Ahmad Bitar
Innovation and the Economy
Innovation is crucial to an economy's success, as new inventions/products/services provide new demand and hence, jobs are created to uplift an economy as well as even life expectancy. New inventions into medical improvement have allowed many to live longer, healthier lives. It is clear what innovation can bring to a country's economy, hence it should be in the incentive of government, and of the EU, to pursue innovation.
However, the negative aspects of innovation must also be taken into account when evaluating its effect on an economy. Innovations that can bring about harm to the environment or stakeholders must be clearly eradicated or at the least minimized to unlock the full potential of innovation. Innovation therefore affects everyone, and thus must reflect social and moral values to solidify that innovation is done in a responsible manner.
An innovation that provides monetary benefits in the short-term, like the pesticides, but can also negatively affect subsistence of a stakeholder such that as a farmer; will negatively affect the economy and society in the long-term due to the decrease in farming profits and thus decreasing supply and demand for crops. This can bring about a downturn of the innovation- creating a cyclical form of under accomplishment. Considering all potential issues, and being forward-looking, can prevent issues from arising in the future and allow the innovation to prosper and unlock its full potential without any repercussions.
Hence, with the expanding awareness and pillars of enforcement, governing bodies like the EU can ensure responsible innovation- in order to pass down an economy, a country, and a society that is forward-looking and aimed at the betterment of future generations.
Causal vs Moral Responsibility
It is clear how responsibly innovating firms can affect the economy, by increasing demand and jobs as well as meeting moral obligations of the stakeholders. It is necessary to dwell deeper into the term "responsible"- as this can entail entirely different connections, more specifically the causal vs moral responsibility connection.
It is first necessary to indicate what criteria must be followed to ensure responsibility of an innovation; both to enforce the implementation and to provide clarity on issues pertaining to it. For firms to be held responsible,
a) Must be able to obtain minimum amount of knowledge for consequences of outcomes
b) Must be able to obtain minimum knowledge of range of options
c) Must be able to evaluate outcomes and options based on moral values ( privacy, accountability, well being, etc.)
d) Must, clearly, have a causal connection to the innovation and the consequences it may bring about.
e) Must transgress an ethical norm if considered to be negatively responsible.
Being causally responsible describes a situation where a decision or choice of an agent leads to a certain outcome to occur. This is the medium through which allows an agent to be deemed responsible; if indeed the agent is also morally responsible. To be morally responsible, it follows that being causally responsible is a prerequisite, but not vice-versa. To be morally responsible, the agent must fulfill the above mentioned criteria of having full knowledge, capability, and the opportunity to be either morally blameworthy or praiseworthy at the final outcome. Hence, if an agent is deemed morally responsible, blameworthy, or praiseworthy- this agent is causally and morally responsible for the action undertaken.