Abstract
Various phrases such as “social implications”, social impact” and “ethical, legal and social implications” are used to indicate the impact of a given scientific or technological advancements on the ‘social’. The impact on the ‘social’ is one focus of science and technology governance discussions. Many terms and phrases can be used to audit the engagement of a given technology (such as quantum technologies) with the ‘social’. Marginalized groups are particularly impacted by the ‘social’. Equity, Diversity, and, Inclusion (EDI) and similar phrases are part of discussing the ‘social’. EDI frameworks and phrases are employed as policy concepts to decrease the research, education, and general workplace problems members of marginalized groups such as women, Indigenous peoples, visible/racialized minorities, disabled people, and LGBTQ2S+ encounter at universities and other workplaces. How quantum technologies-focused discussions engage with the ‘social’ can impact EDI activities, and quantum technologies-focused discussions can be impacted in turn by EDI activities. The objective of this study was to map the engagement with the ‘social’ in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature. A scoping review coupled with a manifest coding approach was used to answer three research questions: (1) Which terms, phrases, and measures that can be seen to cover aspects of the ‘social’ are present in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature? (2) To what extent are EDI frameworks and phrases present in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature? (3) Which marginalized groups visible in EDI discourses are covered in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature? Using the academic databases SCOPUS, EBSCO-HOST, Web of Science, Compendex, Inspec Archive, and Knovel, 362,728 English language abstracts were obtained for the manifest coding using 62 Quantum-related technical phrases and 1062 English language abstracts were obtained using 17 non-technical Quantum-related phrases. Within the 362,728 abstracts of the 200 terms and phrases (which did not have to contain the term “social”) used to answer the research questions, 87 were not mentioned in any abstracts, 47 were mentioned in less than 10, 30 were mentioned in between 10 and 100, and 29 were mentioned in over 100 abstracts. Within the 1062 abstracts, 164 terms and phrases were not mentioned at all, 19 were mentioned in over 10, 8 were mentioned in between 10 and 100 (all false positive), and one was mentioned in over 100 abstracts (false positive). The term “social” or phrases containing “social” appeared in only 867 of the 362,728 abstracts and only 10 of the 1062 abstracts. EDI frameworks and phrases were not present in the 362,728 abstracts and 1062 abstracts, and many marginalized groups engaged with in EDI discussions were not present in the 362,728 and 1062 abstracts either. The results reveal vast opportunities to engage with the ‘social’ of quantum technologies in many different ways, including through EDI frameworks and concepts and by engaging with marginalized groups covered under EDI.
Highlights
Various phrases such as “social implications”, social impact” and “ethical, legal and social implications” are used to indicate the impact of a given scientific or technological advancements on the ‘social’
Within the 867 abstracts obtained with the term “social”, the phrase found most often, “social network”, covered mostly technical aspects, and the second-highest by frequency was a false positive phrase
The findings indicate opportunities for broadening the quantum technologies discourse to the ‘social’ and to EDI, as well as for an increase in inter-intra-trans-disciplinary and intersectional collaborations. These collaborations can occur between groups and individuals involved in quantum technologies and their governance and groups, fields, and individuals involved in the ‘social’; for example: (a) groups involved in the measuring of the ‘social’ [9–39]; (b) groups fields and individuals engaged with and EDI; (c) fields such as disability studies and other identity group studies, social justice studies, health sciences, STEM and AI education and education in general; (d) fields involved in science and technology governance and ethics; and (e) socially disadvantaged groups, practitioners, and policy makers
Summary
Various phrases such as “social implications”, social impact” and “ethical, legal and social implications” are used to indicate the impact of a given scientific or technological advancements on the ‘social’. Diversity and inclusion; equality, diversity and inclusion; diversity, equity and inclusion and other derivative EDI phrases [40–59] and EDI frameworks such as Athena SWAN (“Scientific Women’s Academic Network”) [52,60]; “Science in Australia Gender Equity”, SAGE-Athena SWAN [53]; “See change with STEMM Equity Achievement”, SEAChange [54]; National Science Foundation (NSF) ADVANCE [55] and “DIMENSIONS: Equity, diversity and inclusion program” [56] are increasingly employed to improve the research, education and general workplace climate at universities [51] and other workplaces for marginalized groups such as women, Indigenous peoples, visible/racialized minorities, disabled people, and LGBTQ2S+. Three research questions were asked: (1) Which terms, phrases, and measures that can be seen to cover aspects of the ‘social’ are present in the quantum technologies-focused academic literature? What can be done to ensure that, as Canada’s quantum sector grows, it is increasingly representative of our diversity?” [62]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call