Five rules of thumb for post-ELSI interdisciplinary collaborations

Balmer, Andrew; Calvert, Jane; Marris, Claire; Molyneux‐Hodgson, Susan; Frow, Emma; Kearnes, Matthew; Bulpin, Kate; Schyfter, Pablo; Mackenzie, Adrian; Martin, Paul

doi:10.1080/23299460.2016.1177867

Cited by 91 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Again, disappointments are well documented, ironically by the socalled post-ELSI manifesto by Balmer et al (in a British context), later to be elaborated as lessons learnt (Balmer et al 2016). Also in my own country, self-reflection and self-analysis by these integrated ELSA researchers has had a relatively pessimistic tone (Forsberg 2014, Nydal et al 2016.…”

Section: Elsi/elsa and Rri: Opportunities And Disappointmentsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Striving for Reflexive Science

Strand¹

2019

Fteval Journal for Research and Technology Policy Evaluation Issue 48/July 2019 - Proceedings of the Conference "Impact of Soci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An important aim of ELSA is creating societally robust bio-, nano-and neurotechnologies. The programme will work to explore central challenges for governance, risk, regulation, culture, and values connected to these technologies. The programme should contribute to increase reflexivity and promote learning among ELSA researchers as well as scientists." (Forskningsradet, s. a.) Likewise, a frequently stated goal for responsible innovation/responsible research and innovation (RRI), is that R&I processes become reflexive/reflective-such as in the "R" of the British "AREA" framework: "Anticipate, Reflect, Engage and Act" i. While there is no consensus at all on the overall goal and purpose of RRI in the EU-for some, the goal is reflexive practice and governance of science and technology; for others it is "better alignment" between civil society and the R&I sector-it is interesting to reflect upon the origin of the RRI concept. Except for sporadic and quite unrelated mentions, the term was introduced by philosopher and European Commission (EC) Directorate-General (DG) Research and Innovation (RTD) policy officer René von Schomberg in 2011. Interestingly, he did so with explicit reference to the potential of technology to have negative ethical and social implications: "[…] we are confronted with the Collingridge dilemma, implying that ethical issues could be easily addressed early on during technology design and development whereas in this initial stage the development of the technology is difficult to predict. Once the social and ethical consequences become clearer, the development of technology is often far advanced and its trajectory is difficult to change." (von Schomberg 2011, p. 8) In this regard the so-called Collingridge dilemma is taken to stand for the following: Technologies (created by research and innovation) have negative side-effects (such as risks and hazards), but by the time the side-effects are identified and understood, the technologies have become entrenched in society and infrastructure or otherwise difficult to remove. Neither existing modes of technology assessment, ethics procedures, risk assessment nor market mechanisms have been able to solve this problem. R&I practice and governance accordingly should become more anticipatory-better able to anticipate and avoid R&I trajectories that instantiate the dilemma. This narrative, as well as the accompanying idea that SSH knowledge and practice can contribute in the strive for reflexivity, builds on extensive scholarship-some would say back to Vico (Rommetveit et al. 2013), others to Heidegger and the Frankfurter School, and yet others would make a more easily documented claim that it builds on latter decades' "Science and Technology Studies" (STS), history, philosophy and sociology of science and technology, and related strands of scholarship.

show abstract

Section: Elsi/elsa and Rri: Opportunities And Disappointmentsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Striving for Reflexive Science

Strand¹

2019

Fteval Journal for Research and Technology Policy Evaluation Issue 48/July 2019 - Proceedings of the Conference "Impact of Soci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically for the promotion of interdisciplinary collaboration in scientific knowledge between natural sciences and social sciences, Balmer et al (2016) identify the need for: collaborative experimentation, taking risks, collaborative reflexivity, opening-up discussions of unshared goals, and neighbourliness in the recognition and relevant exploration of the differences.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fostering Interdisciplinarity: Implications for Social Sciences

Serpa¹,

Ferreira²,

Santos³

2017

IJSSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At a time when interdisciplinarity is encouraged, the aim of this article is to analyse some of its implications in contexts of teaching, research and professional practice. For this purpose, and through a literature review, the concept of interdisciplinarity is discussed. Subsequently, the paper discusses its importance and the implications of its promotion, focusing on the following aspects: scientific disciplinary identity, institutional consequences, and professional consequences. It is concluded that interdisciplinary collaboration, while being, in general, difficult to achi eve, can, provided that it is controlled, be both a source of recognition and scientific and/or professional opportunities for social sciences. However, there are also potential risks not to be overlooked, being important to be aware of them.

show abstract

“…McLeod & Nerlich, 2017;Rip, 2014;Stilgoe, 2016). As these technological developments carry with them a great deal of scientific uncertainty and typically a widespread 'fear' by innovators of potential public unrest and lack of acceptability (Marris, 2015), articulations of RRI have sought to expand longstanding frameworks dealing with the ethical, legal and societal aspects to contribute to their governance (Balmer et al, 2016;Guston, 2014). Strikingly, mundane innovation, or 'downstream' innovation which is ready for or has already reached the market, seems to have dropped off the RRI radar.…”

Section: Rri In the Context Of A Normative Turn In Innovation Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the normative turn in regional innovation policy: responsibility and the quest for public value

Uyarra

Ribeiro

Dale-Clough

2019

European Planning Studies

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The perceived ineffectiveness of traditional innovation policies in solving societal challenges such as poverty, ageing, climate change as well as problems of regional economic restructuring has motivated a recent 'normative turn' in innovation policy. This has shifted the debate on the rationales for intervention from market and system failures to accommodate more transformative views but also other approaches rooted in the notion of public value and has led innovation scholars to question not just the how and how much of innovation but also key issues of directionality, legitimacy and responsibility. By engaging the processes through which actors 'know, investigate and perform innovation', we argue that the concept of responsible research and innovation (RRI) offers a potentially useful lens for re-casting our understanding of innovationrelated decision making. We apply RRI to assessing the opportunities and challenges of public procurement as an instrument of challengeoriented and transformative innovation policy. More specifically, we look at how local authorities in the UK are using the Social Value Act to define priorities and articulate demand around social, environmental and community needs as well as coordinate different processes and actors, policy levers and processes. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Five rules of thumb for post-ELSI interdisciplinary collaborations

Cited by 91 publications

References 17 publications

Striving for Reflexive Science

Striving for Reflexive Science

Fostering Interdisciplinarity: Implications for Social Sciences

Exploring the normative turn in regional innovation policy: responsibility and the quest for public value

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About