Technology Assessment

Origins and Definitions

Technology Assessment (TA) has historically had two meanings. One refers to evaluating the properties of existing technology options—for example, comparing different consumer products like printers. The other, and the one of interest here, was first formally defined by Joe Coates (1976) as:

“A class of policy studies that systematically examine the effects on society that may occur when a technology is introduced, extended, or modified. It emphasizes those consequences that are unintended, indirect, or delayed.”

This definition positioned TA as a form of impact assessment, alongside Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA).

Early Challenges in TA

Assessing the unintended, indirect, or delayed societal impacts of a future technology posed significant challenges. Establishing cause-and-effect relationships in complex socio-technical systems is difficult, even when looking at historical trends, let alone predicting future interactions. As noted by Tarr (1977), it is nearly impossible to predict the full effects of technological changes or how they will interact with broader social and economic forces.

Joe Coates (1971) illustrated this challenge with an example of television’s societal effects. He tracked how the introduction of television led to changes in social behavior, beginning with less participation in local clubs, reduced neighborly interaction, increased isolation, overdependence on spouses for social support, and ultimately, rising divorce rates. This highlights how technological changes can trigger complex ripple effects, making their full societal impact difficult to foresee.

The Role of TA in Anticipating Change

The goal of TA has never been to predict exact effects and their timing but rather to identify key trends and potential risks—an early warning system for policymakers, businesses, and society. Identifying potential concerns and benefits allows technology developers and regulators to anticipate challenges and consider mitigation measures before widespread adoption.

For businesses, TA has historically played a role in understanding consumer acceptance and resistance to new technologies. Whirlpool Corporation provides a classic example of the risks of failing to conduct TA. In the 1970s, Whirlpool introduced the trash compactor without fully assessing its environmental and societal implications. Public concerns arose over waste disposal, leading to media backlash and local bans. The product was withdrawn from the market, and although later reintroduced, it never regained full commercial success. Conversely, Whirlpool successfully used technology foresight to anticipate the introduction of permanent press fabrics and quickly adapted their washers and dryers, gaining a competitive advantage. This illustrates the value of forecasting and assessing emerging technologies early.

The Rise and Decline of the U.S. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA)

Technology Assessment gained institutional recognition with the establishment of the U.S. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) in 1972. The OTA provided independent analysis for Congress, with its first major assessment published in 1974. However, its funding was eliminated in 1995, when a Republican-led Congress withdrew support, citing budget concerns.

For a comprehensive history of technology foresight and the Future-oriented Technology Analyses (FTA) community, see Coates et al. (2001). An archive of OTA’s hundreds of reports can be accessed at Princeton’s OTA archive.

TA’s Global Expansion

Since the early 1990s, TA has become firmly established in Europe, with institutions operating at both the national and EU levels. The European Parliamentary Technology Assessment (EPTA) network links various national TA agencies. More information on EPTA’s work can be found at www.eptanetwork.org.

The Evolution of TA Approaches

Criticism from social scientists (e.g., Wynne, 1975) and advances in Science, Technology, and Society (STS) studies led to significant refinements in TA over the decades. Traditional expert-driven TA evolved into several distinct models, including:

• • Participatory TA (pTA) – Emphasizes the social nature of technology, recognizing that experts alone cannot fully assess societal reactions. This model involves public engagement in decision-making (Hennen, 1999; Durant, 1999; Joss & Bellucci, 2002).
  • Interactive TA – Seeks to influence the innovation process early by engaging technology suppliers, users, and affected stakeholders in a Delphi-like process (Grin & van de Graaf, 1996).
  • Constructive TA (CTA) – Encourages co-creation by integrating social concerns into technology design at an early stage (Rip et al., 1995; Schot & Rip, 1996; Schot, 2001; Genus & Coles, 2005).
  • Real-time TA (RTTA) – Integrates scientific, engineering, and social science perspectives from the outset, allowing for ongoing adjustments as new information emerges (Guston & Sarewitz, 2002).

TA in the 21st Century: A Field in Transition

In recent years, the landscape of Technology Assessment has changed dramatically. Traditional TA models, focused on long-term evaluation of emerging technologies, are now being adapted for real-time analysis of fast-moving innovations. The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence, synthetic biology, nanotechnology, and quantum computing has created new challenges for traditional TA methodologies.

Governments and institutions are shifting toward adaptive, anticipatory, and responsible research and innovation (RRI) approaches, ensuring continuous monitoring and public engagement as technologies evolve. TA is now more intertwined with ethical considerations, global governance, and sustainability than ever before.

The role of private-sector actors, venture capital, and global technology companies has further complicated TA’s traditional government-led approach. As a result, new assessment tools such as technology foresight, scenario planning, and horizon scanning have become essential for evaluating the long-term societal implications of emerging innovations.

Conclusion

Technology Assessment, once rooted in government-driven evaluations, has evolved into a dynamic and multi-stakeholder discipline. While traditional TA played a crucial role in shaping 20th-century technology policy, today’s rapidly changing world requires new frameworks, greater agility, and a stronger emphasis on ethical, social, and environmental impacts.

TA remains a vital tool, but its future will depend on how well it adapts to the challenges of an increasingly interconnected, fast-moving technological landscape.