0:01

This is a Technikon podcast.

0:06

In our constantly evolving digital landscape,

0:09

it is expected that purveyors of

0:11

technology maintain certain responsibilities.

0:14

After all, these groups have the ability

0:16

to do good or harm or

0:19

influence others to do good or harm.

0:22

This evolution is a valid argument for

0:24

the integration of ethical decision making

0:26

into the strategic management of technology

0:29

projects. I'm Peter

0:31

Balint from Technikon, and I'm happy to bring

0:33

you this special podcast series entitled "Ethics

0:35

and Technology - A Prerequisite

0:38

for European Research." In

0:40

this series, we will look at ethics in the context

0:42

of cybersecurity, personalized health

0:44

care and many more disciplines. We

0:47

will talk about attitudes towards

0:49

ethics and we will examine how ELSA

0:51

is increasingly becoming part of

0:53

the framework in EU funded projects.

0:57

As we have heard in previous episodes,

0:59

responsible ethics is more than ticking

1:01

boxes on a form, and

1:03

no one knows this better than Conçalo Cadete. He's

1:06

an internal auditor for ELSA in

1:08

the SPARTA project. He joins

1:11

us today from INOV in Portugal. INOV

1:14

specializes in information and

1:16

communication technologies, and they

1:18

are project partners in SPARTA. Welcome

1:21

and thanks for coming on today, Conçalo.

1:23

Thank you, Peter.

1:24

You are an internal auditor

1:27

in the SPARTA project, meaning that

1:29

you report on ethical issues. And

1:32

when we spoke offline, you told me

1:34

that there were quite a few project resources

1:36

dedicated to responsible ethics.

1:39

And this tells me that ethics

1:41

cannot be ignored in EU

1:43

projects. And in

1:45

a project like SPARTA, which is largely

1:47

a technology project in the domain

1:50

of cybersecurity, what specific

1:52

ethical issues are being addressed?

1:55

Yes, correct, Peter, so ethical,

1:59

legal and societal aspects in

2:01

SPARTA, which we call ELSA,

2:04

are absolutely fundamental. They

2:06

are indeed embedded

2:09

in 4 work packages out of 14.

2:12

There is a one work package, work package 1,

2:15

that regards governance. So that

2:17

means that ELSA is embedded

2:20

in the governance framework. So that's a

2:22

very important thing. So it's not

2:25

just something as that's an appendix

2:27

or something that we thought after

2:29

that... it is really embedded. Then

2:32

we have a work package 2 which is a specific

2:34

work package to develop

2:37

and ensure ethical, legal

2:39

and societal aspects. We

2:42

also have a task in another work package

2:45

which deals with ensuring

2:49

gender and diversity issues. And

2:51

finally, we have an initial work

2:54

package that concentrates

2:56

on specifying ELSA requirements.

2:59

So ELSA is really big in SPARTA.

3:02

And good thing because this is a really

3:05

huge project with over 44

3:07

partners. And regarding

3:09

ethics, it has been said

3:11

that ethic princles in

3:14

responsible research must be

3:16

embedded in EU projects. And

3:19

looking forward, how can the EU ensure

3:21

that this happens in the future, and

3:23

how can you measure something like this?

3:26

I think SPARTA is maybe a

3:28

success story in this respect because

3:30

we have very specific mechanisms

3:33

to provide assurance.

3:35

So it's not only, you know, making

3:38

sure we have a few assessments, etc ,

3:40

but mechanisms for providing assurance.

3:44

How did SPARTA do that? So first

3:46

of all, we focused on a few issues

3:49

of fundamental rights. That's one big important

3:51

plus, privacy and ethics

3:54

requirements, gender and diversity,

3:56

and ultimately achieving responsible

3:58

research and innovation. So

4:02

what did SPARTA include

4:04

in the description of work? Yearly

4:07

audits, so that's one

4:09

fairly important mechanism. And

4:11

interestingly enough, the

4:13

audit reports are public. So

4:16

that really shows the commitment

4:18

of the European Commission towards

4:21

transparency. So they can be...

4:23

they are published. We are now

4:26

in the 3rd and final year of SPARTA,

4:28

so anyone can look at the first

4:31

2 yearly reports. They

4:34

can look at the outcomes

4:36

at the conclusions  and they can, even

4:39

as we now have 2 reports, look at the progress.

4:42

So that's very important. That really

4:45

engages people. And and

4:48

as I mentioned, provides transparency.

4:51

It's not every project that has you know

4:53

public... so sensitive public

4:56

reports. The other thing

4:58

is, besides this yearly

5:01

audit, SPARTA defined that

5:04

there should be a continuous

5:06

monitoring mechanism. So

5:09

SPARTA implemented a helpdesk

5:12

with a very, very simple and accessible

5:14

interface. You just have to send an email

5:17

with the content that you wish

5:19

with a question with...well some

5:22

complain, that was never the case, but

5:24

it could be done. It will

5:27

be recorded in a ticketing system

5:29

and all the issues must be raised

5:32

to an ethical committee. So

5:35

we also have specific organizational

5:38

structures to provide

5:40

assurance and to escalate any

5:42

ethical issues. Finally,

5:46

within the context of that privacy

5:48

helpdesk, we have built

5:50

what we call a privacy frequent

5:53

asked questions document, a previously

5:55

FAQ. So it's a sort of lessons

5:57

learned and very

5:59

easy to read document on all

6:01

issues concerning ethical, legal and societal

6:04

acceptance topics.

6:07

So you're saying that you actually had

6:09

a help desk sort of environment

6:11

set up specifically for some of these ethical

6:13

issues, is that right?

6:15

That's correct, yes.

6:16

OK, wow, so do you think that will

6:19

be a model for the future?

6:20

Yes, absolutely. Because it provides

6:22

assurance to people that, first

6:25

there's something official in place, so

6:27

you don't just... - if you have an ethical

6:29

issue or a question

6:31

regarding some ethical issue, right, you know,

6:33

you want to know how to behave in a certain situation

6:36

or how to manage a conflict of interest.

6:38

You don't just send, you know, an

6:41

email to someone without

6:44

an official process tied to

6:46

it. So you have assurance that there's

6:48

a mechanism in place. It

6:51

may be used, it should be used,

6:53

and issues will get

6:55

escalated in a professional

6:58

way. So I think that's very

7:00

comfortable for everybody. So

7:02

far in Sparta, we maybe

7:06

luckily didn't have to

7:08

escalate any issues.

7:11

But, you know, all the all the pieces

7:13

were in place if that was required

7:15

or if that is still required, because we still

7:17

have some time until the end of the project.

7:20

Yeah, that was really excellent planning on

7:22

the side of ethics in the SPARTA project,

7:24

yeah. Now, when

7:27

it comes to technology related projects

7:29

such as SPARTA, how

7:31

do we integrate ethical thinking into

7:34

applied research and development?

7:36

It seems like some pragmatic

7:38

approaches would have to be employed.

7:41

Oh, yes, absolutely. So our ultimate

7:43

goal is responsible research

7:45

and innovation, right? Providing

7:48

assurance for the European Commission

7:50

and the people, the Europeans that

7:52

are actually financing this project

7:55

on 2 aspects. So the first

7:57

aspect is how we conduct

8:00

our daily activities right?. So

8:02

there are many partners from many member

8:04

nations that want

8:06

to be treated fairly, right? Not

8:09

only in terms of the distribution

8:12

of work, if it's interesting,

8:14

if it's valuable, if

8:17

we are working in an honest

8:20

way, you know, the outcomes when we publish

8:22

papers, etc . So there's

8:25

a whole lot of... so

8:27

to speak, internal issues in the

8:29

way we work together, in

8:31

the way we are strong in diversity,

8:33

right? So that's working ethics.

8:36

Now, the other aspect is the actual

8:38

outcomes of what we do. You know, things

8:41

like artificial intelligence

8:43

solutions. Are

8:45

they embedding something that

8:47

is against the values of Europeans?

8:50

Are we, for example, in artificial intelligence,

8:53

are we somehow training

8:55

and testing our algorithms with

8:58

unacceptable bias, you know, gender

9:01

bias, racial bias,

9:04

nationalistic bias, whatever, right?

9:06

So we want to ensure

9:09

that we are ethical in

9:11

these 2 aspects.

9:13

And that makes complete sense, of course.

9:16

And you speak of outcomes. Let's

9:19

look at this for a moment. In your experience,

9:21

how can bottom up communications

9:24

in the ethics realm effectively reach

9:26

the top? Especially in

9:29

an environment where if something is not

9:31

in the description of work, it may not

9:33

get done.

9:35

Good point. Actually, one

9:37

of the mechanisms that we implemented

9:39

that we just talked about, the

9:41

privacy help desk, is a very

9:44

specific implementation of a measure

9:46

for bottom-up feedback.

9:49

So I think that's

9:52

that's an interesting one. It did

9:54

not get a lot of traffic.

9:57

Maybe that's good in a way. Maybe

9:59

that's, that

10:02

may also be a sign that people are not

10:04

used to bottom

10:08

up approaches. So

10:10

maybe an area for opportunity in the future.

10:13

Let's look at conflict for for a moment.

10:16

Is there an area of conflict between

10:18

cybersecurity and ethics? And

10:20

then how do you deal with this kind of issue?

10:24

We did not have big, big

10:26

issues at SPARTA regarding

10:29

areas of conflict, but we

10:31

came up with an issue

10:33

that we identified during the audits

10:36

in the first year. It seems to be solved

10:38

in the second, but I think it could

10:40

be an interesting lesson for the future. And it

10:43

relates to the

10:45

internal side of ethics, so how we work

10:47

together as Europeans coming from different

10:50

nations and different partners.

10:52

And the specific issue is

10:56

small partner versus big

10:58

partner. What does that mean, you know?

11:00

When we have all

11:03

sorts of organizations

11:05

working as partners, some

11:08

very powerful with big

11:11

budgets, big

11:13

lobbying power, right? Which

11:16

is not a bad thing; it's just

11:18

a fact, right? And so it's

11:22

something that does come up, right, the

11:25

relation of power and how that

11:27

affects the perception of fairness.

11:30

So small partner, big partner

11:32

is something to watch for in the future, making

11:35

sure that everyone feels that they're having

11:37

a fair treatment and fair share in

11:39

the burdens, in the costs, in

11:41

the benefits.

11:43

And I think for a large project like SPARTA

11:46

with 44 partners, this

11:48

idea of equity for all

11:50

partners is an important facet in

11:52

moving the efforts forward in a responsible

11:54

way.

11:55

Absolutely, yes.

11:56

Thanks for giving us a glimpse of how ethics

11:59

looks in an ongoing project. It

12:01

was great to hear about some of your success stories

12:04

as well as challenges.

12:05

Thank you, Peter. Appreciate it. Thanks for

12:07

the invitation.

12:09

Join us next time, as we look at the world of

12:11

software and hardware engineering in

12:13

the EU. We will look at how

12:15

efforts in law enforcement and forensics

12:17

are aided by not only new

12:19

methods and tools, but also by ethics

12:21

principles. See you next

12:24

time.

12:27

This podcast has been brought to you by

12:30

Technikon, the SPARTA

12:32

project has received funding from the European

12:34

Union's Horizon 2020 Research

12:36

and Innovation Program under grant agreement

12:38

number 830892.