| Title |
Domesticating the Drone: The Demilitarisation of Unmanned Aircraft for Civil Markets
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science and Engineering Ethics, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11948-014-9603-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Philip Boucher |
| Abstract |
Remotely piloted aviation systems (RPAS) or 'drones' are well known for their military applications, but could also be used for a range of non-military applications for state, industrial, commercial and recreational purposes. The technology is advanced and regulatory changes are underway which will allow their use in domestic airspace. As well as the functional and economic benefits of a strong civil RPAS sector, the potential benefits for the military RPAS sector are also widely recognised. Several actors have nurtured this dual-use aspect of civil RPAS development. However, concerns have been raised about the public rejecting the technology because of their association with military applications and potentially controversial applications, for example in policing and border control. In contrast with the enthusiasm for dual-use exhibited throughout the EC consultation process, the strategy for avoiding public rejection devised in its roadmap would downplay the connection between military and non-military RPAS and focus upon less controversial applications such as search and rescue. We reflect upon this contrast in the context of the European agenda of responsible research and innovation. In doing so, we do not rely upon critique of drones per se, in their neither their civil nor military guise, but explore the extent to which current strategies for managing their public acceptability are compatible with a responsible and socially beneficial development of RPAS for civil purposes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Romania | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 207 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 204 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 47 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 13% |
| Researcher | 20 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 36 | 17% |
| Unknown | 41 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 34 | 16% |
| Engineering | 32 | 15% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 21 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 20 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 42 | 20% |
| Unknown | 49 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 November 2014.
All research outputs
#16,223,992
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#726
of 947 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,999
of 266,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#17
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 947 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.