Enhancing Societal Security Research: Workshop Insights & Recommendations

1. CIES "Societal Security R&D”Perspectives, Conclusions and Recommendations from Workshop of July 1st 2010 Purpose of the workshop: • To assess the current status of the Societal Security strand in the ESRP • To look at the current issues from the perspective of Industry, Social Science & the Citizen • To identfy the next steps & future needs of Societal Securty research.

2. Research needs in Societal Security & How to make the voice of the citizen heard • Industry (Jean-Marc Suchier): • Use the “common criteria” model for privacy protection • Industry fully supports the privacy and data protection regulations • Industry willing to work with European and National regulators to put in place such an approach • Social Science (J. Peter Burgess): • ‘ethical review’ vs. analysis of societal impact • measurement of efficacy of Security Research is required • how can the efficacy of Security Research be measured? • Making the citizen heard in security research (Ian Brown) • Little or no engagement of the citizens or their democratic representatives • Appropriate oversight by EDPS, LIBE, FRA etc. • Assessment of Societal impact should start when topics are being proposed,

3. Conclusions following parallelsessions: (1) • Security research in support of Societal resilience and Trust • Better understanding of group behaviour in crisis situation • Better understanding of (security) “knowledge acquisition” (and its impact on political decision making) • Better understanding of security-relevant learning processes (“lessons learned”): individual & collective; gaming • Better understanding of the role of “community leaders” (vs. official / governmental authorities) and the impact on cohesion and individual behaviour

4. Conclusions following parallelsessions: (2) • Ethical and human rights aspects of security research: • ethics as self-regulating (human rights transform ethics into law) • the importance of proportionality • the role of privacy by design • clearer messages are needed from the ethical reviews of projects

5. Overarching conclusions from Open Plenary Session: • Conclusions: • The Societal and Technological aspects of Security Research should be integrated more effectively • Need to have more (political-related) research on “implicit” understandings, e.g. under what conditions Europe will be secure • We need greater engagement with the citizens and their democratic representatives to enhance the security of society • We need greater transparency and accountability to the European people in order to engender trust • Ethical Review and Societal Impact are not synonymous • Assessment of impact should start at the level of work programme, not at the selection of projects

6. Workshop recommendations & Next Steps • Recommendations: • Greater participation of citizens as the end-users (recipients) of Security Research • Develop a set of criteria for an ethical prism & include a “societal impact assessment” which reflects that prism in all projects • Initiate the societal assessment & ethical review during the development of the work programme • Promote the use of the “common criteria model” to ensure privacy compliant products (certification) • Set up a dedicated, interdisciplinary “platform” for social, ethical & security experts to support the development of the Security Research Programme • The tension between European scientific excellence and European principles of civil liberties and human rights finds its expression in the European Security Research Programme • J. Peter Burgess