Methods for Practising Ethics in Research and Innovation: A Literature Review, Critical Analysis and Recommendations

Abstract

This paper provides a systematic literature review, analysis and discussion of methods that are proposed to practise ethics in research and innovation (R&I). Ethical considerations concerning the impacts of R&I are increasingly important, due to the quickening pace of technological innovation and the ubiquitous use of the outcomes of R&I processes in society. For this reason, several methods for practising ethics have been developed in different fields of R&I. The paper first of all presents a systematic search of academic sources that present and discuss such methods. Secondly, it provides a categorisation of these methods according to three main kinds: (1) ex ante methods, dealing with emerging technologies, (2) intra methods, dealing with technology design, and (3) ex post methods, dealing with ethical analysis of existing technologies. Thirdly, it discusses the methods by considering problems in the way they deal with the uncertainty of technological change, ethical technology design, the identification, analysis and resolving of ethical impacts of technologies and stakeholder participation. The results and discussion of our literature review are valuable for gaining an overview of the state of the art and serve as an outline of a future research agenda of methods for practising ethics in R&I.

Cybersecurity in Health Care

“…Nevertheless, principlism remains highly influential for scholarly thinking about ethical issues arising (not only) in the health domain (e.g. Reijers et al 2018). Hence, we use principlism as the starting point of our ethical analysis concerning cybersecurity in health.…”

Responsibility for Assisted Living Technologies

“…As Reijers et al and Cotton point out, the Ethical Matrix could well be supplemented with structured stakeholder selection in order to avoid overlooking important stakeholders (Cotton 2014;Reijers et al 2017). It would seem that the Ethical Matrix assumes that all members in a stakeholder group will assess the impact of a novel artifact in the same manner, and/or that the adherence to a stakeholder group is decisive for a valuation (Cotton 2014).…”

“…6 The domains and the dimensions are: Population health (Health relevance, Ethical, legal, and social issues, and Health equity), Health system (Inclusiveness, Responsiveness, and Level of care), Economic (Frugality), Organizational (Business model), and Environmental (Eco-responsibility) (Pacifico Silva et al 2018). 7 Reijers et al (2017) point out that ex post assessment should have a methodological solution for solving value conflicts as well as more general guidance on how to choose among different socio-technical alternatives. As I understand Reijers et al, this first demand is a move from evaluation to recommendation -or from assessment to appraisal in the HTA terminology (Sandman & Heintz 2014).…”

¿Nuevos patrones de investigación? Dinámicas de apertura y cierre en el proceso de integración socio-técnica

“…El programa ELSI se establece con el Programa Genoma Humano a inicios de 1990 en los Estados Unidos y tenía como misión anticipar las implicaciones éticas, legales y sociales de la genética y la genómica, mientras que el enfoque ELSA reconoce desde sus orígenes la necesidad de ampliar su ámbito de investigación y desbordar la naturaleza lineal que representa el estudio de las implicaciones (Zwart y Nelis, 2009;Zwart, Landeweerd y van Rooij (2014). No obstante, hay una diversidad y heterogeneidad de perspectivas y métodos sobre la práctica de la ética en las actividades científico-tecnológicas (véase Reijers et al, 2017).…”