I would like to express my deep gratitude to you, Your Royal Highness, for having inaugurated the Fourth Session of COMEST. As I said in my opening remarks, in holding this event, UNESCO and the Government of Thailand are highlighting the important role of the ethics of science and technology in society today, calling attention not only to the positive attributes and beneficial consequences of scientific research and knowledge but also to their potential risks.
New scientific discoveries are a source of wonder and pride, and the application of scientific advances in and through technological innovations is bringing many benefits, transforming how we live and work in the process.
However, the 21 st century does not have a naive or simple view of scientific and technological “progress”. On the contrary, there is mounting concern about the possible adverse consequences of scientific development in general and certain scientific advances in particular. If left unattended, this concern may undermine popular support for and trust in the whole enterprise of modern science.
Some of that concern, furthermore, is focused on the ethical aspects of science and technology. With regard to some fields, such as the life sciences, there is an uneasy feeling that science is developing so rapidly and so radically that the ethical compass we normally use can no longer tell us where we are, where we are going or, most important of all, where we should be going. In some cases, there may also be a growing gap between the complexity of new ethical issues and popular understanding of those issues.
Such a gap is fraught with danger for science because, ultimately, it must be responsible to society, not just itself. If science is ever cut adrift from society, it will lose its ethical bearings. Science must be accountable for its actions and for the consequences of those actions, and this requires ethical engagement by the whole of society. Scientists themselves are keenly aware of this, as was made quite clear at the discussions and debates at the 1999 World Conference on Science in Budapest, whose recommendations we continue to follow.
Today, it is by no means clear that what is scientifically possible and technologically feasible is ethically desirable. In saying this, I am not suggesting that science and technology are ‘inherently bad' or ‘ethically suspect' but that the ethical question must be raised. This will require science and society to become both more reflective about their relationship and more responsible for its outcomes.
It should not be thought that the ethics of science and technology is mainly confined to esoteric or ‘ cutting-edge' scientific discoveries. On the contrary, it is vitally relevant to the ‘bread-and-butter' issues that face the world today. Thus, the ethics of science and technology is highly pertinent to discussions of poverty, public health, agricultural productivity, urban development and environmental degradation.
It is also important for detecting the early signs of risk situations related to advances in science and technology. UNESCO, with the assistance of COMEST, has a special role to perform to advise Member States in this respect, especially to promote dialogue between scientific communities, decision-makers and the public at large. This is an opportunity for UNESCO and COMEST to reaffirm the vision of the ethics of science and technology as a tool for promoting reflection on the social, cultural and economic development of nations and peoples and fostering the prospects for peace and a sustainable future. In order to meet this challenge, I am proposing to our Member States that the ethics of science and technology remain the principal priority of the Human and Social Science Sector in the next biennium (2006-2007). I trust this orientation will allow us to strengthen our capacity-building and awarenessraising role at all levels and to implement international standards through policy, research and scientific activities.
As I said in Berlin in December 2001, at the opening of the second session of
COMEST, “ethical reflection is a perpetually renewed process, a constant questioning of the reasons and consequences of our acts. It means more than defining a code of ethical practice. It implies that the debate should be conducted in public with the informed participation of citizens and decisions-makers, and should thus be regarded as a matter of democratic necessity. Ethical reflection, moreover, must be seen in a proactive perspective. At the international level, it calls for broad vision and foresight, drawing upon the world's major ethical systems and the participation of the intellectual community everywhere”. I'm glad COMEST has been adopting that approach.
In fact, COMEST is now eight years old, and I think it is entering its maturity. One aspect of this maturity is the regional approach that the Commission has embraced since its last session in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in December 2003. By meeting in the different regions of the world, COMEST not only disseminates the debate on ethical issues related to science and technology, but it also demonstrates that it is receptive to distinctive regional concerns on these matters. Meeting here in Bangkok is an opportunity to have a fruitful exchange of views with local experts. It is also particularly useful in order to strengthen our networks and to set up a platform for future activities in the region. The next session, in 2007, hopefully will take place in Africa, and I am sure that this prospect will impact on COMEST's thinking.
Another sign of the maturity of COMEST is its reinforced interaction with all stakeholders internationally. One example is the meeting held early this month in Paris on the feasibility of an ethical code of conduct for scientists, in follow-up to the session dedicated to this subject in Rio de Janeiro in December 2003. The Paris meeting brought together representatives of several UN agencies, IGOs, NGOs, and universities. This method of wide consultation and participation of all stakeholders ensures both the relevance and the credibility of COMEST's work.
Speaking of wide participation, it is also commendable that, despite its maturity, COMEST has retained its enthusiasm for youth. All sessions of COMEST include a youth forum and this meeting in Bangkok is no different. We know from past experience that the contribution of young scientists to the ethical debate can be rich and stimulating.
I should equally commend the commitment of COMEST to providing action oriented recommendations, and its decision to hold its ordinary sessions just long enough before each General Conference of UNESCO, so that I can take its recommendations into account for the decisions I will propose to Member States in the autumn. Another aspect of the maturity of COMEST is to be seen in its working methods and its clarity about its role. As a world ethics committee, COMEST addresses a topic that is both very specific and very important. The development of science and technology raises a broad range of issues: not all are ethical; not all are to be addressed by COMEST. It is the ethical dimension of these problems that the Commission considers.
This is why, on issues such as environmental ethics or the ethics of outer space, COMEST adopted a strategy to focus at a first stage on the ethical dimension as such before widening the debate to all stakeholders, in particular scientists and policymakers.
This approach ensures that more obvious issues do not overwhelm specifically ethical considerations. In the case of environmental ethics, for example, the world is facing urgent environmental problems such as global warming and the loss of biodiversity. However, the importance of their ethical dimension, such as the value of life or the rights of future generations, tends to be neglected in international action because of the urgency of these problems. I think that, through environmental ethics, there is an opportunity for UNESCO to play its own important role in approaching and solving environmental problems; I look forward to the recommendations that the Commission will make with this regard.
However, ethics neither begins nor ends with the production of norms. Discussion and debate about ethical issues and moral action are important in their own right and UNESCO does much to promote such ethical debate. In addition, UNESCO is keen to strengthen ethics education as vital for encouraging lively, relevant and informed ethical debate. By adopting the report on the teaching of ethics, COMEST provided useful guidance to UNESCO in this area. The implementation of the report's findings and recommendations on ethics education has started with two experts meetings in Europe, in Budapest and Moscow. In the coming years, other regions of the world will gradually be incorporated into this effort, and I trust that the process will speed up with experience.
An important role of COMEST is indeed simply to clarify debates. The group of experts on the Precautionary Principle is presenting a report that aims at delineating this widely discussed principle and its applicability. Such effort of clarification is, in my view, a significant step towards the construction of an international consensus, which is the raison d'etre of multilateral organizations like UNESCO. It is often true that disagreements actually rest on misunderstandings. I am confident that the work of COMEST will help to dissipate such misunderstandings and to build international consensus on the precautionary principle and on other matters as well.
This session will not only address the ongoing activities of COMEST and
UNESCO, but will also explore future new activities. In my judgement, the following issues require attention from the international community in terms of their ethical dimensions: nanotechnologies, the rapid obsolescence of technological objects, and the use of technologies for development that are more appropriate and affordable, as well as problems related to the ethical evaluation of emerging technologies. Hence, I have asked the Commission to consider them and to advise the Organization in due course.
Unfortunately, it is uncommon for ethical issues related to science to be addressed prospectively. The example of bioethics thirty years ago showed us that prospective ethics is usually received with skepticism. It is only when problems actually happen that everybody agrees on the need to address them. The work of COMEST and its mandate to give early warning signs of risk situations testify to the progress made by the international community on this matter. It is for me a source of confidence in the future that COMEST can raise ethical issues that we had not thought of, thereby helping UNESCO to fulfil its often ascribed role as “conscience of the United Nations System.”
Your Royal Highness,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Before closing, allow me to pay tribute to the Chairman of COMEST, Professor Jens Erik Fenstad, whose term is coming to an end. He has done much to bring COMEST into the current state of maturity I referred to earlier. After his successful work as Chairman of the COMEST sub-commission on the ethics of outer space, Professor Fenstad was elected Chairman of COMEST in Berlin in 2001. During the past four years, he has shown an exemplary commitment to the Commission and has participated in many “Ethics around the World” conferences to disseminate the work of COMEST and UNESCO. He has been a very active and persuasive promoter of the cause of COMEST, including in my own office! Allow me then to thank you, Professor Fenstad, for your dedication, your untiring efforts and your many achievements.
There are other members of COMEST whose mandates expire at the end of this year, and I wish to thank them also: they are Professor Hamish Kimmins, from Canada, who was very active on the ethics of energy and environmental issues; Professor Lu Yongxiang, from the People's Republic of China, who was involved in virtually all of COMEST's domains of activity and brought his wisdom and social awareness to bear upon the implications of science and technology; and, finally, the First Lady of Egypt, Mme Mubarak, former member of the bureau, who hosted the extraordinary session of COMEST that was held in Alexandria in December 2002.
Dear friends,
I hope that, even when you are no longer members of the Commission, you will continue to advise UNESCO and participate in its activities. Let me conclude by expressing once again my deepest gratitude to Your Royal
Highness, to Mr Deputy Prime Minister, and to Mr Minister of Science and
Technology of the Royal Government of Thailand for your generous invitation to host this meeting. I wish everyone every success in the important deliberations of this meeting.
Thank you.