Page - 192 - in Pflegeroboter

192 B. C. Stahl This shortcoming is not confined to BS 8611 but it is a general issue of RRI. On the one hand it tends to be advertised with great gestures of better societal embedding of sci- ence and research. On the other hand practical implementations tend to be more focused on the delivery of science and research in practice. As this happens in particular organi- sations, the concerns of these organisations take centre stage which includes a focus on specific risks. One can thus not fault the standard for using a language that its users are likely to understand and respond to. The consequence of this language and the focus it sets is nevertheless a possible impoverishment of RRI in practice. 10.6 Conclusion This paper has discussed the question whether BS 8611 can help or even implement RRI with a particular emphasis on the application area of care robots. The answer is fundamen- tally positive and the analysis of the standard in light of the RRI discourse on care robots has demonstrated that BS 8611 can provide important support for researchers and develo- pers working on care robots and wishing to take ethical and social considerations seriously. The standard is of course not perfect and in the discussion I pointed to several areas that could benefit from additional insights, references or work. However, as suc- cessful standards are subject to regular review, one can hope that these changes can be incorporated, if they prove to be truly relevant to the user communities. This paper was written exclusively on the basis of a textual analysis of BS 6811. The analysis and discussion is thus not informed by empirical insights into the way the stan- dard can be used in practice. This will be the natural next step. Understanding how actual researchers and developers make use of the standard and how this influences their work and its outcomes will be an important next step. This will not only help the individuals working in the area and—ideally—the quality of the outcomes of their work, but it can make an important contribution to the development of RRI. BS 6811 is the first standard that has its roots at least partially in the RRI debate. Other standards are currently in pre- paration, such as the IEEE family of standards on ethics in ICT. If BS 6811 proves to be successful and can help individuals and organisations to do their work responsibly, then the next wave of standardisation may help promote RRI more broadly and with it its aim to ensure that science and technical developments contribute to a better world. References Anderson, S. L., Anderson, M. (2015). Towards a Principle-Based Healthcare Agent. In S. P. van Rysewyk, M. Pontier (Hrsg.), Machine Medical Ethics (S. 67–78). Cham: Springer. Arnstein, S.R. (1969). A Ladder Of Citizen Participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225. Bogner, A., Decker, M., Sotoudeh, M. (Hrsg.). (2015). Responsible Innovation – Neue Impluse fuer die Technikfolgenabschaetzung, Gesellschaft – Technik – Umwelt. Baden-Baden: Nomos.