Life Sciences, Society and Policy 13 (1):1-24 (2017)
AbstractThe concept of mutual responsiveness is currently based on little empirical data in the literature of Responsible Research and Innovation. This paper explores RRI’s idea of mutual responsiveness in the light of recent RRI case studies on private sector research and development. In RRI, responsible innovation is understood as a joint endeavour of innovators and societal stakeholders, who become mutually responsive to each other in defining the ‘right impacts’ of the innovation in society, and in steering the innovation towards realising those impacts. Yet, the case studies identified several reasons for why the idea of mutual responsiveness does not always appear feasible or desirable in actual R&D situations. Inspired by the discrepancies between theory and practice, we suggest three further elaborations for the concept of responsiveness in RRI. Process-responsiveness is suggested for identifying situations that require stakeholder involvement specifically during R&D. Product-responsiveness is suggested for mobilising the potential of innovation products to be adaptable according to diverse stakeholder needs. Presponsiveness is suggested as responsiveness towards stakeholders that are not reachable at a given time of R&D. Our aim is to contribute to a more tangible understanding of responsiveness in RRI, and suggest directions for further analysis in upcoming RRI case studies.
Similar books and articles
Definitions and Conceptual Dimensions of Responsible Research and Innovation: A Literature Review.Mirjam Burget, Emanuele Bardone & Margus Pedaste - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (1):1-19.
Responsible, Inclusive Innovation and the Nano-Divide.Doris Schroeder, Sally Dalton-Brown, Benjamin Schrempf & David Kaplan - 2016 - NanoEthics 10 (2):177-188.
Moral “Lock-In” in Responsible Innovation: The Ethical and Social Aspects of Killing Day-Old Chicks and Its Alternatives.M. R. N. Bruijnis, V. Blok, E. N. Stassen & H. G. J. Gremmen - 2013 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (5):939-960.
From Computer Ethics to Responsible Research and Innovation in ICT.Bernd Carsten Stahl, Grace Eden, Marina Jirotka & Mark Coeckelbergh - 2014 - Information and Management 51 (6):810-818.
Towards a Phronetic Space for Responsible Research.Emanuele Bardone & Marianne Lind - 2016 - Life Sciences, Society and Policy 12 (1):1-18.
Moral “Lock-In” in Responsible Innovation: The Ethical and Social Aspects of Killing Day-Old Chicks and Its Alternatives.Payam Moula & Per Sandin - 2015 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 28 (5):939-960.
The Importance of Responsible Innovation and the Necessity of ‘Innovation-Care’.Xavier Pavie - 2014 - Philosophy of Management 13 (1):21-42.
A Vision of Responsible Innovation.Rene Von Schomberg - 2013 - In Richard Owen (ed.), Responsible Innovation. pp. 51-74.
Innovations, Stakeholders & Entrepreneurship.Nicholas Dew & Saras D. Sarasvathy - 2007 - Journal of Business Ethics 74 (3):267-283.
Standardising Responsibility? The Significance of Interstitial Spaces.Fern Wickson & Ellen-Marie Forsberg - 2015 - Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (5):1159-1180.
Exploring Ethical Decision Making in Responsible Innovation: The Case of Innovations for Healthy Food.V. Blok, T. H. Tempels, Pietersma Edwin & L. Jansen - 2017 - In Responsible Innovation 3. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. pp. 209-230.
The Moral Psychology of Value Sensitive Design: The Methodological Issues of Moral Intuitions for Responsible Innovation.Steven Umbrello - 2018 - Journal of Responsible Innovation 5 (2):186-200.
Action Research and Innovation in Networks, Dilemmas and Challenges: Two Cases. [REVIEW]Trond Haga - 2005 - AI and Society 19 (4):362-383.
La Dynamique de la Recherche Et Développement aux Etats-Unis : Origines Et Évolution du Système D’Innovation Américain The Dynamics of U.S. Research and Development: Origins and Evolution of the American National System of Innovation.Coste Jacques-Henri - unknown
Neuroethics and Philosophy in Responsible Research and Innovation: The Case of the Human Brain Project.Arleen Salles, Kathinka Evers & Michele Farisco - 2018 - Neuroethics 12 (2):201-211.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Responsible Innovation and Climate Engineering. A Step Back to Technology Assessment.Harald Stelzer - 2020 - Philosophy of Management 19 (3):297-316.
Responsible Innovation in Industry: The Role of a Firm’s Multi-Stakeholder Network.J. Ceicyte, M. Petraite, Vincent Blok & E. Yaghmaei - 2021 - In Bio#futures, Foreseeing and Exploring the Bioeconomy. Dordrecht, Nederland: pp. 581-603.
The Influence of Internal and External Stakeholder Mechanisms on Entrepreneurial Success: The Moderating Role of Digital Technology Adoption.Cui Yong, Saba Fazal Firdousi, Ayesha Afzal, Viktorija Florjančič & Minahil Awais - 2022 - Frontiers in Psychology 12.
References found in this work
The Emerging Concept of Responsible Innovation. Three Reasons Why It is Questionable and Calls for a Radical Transformation of the Concept of Innovation.V. Blok & P. Lemmens - 2015 - In Bert- Jaap Koops, Ilse Oosterlaken, Henny Romijn, Tsjalling Swiwestra & Jeroen Van Den Hoven (eds.), Responsible Innovation 2: Concepts, Approaches, and Applications. Dordrecht: Springer International Publishing. pp. 19-35.
Nano-Ethics as NEST-Ethics: Patterns of Moral Argumentation About New and Emerging Science and Technology. [REVIEW]Tsjalling Swierstra & Arie Rip - 2007 - NanoEthics 1 (1):3-20.
Look Who’s Talking: Responsible Innovation, the Paradox of Dialogue and the Voice of the Other in Communication and Negotiation Processes.Vincent Blok - 2014 - Journal of Responsible Innovation 1 (2):171-190.
Adapt or Perish? Assessing the Recent Shift in the European Research Funding Arena From ‘ELSA’ to ‘RRI’.Laurens Landeweerd & Hub Zwart - 2014 - Life Sciences, Society and Policy 10 (1):1-19.
Engineering and the Problem of Moral Overload.Jeroen Van den Hoven, Gert-Jan Lokhorst & Ibo Van de Poel - 2012 - Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (1):143-155.