Context: Telecare and telehealth developments have recently attracted much attention in research and service development contexts, where their evaluation has predominantly concerned effectiveness and efficiency. Their social and ethical implications, in contrast, have received little scrutiny.Objective: To develop an ethical framework for telecare systems based on analysis of observations of telecare‐in‐use and citizens’ panel deliberations.Design: Ethnographic study (observation, work shadowing), interviews, older citizens’ panels and a participative conference.Setting: Participants’ homes, workplaces and familiar community venues in England, Spain, the Netherlands and Norway 2008–2011.Results: Older respondents expressed concerns that telecare might be used to replace face‐to‐face/hands‐on care to cut costs. Citizens’ panels strongly advocated ethical and social questions being considered in tandem with technical and policy developments. Older people are too often excluded from telecare system design, and installation is often wrongly seen as a one‐off event. Some systems enhance self‐care by increasing self‐awareness, while others shift agency away from the older person, introducing new forms of dependency.Conclusions: Telecare has care limitations; it is not a solution, but a shift in networks of relations and responsibilities. Telecare cannot be meaningfully evaluated as an entity, but rather in the situated relations people and technologies create together. Characteristics of ethical telecare include on‐going user/carer engagement in decision making about systems: in‐home system evolution with feedback opportunities built into implementation. System design should be horizontal, ‘two‐way’/interactive rather than vertical or ‘one‐way’. An ethical framework for telecare has been developed from these conclusions (Table 1).

In this paper, we analyse patients’ perspectives on the introduction of artificial intelligence (AI) and robotic systems in healthcare. Based on citizens’ experiences when hospitalised for COVID-19, we explore how the opinions and concerns regarding healthcare automation could not be disassociated from a context of high pressure on the health system and lack of resources, and a political discourse on AI and robotics; a situation intensified by the pandemic. Thus, through the analysis of a set of interviews, a series of issues are identified that revolve around the following: the empirical effects of imagined robots, the vivid experience of citizens with the care crisis, the discomfort of the ineffective, the virtualised care assemblages, the human-based face-to-face relationships, and the automatisation of healthcare tasks. In light of these results, we show the variability in patients’ perspectives on AI and robotic systems and explain it by distinguishing two interpretive repertoires that account for different views and opinions: a well-being repertoire and a responsibility repertoire. Both interpretative repertoires are relevant in order to grasp the complexity of citizens’ approaches to automatisation of healthcare. Attending to both allows us to move beyond the dominant (political) discourse of technology markets as the only way to respond to healthcare challenges. Thus, we can analyse and integrate patients’ perspectives to develop AI and robotic systems in healthcare to serve citizens’ needs and collective well-being.

This article reports on ethnographic research into the practical and ethical consequences of the implementation and use of telecare devices for older people living at home in Spain and the United Kingdom. Telecare services are said to allow the maintenance of their users’ autonomy through connectedness, relieving the isolation from which many older people suffer amid rising demands for care. However, engaging with Science and Technology Studies (STS) literature on “user configuration” and implementation processes, we argue here that neither services nor users preexist the installation of the service: they are better described as produced along with it. Moving beyond design and appropriation practices, our contribution stresses the importance of installations as specific moments where such emplacements take place. Using Etienne Souriau’s concept of instauration, we describe the ways in which, through installation work, telecare services “bring into existence” their very infrastructure of usership. Hence, both services and telecare users are effects of fulfilling the “felicity conditions” (technical, relational, and contractual) of an achieved installation.

In this paper we analyze imaginaries about care robots using a set of interviews with roboticists. The study of imaginaries – from a notion close to that of Castoriadis’s radical imaginary – is used as a tool to unravel ethical, political and social concerns that care robots entail. From the analysis of the interviews, our results highlight that imaginaries regarding care robots are predominantly sustained by a social process of care fragmentation. The translation of the imaginary of industry robots into the wildness of the daily life in healthcare reconfigures the comprehension of robots and their mediations. This process is intensively linked to Human Robot Collaboration (HRC) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) imaginaries of care, based on the cult of domesticity and the opposition of human caring to rational caring. We see how these fragmentations are in tension with an approach that seeks to integrate the ethics of care with technoscience, which has relevant consequences for the ethical debate on care robotics and the political significance of care in our world.

Public libraries have proven for centuries to be infrastructures both stable enough as reference centers for access to knowledge yet plastic enough to respond to the social changes of the communities they serve. In these present times of transformation, during which digitalization and the intensive use of technologies are modifying the way in which knowledge is produced, public libraries are facing new and disruptive challenges. The emergence of certain innovation ecosystems within libraries, which place the community at the center of cocreation and codesign processes between different agents, has transformed some public libraries into encountering spaces. The Library Living Lab, in the Miquel Batllori Public Library of Sant Cugat del Vallès (Barcelona, Spain), is an expression of this systemic change. The following paper is a case study based on that sociotechnical infrastructure and analyzes, through two singular examples, how digital technologies can be drivers of social transformation when citizen engagement is placed at the center of innovation processes. The case study also provides insights into how public libraries may become key agents in fostering and strengthening social cohesion through situated, collective, and technology-based innovation practices.