Answering ethical questions posed by the Fourth Industrial Revolution

The fourth industrial revolution is upon us. Also known as "Industry 4.0" or "4IR," it takes the technological advances of the third industrial revolution and connects them into systems that can often operate and adapt without human input. New technologies can create exciting possibilities for positive social impact on diverse issues such as income inequality and the environment.

Yet, at the same time, they often raise new, sometimes difficult, ethical questions. In fact, the irony is this: As we develop technologies that adapt without human input, we are discovering we need human input to address what constitutes the ethical use of these technologies.

As mentioned in a Deloitte article, most leaders want their organizations to create social impact. In today's competitive business environment, social impact initiatives have the ability to separate one company from its competitors in the eyes of consumers. The logic that a company "does well by doing good" has taken hold. And 4IR technologies promise to support companies' efforts to reduce carbon emissions, support diversity initiatives, and other social impact goals.

Yet some leaders are also recognizing that 4IR technologies raise ethical questions in areas such as data privacy, algorithmic bias, and potentially a lack of inclusivity in technology design.

According to Deloitte Global CEO Punit Renjen's report, "Success Personified in the Fourth Industrial Revolution," which is based on a Forbes Insights survey, C-suite executives have varying levels of concern about using technology ethically. From June-August 2018, Forbes Insights surveyed 2,042 executives (with company revenue of $1 billion or more) and public sector leaders (with organization budgets of $500 million or more) from 19 countries and all major industry sectors.

As shown in Figure 2 below, only 15 percent of the 194 CEOs/presidents surveyed are strongly concerned about ethical technology use. Surprisingly, chief information officers and chief technology officers are also at the lower end of the spectrum, at 16 percent and 17 percent, respectively. On the other hand, 41 percent of chief operating officers, 41 percent of chief digital officers, and 50 percent of chief sustainability officers are strongly concerned about ethical technology use.

This disparity in levels of concern about ethical technology use at the top of the organization often results in lack of clarity throughout the rest of the organization. Deloitte offers three recommendations to address this:

  • 1. C-Suite adoption: The CEO must prioritize ethical technology use and encourage the rest of the C-suite to do so too.
  • 2. Culture change: The C-suite must set, model, and communicate ethical use of technology and encourage buy-in from employees by allowing them to share ideas about ethical technology use.
  • 3. Adapt: As technology continues to change, companies must continue to define how to use it ethically.

Ethics are important in and of themselves. However, there may also be business benefits for prioritizing ethical use of technology.

As shown in Figure 1 below, Deloitte's analysis of the Success Personified report found a correlation between high concern for ethical use of 4IR technologies and business growth. Of the 536 respondents whose organizations had 0 percent growth, only 17 percent of them strongly agreed that their organization is highly concerned with ethically using 4IR technologies.

On the other hand, of the 148 respondents whose organizations had 10 percent or more growth, 55 percent of them strongly agreed that their organization is highly concerned with ethically using 4IR technologies.

As more companies aim to make a social impact, C-suite leaders should consider the ethics of 4IR technology implementation to grow as a business and stand out among competitors.

---

This publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication.

About Deloitte
Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee ("DTTL"), its network of member firms, and their related entities. DTTL and each of its member firms are legally separate and independent entities. DTTL (also referred to as "Deloitte Global") does not provide services to clients. In the United States, Deloitte refers to one or more of the US member firms of DTTL, their related entities that operate using the "Deloitte" name in the United States and their respective affiliates. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting. Please see www.deloitte.com/about to learn more about our global network of member firms.

Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Property Showcase

Intuitive Machines lands $180M NASA contract for lunar delivery mission

to the moon

NASA has awarded Intuitive Machines a $180.4 million Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) award to deliver science and technology to the moon.

This is the fifth CLPS award the Houston spacetech company has received from NASA, according to a release. It will be the first mission to utilize Intuitive Machines' larger cargo lunar lander, Nova-D.

Known as IM-5, the mission is expected to deliver seven payloads to Mons Malapert, a ridge near the Lunar South Pole, which is a "compelling location for future communications, navigation, and surface infrastructure," according to the release.

“We believe our space infrastructure provides the scalability and flexibility needed to support an increased cadence of new Artemis missions and advance national objectives. This CLPS award accelerates our expansion efforts as we build, connect, and operate the systems powering that infrastructure,” Steve Altemus, CEO of Intuitive Machines, said in the release. “We look forward to working closely with NASA to deliver mission success on IM-5 and to provide sustained operations and persistent connectivity in the cislunar environment and across the solar system.”

The delivery will include the Australian Space Agency’s lunar rover, known as Roo-ver, and another lunar rover from Honeybee Robotics, a part of Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin. Intuitive Machines will also deliver chemical analysis instruments, radiation detectors and other technologies, as well as a capsule named Sanctuary that shows examples of human achievements.

Intuitive Machines previously completed its IM-1 and IM-2 missions, which put the first commercial lunar lander on the moon and achieved the southernmost lunar landing, respectively.

Its IM-3 mission is expected to deliver international payloads to the moon's Reiner Gamma this year. It’s IM-4 mission, funded by a $116.9 million CLPS award, is expected to deliver six science and technology payloads to the Moon’s South Pole in 2027.

The company also announced a $175 million equity investment to fuel growth earlier this month.

TotalEnergies exits U.S. offshore wind sector in $1B federal deal

Energy News

TotalEnergies, a French company whose U.S. headquarters is in Houston, has agreed to redirect nearly $930 million in capital from two offshore wind leases on the East Coast to oil, natural gas and liquefied natural gas (LNG) production.

In its agreement with the U.S. Department of the Interior, TotalEnergies has also promised not to develop new offshore wind projects in the U.S. “in light of national security concerns,” according to a department press release.

Federal agency hails ‘landmark agreement’

The Department of the Interior called the deal a “landmark agreement” that will steer capital “from expensive, unreliable offshore wind leases toward affordable, reliable natural gas projects that will provide secure energy for hardworking Americans.”

Renewable energy advocates object to what they believe is the Trump administration’s mischaracterization of offshore wind projects.

Under the Department of the Interior agreement, the federal government will reimburse TotalEnergies on a dollar-for-dollar basis for the leases, up to the amount that the energy company paid.

“Offshore wind is one of the most expensive, unreliable, environmentally disruptive, and subsidy-dependent schemes ever forced on American ratepayers and taxpayers,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in the announcement. “We welcome TotalEnergies’ commitment to developing projects that produce dependable, affordable power to lower Americans' monthly bills while providing secure U.S. baseload power today — and in the future.”

TotalEnergies cites U.S. policy in move away from U.S. wind power

In the news release, Patrick Pouyanné, chairman and CEO of TotalEnergies, says the company was “pleased” to sign the agreement to support the Trump administration’s energy policy.

“Considering that the development of offshore wind projects is not in the country’s interest, we have decided to renounce offshore wind development in the United States, in exchange for the reimbursement of the lease fees,” Pouyanné says.

TotalEnergies redirects capital to LNG, oil, and natural gas

TotalEnergies will use the $928 million it spent on the offshore wind leases for development of a joint venture LNG plant in the Rio Grande Valley, as well as for production of upstream oil in the Gulf of Mexico and for production of shale gas.

“These investments will contribute to supplying Europe with much-needed LNG from the U.S. and provide gas for U.S. data center development. We believe this is a more efficient use of capital in the United States,” Pouyanné says.

TotalEnergies paid $133.3 million for an offshore wind lease at the Carolina Long Bay project off the coast of North Carolina and $795 million in 2022 for a lease covering a 1,545-megawatt commercial offshore wind facility off the coast of New Jersey.

“TotalEnergies’ studies on these leases have shown that offshore wind developments in the United States, unlike those in Europe, are costly and might have a negative impact on power affordability for U.S. consumers,” TotalEnergies said in a company-issued press release. “Since other technologies are available to meet the growing demand for electricity in the United States in a more affordable way, TotalEnergies considers there is no need to allocate capital to this technology in the U.S.”

Since 2022, TotalEnergies has invested nearly $12 billion to promote the development of oil, LNG, and electricity in the U.S. In 2025, TotalEnergies was the No. 1 exporter of LNG from the U.S.

Industry groups push back on offshore wind pullback

The American Clean Energy Association has pushed back on the Trump administration’s characterization of offshore wind projects.

“The offshore wind industry creates thousands of high-quality, good-paying jobs, and is revitalizing American manufacturing supply chains and U.S. shipyards,” Jason Grumet, the association’s CEO, said in December after the Trump administration paused all leases for large-scale offshore wind projects under construction in the U.S. “It is a critical component of our energy security and provides stable, domestic power that helps meet demand and keep costs low.”

Grumet added that President Trump’s “relentless attacks on offshore wind undermine his own economic agenda and needlessly harm American workers and consumers.” He called for passage of federal legislation that would prevent the White House “from picking winners and losers” in the energy sector and “placing political ideology” above Americans’ best interests.

The National Resources Defense Council offered a similar response to the offshore wind leases being paused.

“In its ongoing effort to prop up waning fossil fuels interests, the administration is taking wilder and wilder swings at the clean energy projects this economy needs,” said Pasha Feinberg, the council’s offshore wind strategist. “Investments in energy infrastructure require business certainty. This is the opposite. If the administration thinks the chilling impacts of this action are limited to the clean energy sector, it is sorely mistaken.”

---

This article originally appeared on EnergyCapitalHTX.com.

Houston researcher examines how AI helps and hurts creativity

eye on ai

As artificial intelligence continues to grow and seeps into spaces like art, design and writing, a Houston researcher is examining its effects on creativity.

University of Houston’s Bauer College Assistant Professor Jinghui Hou, in collaboration with scholars around the world, recently published the paper "The Double-Edged Roles of Generative AI in the Creative Process" in the journal Information Systems Research.

Through the research, the team identified two stages of creativity that AI can influence: ideation and implementation.

In one study, Hou and her team developed a lab experiment to examine the impact of a cutting-edge generative AI tool during the brainstorming or ideation phase on a group of designers with varying levels of expertise.

The study showed that nearly all designers who used generative AI during this stage improved in the creativity of their graphic design work, and that the improvements were substantial and consistent across the board.

“In the first stage, we find that for anyone, including ordinary people and expert designers, AI is very helpful because of its computational power,” Hou said in a news release. “It can go beyond the imagination that humans have. For example, if I wanted to imagine a tiger with wings, it would be hard to see that in my head, but AI can do it easily.”

However, a second study examining the implementation stage found that AI affects professionals differently than novice designers.

The study showed that novice designers continued to improve in all aspects of their work when using AI. But more expert designers did not see significant improvements in the implementation stage. Rather, expert designers who used AI spent 57 percent more time completing their work compared with their peers who did not use AI.

“In the implementation stage, we find that AI is still very helpful for those ordinary people, but it creates more work for expert designers,” Hou said in the release. “This is because the designer has years of training to materialize a piece of artwork. We find that AI uses different techniques to produce creative work. For designers, it can become burdensome to revise what AI made.”

Hou’s paper suggests that AI is most helpful in the brainstorming stage, but hopes to see generative AI developers program tailor the technology for expert-level, professional needs.

“It could give users more freedom to fit the technology to their usage pattern and workflow,” Hou added. “In a sense, it's not about people catering to the AI, but the AI technology catering to people."

View All Listings