Building a TIPSS Framework: Reflections from the SPRITE+ Expert Fellows Meeting
In September 2026, SPRITE+ brought together its Expert Fellows in Edinburgh for a two-day workshop focused on a deceptively simple question: what is TIPSS, and what would it mean to do TIPSS by design? The meeting combined keynote talks, plenary presentations and structured group exercises to explore whether Trust, Identity, Privacy, Security and Safety can be understood not simply as separate concerns, but as part of a unified socio-technical framework.
The workshop formed part of SPRITE+'s wider effort to develop a more coherent intellectual foundation for research and practice across these interconnected domains. Participants were invited to consider not only the conceptual relationships between TIPSS elements, but also how the resulting framework might guide the design, governance and deployment of emerging technologies.
Why TIPSS?
Although trust, identity, privacy, security and safety are often treated as distinct fields, many of the challenges posed by contemporary digital technologies cut across all five. Decisions made in one area frequently have consequences for the others. A system cannot be trusted if identities cannot be verified; privacy is difficult to sustain without security; and failures in any of these domains can ultimately create safety risks.
The meeting therefore began from the premise that TIPSS may be more than the sum of its parts. Participants explored whether there are deeper concepts and shared principles that connect the individual elements and whether a unified framework could provide practical guidance for researchers, policymakers, developers and technology adopters.
The two keynote talks approached this challenge from different directions. Kieron O'Hara argued that trust may be fundamentally different from the other dimensions because it cannot simply be engineered or delivered. Rather than being a technical property, trust emerges from relationships between actors, institutions and technologies. Systems can be designed to be trustworthy but trust itself remains something that must be negotiated and earned.
Meanwhile, Lizzie Coles-Kemp highlighted the concept of digital responsibility, emphasising duties, obligations and accountability associated with the use and deployment of digital technologies. Her work suggested that conversations about responsibility may provide useful mechanisms for translating high-level TIPSS principles into practical action.
Emerging Technologies as TIPSS Challenges
A recurring theme throughout the workshop was that TIPSS issues become particularly visible when technologies are (rapidly) evolving.
Briana Bowen's presentation examined quantum computing as a case study. Quantum technologies offer transformative opportunities across fields ranging from pharmaceutical development and climate modelling to supply-chain optimisation and AI. At the same time, they pose profound challenges for existing cryptographic infrastructures. The potential impact extends across every TIPSS dimension, including trust in institutions, digital identity systems, privacy protections, security mechanisms and, ultimately, safety-critical infrastructures.
Similarly, Anna Piazza explored TIPSS adoption in the context of converging technologies such as artificial intelligence, virtual reality and blockchain-based systems. Her presentation argued that TIPSS is deeply interconnected and should not be treated as independent checklists; emerging technologies often reveal dependencies between concepts, suggesting the need for integrated approaches.
Sieun Lee focused on neurotechnology, examining technologies capable of sensing, interpreting and potentially influencing activity within the brain and nervous system. Neurotech raises multiple concerns around privacy, consent, security, trust and knowledge asymmetries. The presentation highlighted the importance of considering not only technical capabilities but also realistic deployment contexts, incentives, governance arrangements and societal impacts.
The presentations reinforced a common message: future technologies rarely create isolated TIPSS challenges. Instead, they produce interconnected issues that demand joined-up thinking.
Towards a TIPSS Framework
One of the workshop's central activities asked participants to imagine what a TIPSS framework might look like. Despite differences in emphasis, a remarkable degree of consensus emerged across the breakout groups. Participants argued that any effective framework must be socio-technical and interdisciplinary. It should incorporate technical, regulatory, organisational and human considerations rather than focusing solely on technology itself. Many groups stressed the importance of context, arguing that TIPSS priorities and relationships can and do vary across cultures, sectors, technologies and use cases.
Another common theme was that the framework should be dynamic and adaptive. Participants viewed TIPSS as an evolving process capable of responding to changing technologies, stakeholder expectations and social norms. Several groups suggested that relationships between TIPSS elements may shift depending on context and on which issue is placed at the centre of analysis.
There was also considerable support for treating the framework as an assessment and decision-support tool. Rather than producing a rigid certification regime, participants envisaged mechanisms that help surface issues, structure conversations, identify trade-offs and support responsible decision-making. This could include stakeholder mapping, impact assessments, scenario exercises, pre-mortem and post-mortem analyses, and other instruments capable of supporting reflection and learning.
Across many discussions, accountability and governance emerged as important cross-cutting principles that help bind the framework together. Participants also repeatedly emphasised the need for shared language and common conceptual foundations that would enable communication across disciplines and sectors.
What Does "TIPSS by Design" Mean?
Shifting focus, the second day turned to a practical challenge: how can TIPSS principles be embedded within technology development? Once again, participants converged around several common themes.
The strongest – if perhaps unsurprising - point of agreement was that rather than being added as an afterthought once technologies are mature, TIPSS needs to be considered from inception through development, testing, deployment and ongoing operation. Groups also frequently described TIPSS-by-design as a process of continuous engagement. Suggested approaches included iterative risk assessment, stakeholder engagement, scenario planning, ongoing review mechanisms and continuous feedback throughout the technology lifecycle.
Participants also discussed possible links between TIPSS and Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs). Many felt that different TIPSS questions become salient at different stages of development. Early-stage technologies may require horizon scanning, speculative risk assessment and exploration of societal implications, while later-stage technologies require testing, assurance, governance and operational oversight.
A recurring suggestion was that practical tools will be required to support adoption. These might include checklists, standards, codes of practice, accreditation mechanisms, certification schemes, audit processes, training materials and online guidance resources. Several groups also suggested that organisations may need access to specialist TIPSS expertise to help navigate increasingly complex socio-technical environments.
At the same time, participants recognised significant barriers. Costs, time pressures, conflicting commercial incentives, regulatory variation and uneven global capabilities all present challenges to implementing TIPSS by design.
Emerging Ideas and Open Questions
Perhaps the most important outcome of the meeting was not consensus around a finished framework, but the identification of a set of promising directions for future work.
One line of discussion explored whether broader concepts might connect different TIPSS dimensions. Ideas including accountability, resilience and safety were proposed as candidate integrating concepts that help explain how trust, identity, privacy and security interact. Safety was framed as an outcome enabled by the successful integration of the other dimensions, while accountability and resilience were seen as mechanisms for sustaining them over time.
Another theme concerned the importance of relationships, boundaries and context. Discussions suggested that TIPSS may be best understood as guiding principles for technologists, organisations and institutions to negotiate boundaries, responsibilities, risks and expectations.
At the same time, participants repeatedly highlighted the importance of engagement. Whether discussing trustworthiness, digital responsibility, quantum technologies or neurotechnology, speakers stressed the need for dialogue between technical experts, policymakers, organisations and affected communities. TIPSS by design was therefore frequently characterised not simply as a technical activity but as an ongoing socio-technical practice.
The Edinburgh meeting marked an important step in SPRITE+'s continuing effort to build a shared understanding of TIPSS. While many conceptual questions remain open, participants demonstrated strong support for developing a framework that is interdisciplinary, context-sensitive, adaptive and practically useful.
