung? (Netzwerk TA), Karlsruhe/GERMANY <https://www.nta8.de/nta8-konferenz/index.php>.
Gudowsky, Niklas; Rosa, Aaron (07.11.2018) Transformatives Agendasetting als Aufgabe von TA und Foresight — Ein Vergleich von BürgerInnen- und ExpertInnen-basiertem Orientierungswissen. Vortrag bei: NTA8 – Gesellschaftliche Transformationen: Gegenstand oder Aufgabe der Technikfolgenabschätzung? (Netzwerk TA), Karlsruhe/GERMANY <https://www.nta8.de/nta8-konferenz/index.php>.
Sotoudeh, Mahshid; Gudowsky, Niklas (07.11.2018) Digitalisierung und Ernährung – Chancen und Risiken für Produktion und Konsum von Lebensmitteln im Kontext nachhaltiger Entwicklung. Vortrag bei: NTA8 – Gesellschaftliche Transformationen: Gegenstand oder Aufgabe der Technikfolgenabschätzung? (Netzwerk TA), Karlsruhe/GERMANY <https://www.nta8.de/nta8-konferenz/index.php>.
Gudowsky, Niklas; Peissl, Walter (30.07.2018) Ergebnisse und Anwendbarkeit von CIMULACT – Citizen and Multi-Actor Consultation on Horizon 2020. Vortrag bei: Austrian Standards, Wien/AUSTRIA.
Gudowsky, Niklas; Peissl, Walter (07.06.2018) Ergebnisse und Anwendbarkeit von CIMULACT – Citizen and Multi-Actor Consultation on Horizon 2020. Vortrag bei: FFG – Forschungsförderungsgesellschaft, Wien/AUSTRIA.
Rosa, Aaron B.; Cuhls, Kerstin; Warnke, Philline; Gudowsky, Niklas (05.06.2018) Eye of the Storm: Cross examination of R&I-policy oriented foresight methods and results. Vortrag bei: "Future in the Making" – 6th International Conference on Future-Oriented Technology Analysis (FTA), Brussels/BELGIUM.
Gudowsky, Niklas (29.09.2017) Partizipatives Agenda-Setting: Neue Wege in der Governance von Wissenschaft und Innovation. Vortrag bei: NTA-Jahrestreffen, Wien/AUSTRIA.
Gudowsky, Niklas (22.06.2017) Transdisciplinary foresight: Forward-looking citizen and multi-actor engagement for demand oriented science, technology and innovation governance — theory, method development and case studies. Vortrag bei: Defensio Doctoral Thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Vienna, Wien/AUSTRIA.
-> Traffic congestion costs the EU over €80 billion annually.
-> All major European cities face the challenge of reducing congestion, pollution and accidents in the years to come.
-> Currently, there is no single consistent mobility pricing scheme in Austria. Various approaches for different transport modes co-exist.
-> Mobility behaviour can be governed sustainably by optimising pricing patterns for all modes of transport and directing them towards common goals.
Authors: Tanja Sinozic, Stefanie Peer, Mahshid Sotoudeh, Niklas Gudowsky
-> Staus kosten die EU jährlich über 80 Milliarden Euro.
-> Alle großen europäischen Städte stehen aktuell vor der Herausforderung, Staus, Umweltverschmutzung und Unfälle zu reduzieren.
-> Derzeit gibt es in Österreich kein einheitliches Mobilitätspreissystem, sondern parallele Ansätze für verschiedene Verkehrsträger.
-> Mobilitätsverhalten kann nachhaltig gesteuert werden, indem die Preise für alle Verkehrsträger optimiert und auf gemeinsame Ziele ausgerichtet werden.
AutorInnen: Tanja Sinozic, Stefanie Peer, Mahshid Sotoudeh, Niklas Gudowsky
-> So-called “social bots” can create and send automated messages, thus potentially influencing political and other decisions.
-> Based on the data collected, messages can be tailored to personal preferences and address small groups or individuals.
-> Laws are required to describe when and to what extent social media operators need to restrict activities of social bots.
-> Sogenannte „Social Bots“ können automatisiert Nachrichten verschicken und damit eventuell politische und andere Entscheidungen beeinflussen.
-> Auf Basis gesammelter Daten können Nachrichten zielgerichtet auf persönliche Vorlieben zugeschnitten werden und kleine Gruppen sowie Einzelne ansprechen.
-> Es sollte gesetzlich festgelegt werden, wann und inwieweit BetreiberInnen von Sozialen Medien verpflichtet sind, die Aktivitäten von Social Bots einzugrenzen.
-> Blockchain is a decentrally organised database that archives and manages an evergrowing list of transactions.
-> All information on transactions is permanently stored in a database that parallely exists at all nodes of a peer-to-peer network.
-> Blockchain provides autonomy for individuals away from ‘middlemen’ such as public authorities and banks.
-> However, this decentralisation rapidly reduces current forms of regulatory control.
-> Possible negative social and economic consequences become less predictable and manageable.
-> Blockchain ist eine dezentral organisierte Datenbank, die eine ständig wachsende Liste von Transaktionen archiviert und verwaltet.
-> Alle Informationen über Transaktionen werden permanent in einer Datenbank gespeichert, die an allen Knotenpunkten des Netzwerkes parallel vorliegt.
-> Blockchain bietet Autonomie für Einzelpersonen abseits von zentralen „Zwischenhändlern“ wie Behörden und Banken.
-> Diese Dezentralisierung reduziert jedoch die derzeitigen Formen der regulatorischen Kontrolle.
-> Mögliche negative soziale und ökonomische Folgen werden weniger vorhersehbar und handhabbar.
-> E-cigarettes evaporate a nicotine-containing liquid and are therefore deemed less harmful to health than traditional cigarettes. They can also help with smoking cessation.
-> Opponents emphasize the risk of easier entry as well as the simple increase of the nicotine dose. In addition, increased risk of vascular disease, myocardial infarction or stroke is still associated with vaping.
-> Advocates and opponents hold never-ending debates on health implications, psychological and economic effects. Both sides refer to scientific results. Genuine long-term studies are still missing.
-> E-Zigaretten verdampfen eine nikotinhaltige Flüssigkeit und gelten damit als weniger gesundheitsschädlich als herkömmliche Zigaretten. Auch können sie bei der Rauchentwöhnung helfen.
-> GegnerInnen betonen die Gefahr des leichteren Einstiegs sowie die einfache Steigerbarkeit der Nikotindosis. Außerdem sind auch mit dem Verdampfen erhöhte Gesundheitsrisiken für Ge- fäßerkrankungen, Herzinfarkt oder Schlaganfall verbunden.
-> BefürworterInnen und GegnerInnen führen eine nicht enden wollende Debatte über gesundheitliche Folgen, psychologische und ökonomische Effekte. Beide Seiten berufen sich auf wissenschaftliche Ergebnisse. Echte Langzeitstudien fehlen derzeit noch.
Tel.: +43 (0)1 515 81-6572
Fax: (+43-1-) 515 81-6570
Bäckerstraße 13, 1010 Wien
niklas.gudowsky(at)oeaw.ac.at