Politicizing Responsible Innovation: Responsibility as Inclusive Governance

Eizagirre, Andoni Eizagirre; Rodríguez, Hannot; Ibarra, Andoni

doi:10.3724/sp.j.1440.101003

Cited by 30 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings draw particular attention to the prevailing external policy environment as a powerful counter-legitimating force for RI institutionalisation (Eizagirre et al, 2017), where an overwhelming political priority in the UK has been for publicly-funded research to instrumentally and unreflexively fuel innovation through a 'technologymarket dyad' (Pfotenhauer and Juhl, 2017) aimed at economic growth, productivity and national prosperity (Docherty, 2016;Perkmann et al, 2013;Pfotenhauer et al, 2019;Taylor and Woods, 2020;UKRI, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Organisational institutionalisation of responsible innovation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe the institutionalisation of responsible innovation (RI) over the last decade at the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and universities funded by it as a focal point for RI in the UK. Drawing on organisational theory we identify factors influencing the dynamics of RI institutionalisation, including forces of legitimation, entrepreneurship and decoupling. We report significant institutionalisation at the EPSRC prior to 2013, when it published its RI policy. Notwithstanding instances of experimentation and assimilation since, we report limited institutionalisation within research communities in universities as RI has encountered competing institutional logics, responsibility norms and epistemic practices. Our findings suggest an ongoing and dynamic process of translation that reflects RI's status as a performative and contested discourse 'in the making'.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Organisational institutionalisation of responsible innovation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such a trajectory should not surprise the analyst, given the reliance on universal models of innovation and innovation governance in science, technology and innovation policy (Pfotenhauer & Jasanoff, 2017a). Further, as Eizagirre and colleagues note, ‘… the inclusionary or political eagerness represented through RRI must grapple with the strategic imperative of competitiveness and economic development’ (Eizagirre, Rodríguez, & Ibarra, 2017, p. 20).…”

Section: Tensions In Mobilising Rri In the Global Southmentioning

confidence: 99%

Turning Straw to Gold: Mobilising Symmetry in Responsible Research and Innovation

Mamidipudi

Frahm

2020

Science, Technology and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article aims to reflect on the role of Science, Technology and Society (STS) research(ers) in co-constructing Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) in the Global South. By reporting on RRI research in the Global South, here the Indo-Dutch NWO-MVI project on rice straw burning in Punjab, we make an argument for approaching RRI as a symmetric process of knowledge production mobilised by local actors and researchers alike. For STS researchers to responsibly engage with local innovation systems, their activities need to go beyond knowledge provision and towards facilitating the ownership and circulation of local meanings and means to responsibly innovate. Rather than understanding RRI as a fixed framework to govern innovation practices, this article reflects on RRI as an approach that combines research with intervention. We propose that following the principle of symmetry can turn RRI into a productive tool for the mobilisation of embedded local principles that can organise innovation systems in a responsible way. In particular, symmetry allows the re-location of meanings and practices of innovation as well as the re-negotiation of multiple notions of responsible governance.

show abstract

“…It is held that when diverse stakeholders and lay people are involved in the innovation' (Brand and Blok 2019, 6). Although the inclusion principle has practical and strategic advantages (Eizagirre, Rodríguez, and Ibarra 2017), it must be remembered that it is a moral imperative. Inclusion, as a regulatory idea, does not imply that we need to discuss every topic endlessly, but that we must be open to a pluralistic discourse and implies, clearly, that no one should be excluded from the outset.…”

Section: Implications Of Civic Ethics For Rrimentioning

confidence: 99%

Civic ethics as a normative framework for responsible research and innovation

Lozano

Monsonís-Payá

2020

Journal of Responsible Innovation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) is a term used in Europe to advance in the consideration of societal and ethical dimensions of research and innovation. RRI involves two main challenges: its rationale its practical development. The legitimacy of RRI is based on its ethical foundation. Different ethical traditions, such as procedural ethics, have been identified as underpinning the RRI conceptualizations so far. The objective of this article is to examine the evolution of discursive ethics proposed by J. Habermas and K.O. Apel, and civic ethics as a normative framework for RRI, and to explore their development and feasibility and how they are affected by the tensions that such a paradigmatic change might imply.

show abstract

Politicizing Responsible Innovation: Responsibility as Inclusive Governance

Cited by 30 publications

References 23 publications

Organisational institutionalisation of responsible innovation

Organisational institutionalisation of responsible innovation

Turning Straw to Gold: Mobilising Symmetry in Responsible Research and Innovation

Civic ethics as a normative framework for responsible research and innovation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About