Rethinking Public Acceptance Mechanisms and Ethical Frameworks for emerging technologies in the EU: The example of VR

Manuel Resende Protásio (PhD candidate at the School of Law of University of Minho)

Introduction

The European Union (EU) faces a profound challenge in the regulation and oversight of rapidly advancing technologies such as Virtual Reality (VR). As technological progress accelerates, the mechanisms that assess, accept, and regulate such innovations are being tested like never before. This article seeks to unravel the complexities of these mechanisms, exploring how the EU addresses ethical, social, and economic challenges arising from VR through public consultations, impact assessments, and legislative initiatives such as the “Better Regulation” agenda.

Drawing attention to key institutions such as the European Commission and advisory bodies like the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE), we examine their roles in shaping the regulatory landscape. At the heart of this inquiry is the question: how can the EU balance the often competing demands of innovation, public safety, data protection, and ethical standards?

By delving into real-world applications and regulatory obstacles—such as the effects of VR on mental health, consumer protection, and data concerns—this article presents an in-depth analysis of the current regulatory framework. Ultimately, the aim is to advocate for more transparent, inclusive, and adaptive approaches to governance, which are vital for fostering innovation while safeguarding societal interests.

In the present digital transformation, the ethical dimensions of emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), and the sprawling domain of Web3 are a focal point of public and academic discourse. However, the EU has encountered notable difficulties in addressing these concerns at the pace required by technological developments. The existing regulatory framework often seems incapable of keeping up with the swift evolution of technologies that have the potential to fundamentally alter our experiences, perceptions, and social interactions.

VR is emblematic of this challenge. It brings with it an entirely new form of human interaction, one that can potentially modify cognition and behaviour in profound ways. In its more extreme manifestations, such as fully immersive virtual worlds, VR may blur the line between what is real and what is simulated, raising deep ethical questions about autonomy, identity, and agency. The EU’s regulatory mechanisms, while theoretically robust, are often reactive rather than proactive, leading to gaps in the governance of such transformative technologies.

The growing dominance of AI, ChatGPT-like language models, and immersive Extended Reality (ER) platforms brings us to a pivotal juncture. Our conception of what constitutes reality is shifting, and along with it, our understanding of autonomy, freedom, and responsibility. The legal and ethical frameworks that underpin our society must evolve in response to these shifts, or risk becoming obsolete and ultimately, the EU must adopt a more agile regulatory framework that allows for both innovation and ethical responsibility.

The core of this ethical dilemma lies in the way we perceive and value technology’s impact on human cognition. The fundamental question remains: how can we ensure that these technologies serve as tools for empowerment, rather than instruments of alienation or inequality?

The answer may lie in developing more sophisticated ethical frameworks that account for these emerging realities where we can begin to construct a legal and ethical landscape that prioritises fairness, equity, and justice in the development and deployment of new technologies.

Potential regulatory and ethical considerations regarding Extended Reality technologies

In the context of VR, the EU’s regulatory framework is multi-layered, involving a range of institutions, directives, and mechanisms aimed at safeguarding public welfare while encouraging innovation. However, the pace of technological advancement, especially in sectors like VR, AI, and Web3, often outstrips the EU’s ability to regulate effectively.

The role of Artificial Intelligence in shaping Virtual Reality environments

Artificial Intelligence (AI) plays a crucial role in enhancing VR environments, from creating more realistic and interactive virtual characters to optimising the rendering of complex 3D landscapes. However, the integration of AI into VR also introduces additional ethical concerns. For instance, AI-driven avatars and NPCs (non-player characters) in virtual environments could be programmed to influence user behaviour in subtle ways, raising questions about the transparency and ethics of such interactions.

The EU’s regulatory framework for AI, particularly the proposed AI Act, aims to establish clear guidelines for the ethical use of AI in various applications. However, specific provisions may need to be developed for the use of AI in VR environments. These could include rules requiring full disclosure when users are interacting with AI-driven entities and guidelines to prevent AI from manipulating user behavior without informed consent.

Additionally, the use of AI in moderating and controlling virtual environments raises issues of bias and fairness. AI algorithms used to moderate user behaviour in VR settings must be carefully designed to avoid reinforcing harmful biases or engaging in discriminatory practices. The EU should promote the development of transparent and accountable AI systems in VR, ensuring that these technologies are used ethically and equitably.

VR creates entirely new worlds where the rules of engagement may differ substantially from our current legal and social frameworks. In these virtual spaces, the question of responsibility becomes murkier. If a person behaves unethically in a virtual world, are they subject to the same moral and legal standards as in the real world? Moreover, when interacting with language models like ChatGPT, who or what bears responsibility for the information exchanged?

Impact of Extended Reality on labour markets

Another critical aspect that merits further discussion is the potential impact of VR and Extended Reality (XR) on labour markets and employment structures. As immersive technologies develop, the boundaries between traditional and virtual workspaces will blur, offering both opportunities and risks. While VR can democratise access to remote work and create new job roles (e.g., virtual trainers, metaverse architects), it may also exacerbate labor inequalities by creating divisions between workers who have access to these technologies and those who do not.

Furthermore, as AI and VR technologies combine to automate certain tasks, the risk of job displacement in sectors like education, customer service, and even healthcare becomes more pressing. This will require the EU to not only assess the ethical implications of VR from a consumer perspective but also from a labour rights standpoint, ensuring fair access to technology and retraining opportunities for workers impacted by automation.

The ethical implications of data collection in VR environments

Data collection in VR environments is an emerging issue that raises significant ethical concerns. Unlike traditional digital platforms, VR captures a vast array of biometric and behavioural data, including eye movements, facial expressions, and even brainwave activity in the case of Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs). This unprecedented level of data collection could lead to profound privacy risks if not properly regulated. The current EU data protection framework, particularly the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), offers a strong foundation for privacy and data protection regulation, but it may need to be adapted to address the unique data collection practices in VR environments.

Questions regarding user consent, data ownership, and the potential for misuse of personal biometric information need to be considered within this new technological context. The EU’s regulatory mechanisms will have to balance the benefits of data-driven VR applications, such as personalised healthcare and education, with the need to safeguard individual privacy and autonomy.

Potential for inequality in access to emerging technologies

There is also the risk of a growing digital divide as new technologies like VR become more prevalent. While VR has the potential to revolutionise sectors like education, healthcare, and entertainment, access to such technologies is often limited by socio-economic factors. High-end VR equipment and reliable internet infrastructure are often out of reach for lower-income populations. This technological inequality can exacerbate existing social disparities, leaving marginalised groups further behind in an increasingly digitised world.

EU policymakers must consider how to make emerging technologies more accessible and affordable to all citizens, potentially through public-private partnerships, subsidies, or infrastructure investment programs. This would ensure that VR and other extended reality technologies do not become the exclusive domain of affluent individuals or businesses, thus promoting a more egalitarian technological landscape.

Public health implications of VR and Extended Reality

As immersive VR environments become more engaging and lifelike, there is an increasing risk that users may become addicted to these digital experiences. Much like the concerns surrounding social media addiction, VR addiction could lead to negative mental health outcomes, including social isolation, anxiety, and depression. The immersive nature of VR makes it particularly prone to overuse, as users may lose track of time or become detached from their physical surroundings.

To address this, the EU may need to consider new regulatory mechanisms that focus specifically on digital addiction in VR environments. This could involve setting limits on the amount of time users can spend in virtual environments, or mandating the inclusion of features that encourage users to take regular breaks. Additionally, the EU could collaborate with mental health professionals to develop public awareness campaigns about the risks of VR addiction, similar to current initiatives aimed at reducing excessive screen time.

Prolonged immersion in virtual environments may have both psychological and physiological consequences. There is emerging evidence suggesting that extended use of VR could lead to symptoms such as disorientation, dizziness, and digital eye strain (commonly referred to as “cybersickness”). Additionally, psychological dependence on virtual worlds—akin to addiction—is a growing concern.

The EU regulatory bodies must examine these potential health risks and create guidelines for safe VR usage, particularly for vulnerable populations like children and those with mental health conditions. Public health campaigns could also be initiated to raise awareness of the potential dangers associated with prolonged use, alongside guidelines that recommend healthy usage practices. Much like the regulations surrounding screen time in children, there may be a need for targeted restrictions or educational programs that encourage responsible use of VR technology.

Public consultations and impact assessments: gaps and challenges

The EU’s public consultation processes, designed to capture a wide spectrum of opinions from individuals, organisations, and stakeholders, are a cornerstone of its regulatory system. These consultations are published on the European Commission’s website, inviting feedback on proposed policies and regulations. Ideally, this system serves to democratise decision-making, ensuring that a wide variety of voices are heard. However, the inherent complexity of emerging technologies like VR often limits meaningful participation to those with specialised knowledge.

To supplement these consultations, the EU conducts impact assessments to evaluate the economic, social, and environmental consequences of proposed measures. These assessments involve a rigorous consultation process with stakeholders and experts, aiming to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the ethical implications of regulatory decisions. While the intention is clear, the effectiveness of these mechanisms in addressing the ethical concerns surrounding emerging technologies remains a topic of debate.

“Better Regulation” and the “Have Your Say” portal

The European Commission’s “Better Regulation” initiative, introduced in 2015, marked a significant attempt to address some of the inefficiencies in the EU’s regulatory processes. Through platforms like the “Have Your Say” portal, citizens, businesses, and stakeholders are encouraged to offer input at various stages of the legislative process. The transparency and accessibility offered by this platform have been hailed as a step in the right direction, particularly when it comes to incorporating public sentiment early in the regulatory process.

Nevertheless, as with many well-intentioned initiatives, the portal’s limitations are evident. The feedback provided through public consultations often skews towards those with a vested interest in the industry, while the general public, lacking the technical expertise to engage fully with the complexities of VR, remains underrepresented. This imbalance could potentially weaken the democratic underpinnings of the consultation process, where the views of a technically savvy few overshadow the broader societal concerns.

As mentioned, public consultations form an integral part of the EU’s regulatory strategy. These consultations invite feedback from a broad array of stakeholders, including businesses, non-governmental organisations, and academic experts. However, despite their democratic intent, these processes often fail to capture the full scope of societal concerns. The technical nature of emerging technologies like VR means that the general public—those who will ultimately be affected by these innovations—may not possess the requisite expertise to engage meaningfully with the consultation process.

Similarly, impact assessments, which are intended to gauge the economic, social, and environmental implications of new technologies, tend to be reactive rather than proactive. By the time an impact assessment is completed, the technology in question may already be entrenched in the market, rendering regulatory efforts less effective. This reactive approach creates a time lag that is particularly problematic in sectors characterised by rapid technological progress, such as VR.

European Commission and legislative bodies

The European Commission plays a central role in regulating emerging technologies. It is responsible for proposing new laws, ensuring their proper implementation, and overseeing the enforcement of regulations across Member States. However, the legislative process can be slow, and the Commission often finds itself playing catch-up to technologies that are already widespread.

Both the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union must approve proposed regulations before they become law. Parliamentary committees, such as the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE), and the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE), frequently engage in debates regarding the ethical and societal implications of new technologies. Yet, these discussions are often characterised by a lack of consensus, with different stakeholders advocating for varying levels of regulation.

The role of the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE)

The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE) provides crucial independent advice on ethical issues related to scientific and technological progress. Their input has shaped legislative frameworks, such as the AI Act, and continues to inform discussions on technologies like VR and extended reality.

EGE’s 2020 report, “Ethics of Artificial Intelligence: Challenges and Recommendations,” highlighted the importance of creating ethical guidelines that account for both the opportunities and risks posed by emerging technologies. Their recommendations serve as a basis for ongoing legislative efforts, but the rapid development of technologies like VR underscores the need for continuous engagement with ethical concerns.

Conclusion: expanding the scope of ethical and regulatory frameworks

The EU’s current regulatory frameworks, while robust in many respects, struggle to keep pace with the rapid technological advancements reshaping society. The complexities inherent in VR and similar technologies demand a more dynamic and responsive approach—one that emphasises ethical considerations alongside economic and social factors.

To achieve this, public discourse must play a more central role in shaping regulations. Social media platforms, while often dismissed as informal and unreliable, may offer valuable insights into public sentiment regarding new technologies. Incorporating such platforms into formal regulatory frameworks could provide a more immediate and nuanced understanding of public concerns.

Ultimately, the EU must adopt a more agile regulatory framework that allows for both innovation and ethical responsibility. By embracing transparency, enhancing public participation, and prioritising justice and equity, the EU can ensure that the regulatory mechanisms governing VR and other emerging technologies remain fit for purpose in an increasingly complex digital world.

Picture credits: by Julia M Cameron on Pexels.com.