International Handbook on Responsible Innovation 2019
DOI: 10.4337/9781784718862.00018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamics of responsible innovation constitution in European Union research policy: tensions, possibilities and constraints

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Following the original Science and Society Action Plan (EC 2001b), the funding opportunities of the last three framework programmes (FPs) -'Science and Society' (SaS), FP6 (2002FP6 ( -2006; 'Science in Society' (SiS), FP7 (2007-2013); and 'Science with and for Society' (SwafS), FP8 (2014-2020)reflect some of this evolution, which is being widely studied both in academic papers and in policy reports (Owen et al 2012;Rodríguez et al 2019;EC 2016). Since 2010, citizen science has been explicitly placed in different European science policy frameworks, both aligned with the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy and related to more specific areas such as the Digital Agenda, Science 2.0, RRI and Open Science, and SDGs.…”
Section: The Bigger Picturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Following the original Science and Society Action Plan (EC 2001b), the funding opportunities of the last three framework programmes (FPs) -'Science and Society' (SaS), FP6 (2002FP6 ( -2006; 'Science in Society' (SiS), FP7 (2007-2013); and 'Science with and for Society' (SwafS), FP8 (2014-2020)reflect some of this evolution, which is being widely studied both in academic papers and in policy reports (Owen et al 2012;Rodríguez et al 2019;EC 2016). Since 2010, citizen science has been explicitly placed in different European science policy frameworks, both aligned with the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy and related to more specific areas such as the Digital Agenda, Science 2.0, RRI and Open Science, and SDGs.…”
Section: The Bigger Picturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…La ciudadanía, más que como una fuente legítima de conocimiento (potencialmente disruptiva, o contestataria), se representa aquí como una agencia al servicio del propio sistema, al atribuírsele «a central and transversal role to play in bringing innovation to the market» (EC, 2016: 17). 10 Lo que esto significa es que las propuestas a favor de una innovación responsable más radicalmente inclusiva, o abierta, deben medirse a la luz de la tensión fundamental entre las demandas por un progreso tecnoindustrial más socialmente responsable y las dinámicas político-epistémicas firmemente comprometidas con el desarrollismo y la competitividad (Owen y Pansera, 2019;Rodríguez, Eizagirre e Ibarra, 2019;von Schomberg y Blok, 2021). En ese sentido, a pesar de que estas iniciativas parezcan representar un salto cualitativo en comparación al modelo de control instrumental de riesgos -en función del cual la actividad científico-tecnológica se mantiene en lo fundamental impermeable, o autónoma, respecto a determinados intereses y preocupaciones sociales tradicionalmente dejados de lado-, ellas mismas parecen verse limitadas en lo que respecta a su potencial real para transformar las prácticas de investigación e innovación (Novitzky et al, 2020;Stirling, 2016).…”
Section: Otra Innovación Responsable Parece Posible: Rri Y Open Scienceunclassified
“…On the one hand, at the declarative level, policies urge innovation processes to generate societally desirable outcomes, particularly in response to global objectives such as the Sustainable Development Goals (von Schomberg 2019). On the other hand, at the operational level, the integration of RI faces structural tensions with other policy goals, such as scientific excellence and economic value (Rodríguez et al 2019). As a result, frameworks of RI are exposed to potential instrumentalization, while falling short on the promoted ambitions of the EU (Novitzsky et al 2020).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%