‘Responsible innovation’ is already too European (original) (raw)
Related papers
International Handbook on Responsible Innovation
Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks, 2019
Responsible innovation (RI) has become the subject matter of a broad array of dedicated research and innovation actions over the past ten years, with several national research funding bodies having designed programmes to support research and innovation action. Examples include the Netherlands Council for Research (NWO), which has a dedicated internationally orientated programme on RI, 1 the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) whose interest in the subject matter can be traced back as early as 2008, 2 the US National Science Foundation (NSF) which among other projects supported the creation of the Virtual Institute of Responsible Innovation (VIRI) 3 and the Research Council of Norway's creation of the responsible innovation and corporate social responsibility (SAMANSVAR) funding programme. 4 Since 2014, responsible research and innovation (RRI) has been a cross-cutting issue under the European Union's (EU's) Framework Programme for research and innovation, Horizon 2020, the world largest research and innovation programme. Important features of responsible innovation, for example, open collaboration and the co-design of research and innovation agendas for mission-orientated research and innovation targeted at delivering on societal desirable outcomes (notably on the global sustainable development goals), are an integral part of the European Commission's proposal for Horizon Europe, the new Framework Programme that will run from 2020 to 2027. China has made responsible innovation a formal policy of the state by including it in the thirteenth five-year plan on science, technology and innovation. Industrial actors have become increasingly responsive to the demand that their products reflect basic societal values and expectations. This Handbook constitutes a valuable resource for all those interested in the further development and implementation of RI in all of its forms. As a truly global resource on the subject matter of interdisciplinary research and activity, the Handbook brings together prominent authors from the United States, Europe, Asia and Africa. This naturally has the consequence that the authors provide a variety of perspectives and different assessments of what needs to be addressed by responsible innovations. All authors however share the notion that RI requires a form of governance that will direct or redirect innovation towards societally desirable outcomes. Responsible innovation advocates will argue that the innovation process is neither steerless nor inherently good. Instead of being steerless, innovation can be managed and a growing body of research constitutes a testimony on how we can manage innovation and shape technologies in accordance with societal values and expectations as well as (re-)direct them towards normative targets such as sustainability goals. Furthermore, RI reflects an economic paradigm that acknowledges that market innovations do not automatically deliver on societally desirable objectives, and require a broad governance of knowledge coalitions of René von Schomberg and Jonathan Hankins-9781784718862 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 12/17/2019 11:48:52AM via communal account * The views expressed here are those of the authors and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission.
A vision of responsible innovation
I provide a vision and definition of Responsible Research and Innovation and propose a broad framework for its implementation under Research and Innovation schemes around the world. I make the case that RRI should be understood as a strategy of stakeholders to become mutual responsive to each other and anticipate research and innovation outcomes underpinning the "grand challenges" of our time for which they share responsibility. Research and Innovation processes need to become more responsive and adaptive to these grand challenges. This implies, among other, the introduction of broader foresight and impact assessments for new technologies beyond their anticipated market-benefits and risks. Social benefits of new technologies need to take into account widely shared public values. This implies a paradigm shift in innovation policy, moving away from an emphasis on key technologies towards issue and mission oriented policies. Background information can be found on: http://Rene...
Responsible Innovation in Developing Countries: An Enlarged Agenda
The Responsible Research and Innovation framework emerged from the reflection on a socially desirable form of development of emerging technologies in Europe and the United States. In this chapter, I discuss how to further elaborate the framework in order to effectively engage in a dialogue with science, technology and innovation (STI) policy in the developing world, particularly in Latin America. In order to take on this task, I describe first the discussion about uncritical processes of STI policy transfer. Then I analyze the dominant framework of science, technology and innovation policies in the region. Finally, I propose topics that I think should be included in the RRI agenda; themes that will allow the framework to be more responsive to issues related to other geographical contexts. The proposed topics include: (a) expansion of its focus beyond emerging technologies, (b) inclusion of resistance to technologies and contentious politics, (c) global perspective on the production of innovations, (d) building of theoretical links with inclusive innovation frameworks and (d) the development of sensitivity towards intercultural dialogue.
Introduction to the International Handbook on Responsible Innovation
International Handbook on Responsible Innovation. A global Resource, 2019
The Handbook constitutes a global resource for the fast growing interdisciplinary research and policy communities addressing the challenge of driving innovation towards socially desirable outcomes. This book brings together well-known authors from the US, Europe and Asia who develop conceptual and regional perspectives on responsible innovation as well as exploring the prospects for further implementation of responsible innovation in emerging technological practices ranging from agriculture and medicine, to nanotechnology and robotics. The emphasis is on the socio-economic and normative dimensions of innovation including issues of social risk and sustainability
Responsible innovation: a going concern
Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2014
View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles EDITORIAL Responsible innovation: a going concern With this second issue, the Journal of Responsible Innovation (JRI) is now a "going concern" as they say, demonstrably not a one-off. Inquiries abound. Manuscripts arrive over the electronic transom. And "responsible research and innovation" continues to be a timely and important topic at the interface of scholarship and practice. In the USA, for example, the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues recently released its report, Gray Matters (PCSBI 2014), which discusses in detail the options for pursuing responsible neuroscience in the context of President Barack Obama's BRAIN Initiative. The focus of the report is "integrative approaches for neuroscience, ethics and society", and it borrows heavily from JRI's own associate editor, and my Arizona State University colleague, Erik Fisher's testimony and work in Socio-Technical Integration Research (PCSBI 2014, 15 and see Shuurbiers and Fisher 2009). Indeed, three of the Commission's four recommendations focus on integrating ethical and societal perspectives with neuroscience-"early and explicitly throughout the research" as well as in education and in advisory bodiesand the fourth focuses on evaluating integration techniques. In the UK, SynbiCITE (www.synbicite.com)the Synthetic Biology Innovation Commercial and Industrial Translation Enginehas committed to an approach including responsible innovation (RI). Based at Imperial College and comprising 15 academic and 11 industrial partners, SynbiCITE aims "to grow UK industry in the sector and improve synthetic biology, using industry to achieve significant economic impact, generate wealth for the companies, generate skilled workers and create jobs". 1 It has also adopted as its approach to RI the four-part frameworkanticipate, reflect, engage and actproffered by the UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and described by Owen (2014) in JRI's first issue. Meanwhile, on the continent, the constructive conference scene for RI continues. The Dutch "Responsible Innovation Conference 2014" was held in The Hague in May, and the International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (www.ice-conference.org)with the support of the IEEE Technology Management Councilconducted its meeting on "Engineering Responsible Innovation in Products and Services" in Bergamo, Italy, in June as JRI was going to press. Conference activities have also spread to the global South, as Macnaghten et al. (2014) report in the Perspectives section on a meeting in Brazil. The second issue of JRI joins the fray with many features shared with the first issue, and it introduces different pleasures as well. In the lead research article, authors Colette Bos, Bart Walhout, Alexander Peine and Harro van Lente (Bos et al. 2014), explore a major challenge to RI, namely, its role in steering research given its ideographic nature. Studying this question not just with respect to RI but also to "sustainability" and "valorization" in a Dutch research program on nanotechnology, Bos and co-authors find that such terms do have forceful normative connotations and contribute to the structuring of research projects and programs. Talk matters.
Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2014
In March 2014 a group of early career researchers and academics from São Paulo state and from the UK met at the University of Campinas to participate in a workshop on ‘Responsible Innovation and the Governance of Socially Controversial Technologies’. In this Perspective we describe key reflections and observations from the workshop discussions, paying particular attention to the discourse of responsible innovation from a cross-cultural perspective. We describe a number of important tensions, paradoxes and opportunities that emerged over the three days of the workshop.
Responsible innovation across borders: tensions, paradoxes and possibilities
Brian Garvey, Adalberto Azevedo, Sara Helen Wilford, Bruno Rondani, David Tyfield, Renzo Taddei, Christopher Groves, Leonardo Freire de Mello, Markku Lehtonen, André Sica Campos, Marko Monteiro, Lea Maria L S Velho, Phil Macnaghten
Journal of Responsible Innovation
In March 2014 a group of early career researchers and academics from São Paulo state and from the UK met at the University of Campinas to participate in a workshop on ‘Responsible Innovation and the Governance of Socially Controversial Technologies’. In this Perspective we describe key reflections and observations from the workshop discussions, paying particular attention to the discourse of responsible innovation from a cross-cultural perspective. We describe a number of important tensions, paradoxes and opportunities that emerged over the three days of the workshop.
Developing a framework for responsible innovation
The governance of emerging science and innovation is a major challenge for contemporary democracies. In this paper we present a framework for understanding and supporting efforts aimed at 'responsible innovation'. The framework was developed in part through work with one of the first major research projects in the controversial area of geoengineering, funded by the UK Research Councils. We describe this case study, and how this became a location to articulate and explore four integrated dimensions of responsible innovation: anticipation, reflexivity, inclusion and responsiveness. Although the framework for responsible innovation was designed for use by the UK Research Councils and the scientific communities they support, we argue that it has more general application and relevance.