![](../resources/RISKGONE_Logo_96.png) | Drafting EIA plan / Planning |
Drafting an Ethical Impact Assessment Plan
The screening of the Ethical Impact, performed in the preceding step, results in one of four possible outcomes: no EIA or a small, medium, or large EIA. An external ethicist should check the self-assessment report if no EIA is deemed necessary. If a medium or large EIA is needed, the present tool only supports the preparation of an EIA plan. After this plan is checked by an external ethicist, professional ethicists should be engaged to perform the EIA. If a small EIA is needed and the EIA plan is checked by an external ethicist, the present tool is designed to guide the user through the procedure.
|
Review of EIA screening by independent body or person to check if no significant ethical impacts are expected
Required budget (1-10% of research budget for the risk governance assessment of the nanomaterial and its applications)
90% personnel, 10% other
80% personnel, 20% other
70% personnel, 30% other
Team composition
Leader: part time research assistant
Optional members: should have relevant expertise to the identified ethical issues
Leader: full time researcher
Optional members: should have relevant expertise to the identified ethical issues
Leader: full time senior researcher or independent consultant
Optional members: should have relevant expertise to the identified ethical issues
Formulating review criteria
Yes
Yes
Yes
Consult with stakeholders before starting the EIA 1
No
Optional
Optional
Planning identification ethical impacts. Objective: to identify and describe the ethical impacts of the nanomaterial and its applications and places these impacts in a temporal perspective, anticipating short, medium and long-term impacts. To cover differences in perception of ethical issues between different stakeholder groups, stakeholder consultations are included in all cases. However, in small EIAs this may be limited to online consultations, while large scale EIAs may require the organisation of on-site stakeholder events.
Desk research: literature research; foresight through horizon scanning, and online expert and stakeholder consultation;
Ethical Impact conceptual analysis of explicit issues through ethical checklists, and empirical analysis through online consultations with experts and stakeholders;
document the outcomes.
Literature research:
foresight through horizon scanning, trend analysis, expert and stakeholder consultation, brainstorming, futures wheel, and roadmapping;
Ethical Impact conceptual analysis of explicit issues through ethical theories, and empirical analysis through consultations with experts and stakeholders;
document outcomes.
Literature research:
foresight through horizon scanning, trend analysis, expert and stakeholder consultation, delphi interviews, brainstorming, futures wheel, citizen panels, roadmapping and scenario writing;
Ethical Impact conceptual analysis of explicit issues through ethical theories, of intuitive issues through situational approaches, and empirical analysis of explicit issues through expert and stakeholder consultations, of intuitive issues through techno-ethical scenarios;
document outcomes.
Planning evaluating ethical impacts. Objective: assess the relative importance, the likelihood of occurrence and the possible value conflicts of identified ethical impacts. Stakeholders will in all cases be involved in the evaluation, ranging from online consultations for small scale EIAs to on-site events in large scale EIAs.
Desk research: literature research of existing evaluation of ethical impacts in related projects. Use 5 rules of thumb2 to identify and resolve value conflicts. Present and discuss the ethical impact evaluation online with stakeholders.
Desk research and expert consultation. Methods: Delphi, interviews and workshops.
Use 5 rules of thumb to identify and resolve value conflicts. Present and discuss the ethical impact evaluation with stakeholders.
Desk research, expert consultation, and participatory approaches focusing on stakeholder engagement. Use 5 rules of thumb to identify and resolve value conflicts. Present and discuss the ethical impact evaluation with stakeholders.
Planning ethical remediation: Review remediation in other projects, formulate and implement remediation, formulate and present recommendations to stakeholders.
Desk research: formulate societal and organisational recommendations
Formulate design, societal, organisational, regulatory and policy recommendations.
Formulate design, societal, organisational, regulatory and policy recommendations.
Planning the review of the EIA by an independent member of the RGC or external body. External reviewer provides feedback and guidelines for improving the EIA process and guards milestones and KPI.
At start: review and approve EIA plan.
During: evaluate conduct and documentation.
At end: review EIA process.
At start: review and approve EIA plan.
During: evaluate conduct and documentation.
At end: review EIA process
At start: review and approve EIA plan.
During: evaluate conduct and documentation.
At end: review EIA process
Guidance text
Title of EIA:
Abstract:
[This includes information on the nanomaterial and applications which will be assessed, the identified ethical issues, the scale of the EIA and who will be responsible for performing the EIA.]
Budget:
[Include an estimate of personnel cost and other costs (travel, organising events, materials).]
Team composition:
[Include information on the expertise of team members.]
Review criteria:
[E.g. validity of screening output, appropriateness of selected literature and stakeholders, quality of methodology.]
Optional: preliminary stakeholder consultation:
[If the identified issues are controversial, early stakeholder consultation about the EIA plan could be advised, in addition to consultations in later stages.]
Identification of Ethical Impacts:
[The EIA plan outlines who will identify ethical impact, how and when, using which information sources. To facilitate the creation of a list of references, possible information sources are listed here (
Link). For medium or large EIAs, additional suggested methodologies are included in the CEN Workshop Agreement part 2 CWA 17145-2:2017 (E) (
Link).
Evaluation of Ethical Impacts:
[The EIA plan outlines who will evaluate the identified ethical issues, and specifies the methodology which will be used, for small EIAs mainly desk research and consultation. For medium or large EIAs, additional suggested methodologies are included in the CEN Workshop Agreement part 2 CWA 17145-2:2017 (E) (
Link).]
Remediation:
[The EIA plan outlines who will draft the remediation recommendations and lists the types of remediation recommendations which will be considered: in any case societal and organisational. In case of medium-large EIA, regulatory and policy recommendations may also be needed.]
Review of EIA plan:
[The EIA plan includes a short plan for external review, including the name of the reviewer and indication of when reviews will take place.]
**This work project has received funding from European Union Horizon 2020 Programme (H2020) via RiskGONE project under grant agreement nÂș 814425