The Emerging Concept of Responsible Innovation. Three Reasons Why It Is Questionable and Calls for a Radical Transformation of the Concept of Innovation

Abstract

In this chapter, we challenge the presupposed concept of innovation in the responsible innovation literature. As a first step, we raise several questions with regard to the possibility of 'responsible' innovation and point at several difficulties which undermine the supposedly responsible character of innovation processes, based on an analysis of the input, throughput and output of innovation processes. It becomes clear that the practical applicability of the concept of responsible innovation is highly problematic and that a more thorough inquiry of the concept is required. As a second step, we analyze the concept of innovation which is self-evidently presupposed in current literature on responsible innovation. It becomes clear that innovation is self-evidently seen as ( 1) technological innovation, (2) is primarily perceived from an economic perspective, (3) is inherently good and (4) presupposes a symmetry between moral agents and moral addressees. By challenging this narrow and uncritical concept of innovation, we contribute to a second round of theorizing about the concept and provide a research agenda for future research in order to enhance a less naïve concept of responsible innovation.

Agricultural Innovation and the Role of Institutions: Lessons from the Game of Drones

“…A recurrent theme in this ethics-related literature is that societal and environmental concerns are or should be connected to innovation (Nordgren 2012;Attfield 2014;Lubberink et al 2017;Long and Blok 2017). Thus, responsible innovation is related to the sustainability perspective (The European Commission 2011; Blok and Lemmens 2015). Therefore, the concept of responsible innovation can be defined as ''taking care of the future through collective stewardship of science and innovation in the present'' (Stilgoe et al 2013(Stilgoe et al p. 1570.…”

Philosophy of Innovation: A Research Agenda

“…Why is innovation commercial innovation and is this necessarily the case? On the other hand, it is exactly this economic paradigm of technological innovation that is at odds with the grand challenge of global warming, as the imperative of economic growth may be seen as 'responsible' for the environmental destruction, resource depletion and impoverishment of populations all over the globe (Blok and Lemmens 2015). This calls for an opening up of the concept of innovation and the philosophical reflection on a concept of innovation that is able to address the grand challenges of our time.…”

“…And, to accept alternative strategies of innovation, such as user-based or usercentred innovations, free and open source development, and commons-based peer-to-peer innovation strategies? (Blok and Lemmens 2015)?…”

“…5. How to deal with power-, vision-, goal-, sector-, and motive-deviations among stakeholders involved in responsible innovation processes (Blok and Lemmens 2015), and in the development and mainstreaming of new and emerging technologies like genetic modification, nanotechnology or synthetic biology (Blok 2014;Macnaghten and Chilvers 2013). 6.…”

The Relationship Between Ethical Organisational Culture and Organisational Innovativeness: Comparison of Findings from Finland and Lithuania

“…The latter academic discourse is comparatively new but scholars in this field highlight economic, social and environmental impacts of innovation as a process and an outcome (Blok and Lemmens, 2015;Halme and Korpela, 2014). Thus, ethical organisational culture is a set of collective characteristics that ensures responsible processes for innovative outcomes which promote the common good.…”