A Mobilising Concept? Unpacking Academic Representations of Responsible Research and Innovation

Governing beyond the project: Refocusing innovation governance in emerging science and technology funding

This article analyses how a recent idiom of innovation governance, 'responsible innovation', is enacted in practice, how this shapes innovation processes, and what aspects of innovation are left untouched. Within this idiom, funders typically focus on one point in an innovation system: researchers in projects. However, the more transformational aspirations of responsible innovation are circumscribed by this context. Adopting a mode of critique that assembles, this article considers some alternative approaches to governing the shared trajectories of science, technology, and society. Using the idea of institutional invention to focus innovation governance on four inflection points-agendas, calls, spaces, evaluation-would allow funding organizations and researchers to look 'beyond the project', developing new methods to unpack and reflect on assumed purposes of science, technology, and innovation, and to potentially reconfigure the institutions that condition scientific practice.

Creating a developmental framework for evaluating RRI implementation in research organisations

The evaluation of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) actions presents important challenges for the key stakeholders engaged in the process of RRI implementation, such as policy makers, programme managers, and researchers. While there is a considerable body of literature on the conceptualization of responsibility in research and a plethora of attempts to practice RRI, there is a need for increased attention to the monitoring and evaluation of case studies of RRI implementations in research organisations, in particular regarding their structural change effects. This paper aims to discuss a contextualised developmental framework for evaluating RRI implementation in research organisations, with a specific focus on achieving structural change through tailor-made action plans. The framework, developed through RRI evaluation work in the field of biosciences, adopts a systemic and process-oriented perspective, encompassing participatory, anticipatory, reflexive, and responsive dimensions. Concrete empirical examples from bioscience organizations are provided to illustrate how the framework relates to specific conditions, experiences, and solutions, demonstrating how conceptual insights have emerged from real-life practices and data analysis. While the framework was initially customized for the specific contexts of six bioscience research organizations, it holds potential for broader relevance and applicability in addressing challenges related to RRI design, implementation, and evaluation.

Knowledge, Information, and Data Readiness Levels (KaRLs) for Risk Assessment, Communication, and Governance of Nano-, New, and Other Advanced Materials

The obvious benefits derived from the increasing use of engineered nano-, new, and advanced materials and associated products have to be weighed out by a governance process against their possible risks. Differences in risk perception (beliefs about potential harm) among stakeholders, in particular nonscientists, and low transparency of the underlying decision processes can lead to a lack of support and acceptance of nano-, new, and other advanced material enabled products. To integrate scientific outcomes with stakeholders needs, this work develops a new approach comprising a nine-level, stepwise categorization and guidance system entitled "Knowledge, Information, and Data Readiness Levels" (KaRLs), analogous to the NASA Technology Readiness Levels. The KaRL system assesses the type, extent, and usability of the available data, information, and knowledge and integrates the participation of relevant and interested stakeholders in a cocreation/codesign process to improve current risk assessment, communication, and governance. The novelty of the new system is to communicate and share all available and relevant elements on material related risks in a user/stakeholder-friendly, transparent, flexible, and holistic way and so stimulate reflection, awareness, communication, and a deeper understanding that ultimately enables the discursive process that is needed for the sustainable risk governance of new materials.

Participative leadership, ethical climate and responsible innovation perceptions: evidence from South Korea

This study explores a novel process linking participative leadership (PL) to responsible innovation (RI) perceptions through ethical climate. It also investigates the moderating role of managerial discretion in this process. Two-wave survey data were collected from employees working for technology firms in South Korea. Findings show that the link between PL and RI perceptions is mediated by ethical climate and that the relationship between ethical climate and RI as well as the indirect relationship between PL and RI are moderated by managerial discretion. This study expands the theoretical research perspective on consequences and mechanisms of PL, uncovers a new driver of ethical climate, expands research on the outcomes of ethical work climates, discovers new antecedents of RI perceptions, and enriches the RI literature by exploring mechanisms and boundary conditions in which RI perceptions are formed within organizations in Asia Pacific, specifically South Korea. This study provides a good approach for managers in Asian countries to follow if they wish to establish positive perceptions of an ethical climate and RI among their employees that are important to achieve organizational success.

Artificially Intelligent Super Computer Machines and Robotics: Apprehensions and Challenges – A Call for Responsible Innovation Framework

“Industrial revolution 4.0” is a term that is becoming increasingly popular among academics. A number of articles have been carved to emphasize the beneficial aspects of the stated issue under many titles such as cyber-physical systems, internet of things, artificial intelligence, smart manufacturing, digitalization of industrial production, and so on. However, few academics have delved into the negative or dark side of such a profound technological paradigm change, especially the artificially intelligent robotics, creating a large knowledge vacuum. Because of this, little is known about the negative repercussions of artificial intelligence (AI), a key component of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (or IR 4.0). It is an open secret now that AI machines may have serious impacts on human autonomy, fairness, justice, and agency. These unanticipated consequences have resulted in the development of an emerging concept, that is, responsible innovation. The responsible innovation framework binds the firm ethically, morally, and socially to be responsible, environmentally friendly, humanitarian, and business-oriented while developing innovative products. The current study proposes an integrated responsible innovation framework that acts as a science governance mechanism and considers organizations and stakeholders collectively responsible for upcoming technological innovations. This study has suggested several implications for policymakers.

Responsible innovation and ethical corporate behavior in the Asian fashion industry: A systematic literature review and avenues ahead

Fashion firms have transferred their manufacturing processes to Asia, seeking minimum labor costs, supported by the academic literature’s proposals for alternative supply chain configurations to maximize profits. Fashion industry has undergone public analysis, facing demands for greater transparency about environmental and social sustainability. The growing public awareness of sustainability issues has led firms to declare their commitment to sustainable resources, but few changes have been registered. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe listed technological innovation as a key tool for making the fashion industry transparent and traceable regarding sustainability and circularity. The research and responsible innovation framework indicate appropriate ways to manage innovation from a responsible and ethical perspective, according to ethical corporate behaviour (ECB), particularly in the industries characterized by productive phases processed in more countries, such as the fashion industry. However, the linkages between responsible innovation, ECB towards innovative and sustainable business models, and their conceptualization, are still unclear in the fashion industry, achieving the goals included in the UN 2030 Agenda. This study draws on bibliometric analysis and systematic review of the literature on 114 articles published between 1990 and 2021 allows to identify the above issues in the research domains, and outline the evolutionary trajectories, as well as to explore the literary corpus about responsible innovation (RI) in the ethical corporate behaviour (ECB) of the fashion industry and its Asian suppliers. The results highlight that fashion brands strive to develop RI and ECB along their supply chain. Still, the misalignment of corporate ethics and cultural values represents a significant obstacle to the adoption of business models, especially to achieve the goals of UN 2030 Agenda. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that discusses RI as enabling driver in the ECB for fashion companies also defining a future research agenda including RI, ECB, iSBMs towards SDGs.

Discovering the Landscape and Evolution of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI): Science Mapping Based on Bibliometric Analysis

The growing number of papers on Responsible Innovation (RI) and Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) have shaped the popularity and usefulness of RI and RRI as a technology governance concept. This study reviews and assesses the development of RRI research through a bibliometric analysis of 702 RRI-focused papers and 26,471 secondary references published in the Web of Science Core Collection database between 2006 and 2020. Firstly, the paper provides a broad outline of the field based on annual growth trends, journal distribution, and disciplinary distribution for RRI publications. Secondly, this study reveals the current state of RRI research by identifying influential literature, journals, authors, countries, and institutions. Thirdly, a phased keyword analysis is conducted to determine the stage characteristics of the RRI field. Finally, based on the bibliometric analyses, this study summarises the evolutionary trajectory of RRI and makes recommendations for future research directions. As a complement to the previous qualitative literature review, the paper provides a systematic and dynamic understanding of RRI research.

Contextualizing Security Innovation: Responsible Research and Innovation at the Smart Border?

Current European innovation and security policies are increasingly channeled into efforts to address the assumed challenges that threaten European societies. A field in which this has become particularly salient is digitized EU border management. Here, the framework of responsible research and innovation (RRI) has recently been used to point to the alleged sensitivity of political actors towards the contingent dimensions of emerging security technologies. RRI, in general, is concerned with societal needs and the engagement and inclusion of various stakeholder groups in the research and innovation processes, aiming to anticipate undesired consequences of and identifying socially acceptable alternatives for emerging technologies. However, RRI has also been criticized as an industry-driven attempt to gain societal legitimacy for new technologies. In this article, we argue that while RRI evokes a space where different actors enter co-creative dialogues, it lays bare the specific challenges of governing security innovation in socially responsible ways. Empirically, we draw on the case study of BODEGA, the first EU funded research project to apply the RRI framework to the field of border security. We show how stakeholders involved in the project represent their work in relation to RRI and the resulting benefits and challenges they face. The paper argues that applying the framework to the field of (border) security lays bare its limitations, namely that RRI itself embodies a political agenda, conceals alternative experiences by those on whom security is enacted upon and that its key propositions of openness and transparency are hardly met in practice due to confidentiality agreements. Our hope is to contribute to work on RRI and emerging debates about how the concept can (or cannot) be contextualized for the field of security-a field that might be more in need than any other to consider the ethical dimension of its activities.

RRI and Corporate Stakeholder Engagement: The Aquadvantage Salmon Case

Declining public trust in science and innovation triggered the emergence and development of the responsible research and innovation (RRI) concept among policymakers and academics. Engaging stakeholders in the early phases of innovation processes has been identified as a major driver of inclusive, responsible, and sustainable development. Firms however have often adopted practices entirely opposite to those being advocated within the RRI framework, namely, reducing external interaction with stakeholders, focusing on exclusive communication with the scientific community and legal authorities while avoiding the social spotlight. We illustrate these practices, their causes and consequences using the case of the Aquadvantage salmon, the first genetically modified (GM) animal approved to petition for the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for human consumption. We find that such practices heighten the risk of social backlash, being undesirable from the perspective of both the organizations involved and society at large. Stakeholder engagement remains necessary in order to gain the minimum social acceptance required for contentious innovative products to enter the market. However, stakeholder engagement must be selective, focused on pragmatic organizations whose aims and interests are sufficiently broad to potentially align with corporate interests. Strategic stakeholder engagement offers a meeting point between the transformative aspirations of RRI framework proponents and legitimate business interests.

Responsible Innovation in SMEs: A Systematic Literature Review for a Conceptual Model

Responsible innovation has always been an important issue in discourses addressing the major challenges faced by humankind in terms of natural resource degradation, climate change, economic progress and societal well-being. However, its integration into industry is still in its infancy, and even more so when it comes to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The aim of this research is to use a systematic literature review to develop a conceptual model for responsible innovation and its relationship with SME performance, in connection with sustainable innovation and corporate social responsibility practices. A bibliometric analysis of 102 articles collected between 2000 and April 2020 from the Web of Science database was used, in addition to the systematic literature review using the Gephi and NVivo software. The study presents an overview of the articles, authors, and most influential journals and research clusters identified, and provides a solid conceptual framework to be applied in this field and in the context of SMEs.

Conceptualising technology, its development and future: The six genres of technology

One approach to developing futuristic views of technology is to draw upon experience and expertise. However, this becomes increasingly speculative as one moves to more distant timelines and visionary technological forms. This raises the question of whether it is possible to rationally predict how a technology development trajectory might unfold into the future, perhaps to some 'ultimate form', that is accessible, surfaces the necessary technological features for development as well as considers the implications for human-artefact relationships. The proposed approach is conceptually grounded in a parsimonious framework that examines different configurations of human-artefact relationships, revealing 'Six Genres of Technology'. This suggests how the shift from human-human to artefact-artefact and the increasing autonomy of the artefacts (technological beings), introduces specific features to each of the six Genres. Four features are identified in the later Genres that in combination, could be construed as, or indeed pose a threat: autonomy, intelligence, language, and autopoiesis. This paper advances the debate about future technological developments by using the proposed framework to structure an argument about the key issues that should be discussed today - so that the developments of tomorrow can be more reflectively considered, appropriately debated and knowingly pursued.

Responsible Innovation for Sustainable Development Goals in Business: An Agenda for Cooperative Firms

In this contribution, we explore the possibilities of Responsible Innovation (RI) to assess and support the engagement of businesses in the spectrum of Social and Solidarity Economy (SSE) and, in particular, cooperatives to the implementation of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) at the firm level. We conduct a critical review of the academic literature on sustainable development and responsible innovation, focusing on the role of business to identify how firms in the spectrum of SSE can contribute through responsible innovation to the sustainable development agenda and how firms in the spectrum of SSE can benefit from it. Results suggest that firms can benefit from responsible innovation in the transformation of their business models. On the other hand, firms in the spectrum of SSE contribute to extending the scope of SDGs to business, not focusing on what cooperatives do by their nature (e.g., principles and values), but their contribution to key horizontal enablers (e.g., partnership and innovation) for the integration of firms in the sustainable development agenda. To our knowledge, this is the first time that the relationship between SSE firms and RI is assessed from the perspective of firms’ contribution to SDGs. Further research is needed to sophisticate the translation of particular tools developed in the framework of RI to firms in the spectrum of SSE and, in particular, cooperative firms.

Mapping RRI Dimensions and Sustainability into Regional Development Policies and Urban Planning Instruments

Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) is an inclusive approach to the research and innovation process. Regional and local authorities are encouraged to take advantages of RRI in order to address the complexity of the interplay between science and society, especially as it affects territorial development policies. However, adopting the RRI approach is not an immediate or linear process. Consciously or not, many territories have already adopted policies and planning instruments that incorporate RRI, generating effects on the spatial scales. The aim of this study is to provide a methodology to map the inclusion of RRI dimensions (i.e., public engagement, open access, gender, ethics, science education) into regional development policies and spatial planning instruments, in order to detect integrated strategies and elements that are sustainable, open, inclusive, anticipative and responsive. The mapping methodology has been applied to three territorial pilot cases. The results provide the territories with a baseline to improve the integration of the RRI approach in their commitments to develop self-sustaining research and innovation ecosystems. Through the lessons learnt from the pilot cases, recommendations are drawn for the integration of RRI in spatial and urban planning policies and tools.

Transforming Scientists' Understanding of Science-Society Relations. Stimulating Double-Loop Learning when Teaching RRI

The problem of developing research and innovation in accordance with society's general needs and values has received increasing attention in research policy. In the last 7 years, the concept of "Responsible Research and Innovation" (RRI) has gained prominence in this regard, along with the resulting question of how best to integrate awareness about science-society relations into daily practices in research and higher education. In this context, post-graduate training has been seen as a promising entrance point, but tool-kit approaches more frequently have been used. In this paper, we present and analyze an experiment-in the format of a Ph.D. course for early-career researchers-deploying an alternative approach. Drawing on Argyris and Schön's (1974) framing of reflective practice, and their distinctions between espoused theories and theories-in-use, the analyzed course endeavored to stimulate double-loop learning. Focusing on dislocatory moments, this paper analyses how the course tried to teach participants to reflect upon their own practices, values, and ontologies, and whether this provided them with the resources necessary to reflect on their theories-in-use in their daily practices.

AMICAI: A Method Based on Risk Analysis to Integrate Responsible Research and Innovation into the Work of Research and Innovation Practitioners

The integration of ethics into the day-to-day work of research and innovation (R&I) is an important but difficult challenge. However, with the Aachen method for identification, classification and risk analysis of innovation-based problems (AMICAI) an approach from an engineering perspective is presented that enables the integration of ethical, legal and social implications into the day-to-day work of R&I practitioners. AMICAI appears in particular capable of providing a procedural guidance for R&I practitioners based on a method established in engineering science, breaking down the object of consideration into partial aspects and prioritizing the innovation-based problems in dependence of potential risk. This enables the user to apply AMICAI continuously during all stages of the research and development (R&D) process and to analyze and choose between certain sociotechnical alternatives. In this way, problems that affect ethical, legal, and social aspects can be understood, reflected and considered in the mostly technically focused R&D process. The paper gives a general guidance about AMICAI by describing principles and assumptions, providing the steps of analysis and application aids, giving an example application, explaining the necessary adjustments of AMICAI compared to the methodical basis of failure mode, effects, and criticality analysis and discussing the advantages and limits. AMICAI's simple applications can stimulate interdisciplinary cooperation in the R&D process and be a starting point for the development of an "open RRI risk analysis platform" allowing society to evaluate innovation-based problems.

Private and public values of innovation: A patent analysis of synthetic biology

•

Patent documents are a signalling mechanism about innovation values.

•

Extant patent valuation literature tends to overlook the public value of innovation.

•

Both private and public value propositions are found in patent documents.

•

Public value propositions are less frequent but more diverse.

•

Analysing private and public values in patents offers innovation policy insights.

Emerging science and technology fields are increasingly expected to provide solutions to societal grand challenges. The promise of such solutions frequently underwrites claims for the public funding of research. In parallel, universities, public research organizations and, in particular, private enterprises draw on such research to actively secure property rights over potential applications through patenting. Patents represent a claim to garner financial returns from the novel outcomes of science and technology. This is justified by the potential social value promised by patents as they encourage information sharing, further R&D investment, and the useful application of new knowledge. Indeed, the value of patents has generated longstanding academic interest in innovation studies with many scholars investigating its determinants based on econometric models. Yet, this research has largely focused on evaluating factors that influence the market value of patents and the gains from exclusivity rights granted to inventions, which reflect the private value of a patent. However, the patent system is a socially shaped enterprise where private and public concerns intersect. Despite the notion of the social utility of inventions as a patenting condition, and evidence of disconnection between societal needs and the goals of private actors, less attention has been paid to other interpretations of patent value. This paper investigates the various articulations of value delineated by patents in an emerging science and technology domain. As a pilot study, we analyse patents in synthetic biology, contributing a new analytical framework and classification of private and public values at the intersections of science, economy, and society. After considering the legal, business, social and political dimensions of patenting, we undertake a qualitative and systematic examination of patent content in synthetic biology. Our analysis probes the private and public value propositions that are framed in these patents in terms of the potential private and public benefits of research and innovation. Based on this framework, we shed light on questions of what values are being nurtured in inventions in synthetic biology and discuss how attention to public as well as private values opens up promising avenues of research in science, technology and innovation policy.

Research Profiling for Responsible and Sustainable Innovations

The issues of responsible and sustainable innovations have been attracting the growing attention of the ranks of scholars in recent years. However, this amassing productivity in the field has not been mapped and profiled thoroughly, yet. Therefore, the aim of the paper is to map the research output related to the concepts of responsible and sustainable innovations with the method of research profiling. The analysis consists of three components: general research profiling, subject area profiling and topic profiling conducted with the use of Scopus database. The research process is directed at answering three research questions: (1) who are the main contributors within the scholarly community? why? so what? (2) how is the research output distributed among subject areas? why? so what? (3) what are the central topics and issues discussed within the research field? why? so what? First of all, key contributing countries, research institutions, journals, and authors are identified in order to characterize the scholarly community working in the field. Secondly, research output is profiled through the prism of respective subject areas. This type of profiling aims at discovering varieties among key journals, authors and core references distributed across various subject areas. Thirdly, topic analysis is conducted in order to point out most crucial aspects studied in the body of literature in the field. The research sample consists of 1,083 publications indexed in Scopus database, including the phrases ‘responsible innovation’ or ‘sustainable innovation’ within their titles, keywords, and abstracts (topic search). The findings from the general research profiling confirm the growing interest of academia in exploring and investigating the issues of responsible and sustainable innovations. The leading contributors in the field are scholars and research institutions from the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Dutch universities and research centers occupy three top three positions in regard to the number of publications. Among them, Delft University of Technology is the unquestionable leader. Journal of Cleaner Production and Journal of Responsible Innovation are found to be the most prolific and highly recognized source titles in the field. Subject area profiling shows a relatively high level of interrelatedness among the four leading subject areas i.e., Business, Management and Accounting, Engineering, Social Sciences, and Environmental Science in regard to authors, source titles and core references. Topic profiling indicates two leading thematic streams in the research field focused on the features and core aspects of responsible and sustainable innovations, and the relationships of the concept with people (human, humans), research, ethics, and technology. Discussion of research findings is focused around comparing and contrasting three overlapping concepts (i.e., responsible research and innovation, responsible innovation, and sustainable innovation), providing the critical assessment of the reasons for the scholarly research to have developed along with certain patterns and identifying unexplored aspects or possible future avenues of research.

Aligning sustainability assessment with responsible research and innovation: Towards a framework for Constructive Sustainability Assessment

Emerging technologies are increasingly promoted on the promise of tackling the grand challenge of sustainability. A range of assessment and governance approaches seek to evaluate these claims, but these tend to be applied disparately and lack widespread operationalisation. They also face specific challenges, such as high levels of uncertainty, when it comes to emerging technologies. Building and reflecting on both theory and practice, this article develops a framework for Constructive Sustainability Assessment (CSA) that enables the application of sustainability assessments to emerging technologies as part of a broader deliberative approach. In order to achieve this, we discuss and critique current approaches to analytical sustainability assessment and review deliberative social science governance frameworks. We then develop the conceptual basis of CSA - blending life-cycle thinking with principles of responsible research and innovation. This results in four design principles - transdisciplinarity, opening-up, exploring uncertainty and anticipation - that can be followed when applying sustainability assessments to emerging technologies. Finally, we discuss the practical implementation of the framework through a three-step process to (a) formulate the sustainability assessment in collaboration with stakeholders, (b) evaluate potential sustainability implications using methods such as anticipatory life-cycle assessment and (c) interpret and explore the results as part of a deliberative process. Through this, CSA facilitates a much-needed transdisciplinary response to enable the governance of emerging technologies towards sustainability. The framework will be of interest to scientists, engineers, and policy-makers working with emerging technologies that have sustainability as an explicit or implicit motivator.

Responsible for Responsibility? A Study of Digital E-health Startups

Responsible innovation (RI) has received increased attention from policymakers and academics as a solution to grand challenges and is viewed as the main driver for innovation. The United Nations has suggested 17 Sustainable Development Goals and responsible innovation can be seen as a tool that allows the movement of society towards reducing inequality, coping with environmental challenges and sustaining countries’ economic and societal development. Our knowledge of how businesses act responsibly in solving these challenges is scarce. An inductive analysis of 14 e-health startups in Norway, shows that responsibility is highly prevalent. Entrepreneurs have instant contact with users (patients or healthcare professionals), which increases inclusiveness, anticipation and reflection as the main elements of responsibility. However, firms’ contextual and strategic awareness of responsibility remains low, which means an absence of focused strategies to exercise responsibility. Consequently, entrepreneurial startups are prevented from reaching broader stakeholders and fully reflecting the knowledge obtained. Moreover, RI activities are often bundled with other activities on the “path” to successful commercialization. This paper contributes to and enriches the current RI understanding from a firm perspective and suggests some implications for practitioners as well as policymakers to enhance sustainable development in the healthcare sector.

Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation: A Phronetic Perspective

Across the European research area and beyond, efforts are being mobilized to align research and innovation processes and products with societal values and needs, and to create mechanisms for inclusive priority setting and knowledge production. A central concern is how to foster a culture of "Responsible Research and Innovation" (RRI) among scientists and engineers. This paper focuses on RRI teaching at higher education institutions. On the basis of interviews and reviews of academic and policy documents, it highlights the generic aspects of teaching aimed at invoking a sense of care and societal obligation, and provides a set of exemplary cases of RRI-related teaching. It argues that the Aristotelian concept of phronesis can capture core properties of the objectives of RRI-related teaching activities. Teaching should nurture the students' capacity in terms of practical wisdom, practical ethics, or administrative ability in order to enable them to act virtuously and responsibly in contexts which are often characterized by uncertainty, contention, and controversy.

Structural Transformation to Attain Responsible BIOSciences (STARBIOS2): Protocol for a Horizon 2020 Funded European Multicenter Project to Promote Responsible Research and Innovation

BACKGROUND

Promoting Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) is a major strategy of the "Science with and for Society" work program of the European Union's Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. RRI aims to achieve a better alignment of research and innovation with the values, needs, and expectations of society. The RRI strategy includes the "keys" of public engagement, open access, gender, ethics, and science education. The Structural Transformation to Attain Responsible BIOSciences (STARBIOS2) project promotes RRI in 6 European research institutions and universities from Bulgaria, Germany, Italy, Slovenia, Poland, and the United Kingdom, in partnership with a further 6 institutions from Brazil, Denmark, Italy, South Africa, Sweden, and the United States.

OBJECTIVE

The project aims to attain RRI structural change in 6 European institutions by implementing action plans (APs) and developing APs for 3 non-European institutions active in the field of biosciences; use the implementation of APs as a learning process with a view to developing a set of guidelines on the implementation of RRI; and develop a sustainable model for RRI in biosciences.

METHODS

The project comprises interrelated research and implementation designed to achieve the aforementioned specific objectives. The project is organized into 6 core work packages and 5 supporting work packages. The core work packages deal with the implementation of institutional APs in 6 European institutions based on the structural change activation model. The supporting work packages include technical assistance, learning process on RRI-oriented structural change, monitoring and assessment, communication and dissemination, and project management.

RESULTS

The project is funded by Horizon 2020 and will run for 4 years (May 2016-April 2020). As of June 2018, the initial phase has been completed. The participating institutions have developed and approved APs and commenced their implementation. An observation tool has been launched by the Technical Assistance Team to collect information from the implementation of APs; the Evaluation & Assessment team has started monitoring the advancement of the project. As part of the communication and dissemination strategy, a project website, a Facebook page, and a Twitter account have been launched and are updated periodically. The International Scientific Advisory Committee has been formed to advise on the reporting and dissemination of the project's results.

CONCLUSIONS

In the short term, we anticipate that the project will have a considerable impact on the organizational processes and structures, improving the RRI uptake in the participating institutions. In the medium term, we expect to make RRI-oriented organizational change scalable across Europe by developing guidelines on RRI implementation and an RRI model in biosciences. In the long term, we expect that the project would help increase the ability of research institutions to make discoveries and innovations in better alignment with societal needs and values.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/11745.

Anticipating governance challenges in synthetic biology: Insights from biosynthetic menthol

This paper advances an anticipatory governance framework to investigate and prepare for the potential implications of an emerging technology. Within the growing domain of synthetic biology, we draw on an end-to-end assessment of biosynthetic menthol that incorporates consideration of multiple dimensions of production and use. Based on documentary analysis, available data, and interviews, our approach unfolds in three steps. First, we map the sociotechnical transition in menthol production, comparing existing agricultural and chemical production methods with new biosynthetic processes - or what we call the biological (bio) turn. Second, we explore the rationales, promises and expectations of menthol's bio-turn and explore the drivers of transition so as to clarify which goals and values innovation is addressing. Third, we reflect on the opportunities and challenges of such a transition to put forward an agenda for responsible innovation and anticipatory governance. The bio-turn in menthol is analysed through five responsible innovation dimensions: the potential distribution of benefits and burdens; social resilience; environmental sustainability; infrastructure and business models; and public perception and public interest. We consider the implications of our analysis both for the responsible development and application of synthetic biology for menthol and for the broader assessment and sociotechnical construction of emerging technologies.

Enacting Responsibilities in Landscape Design: The Case of Advanced Biofuels

In this article, we explore the opportunities and challenges of landscape approaches through the lens of responsible research and innovation (RRI). We use the case of transport biofuels to reflect on the capacity of landscape approaches to support the governance of emerging technologies. The case study, developed in the region of Sardinia, Italy, consists of a landscape design process for the implementation of biofuel technologies that rely on the use of non-food dedicated crops and agricultural residues. By using non-food feedstocks, the biofuel project aims to avoid competition with food production and achieve sustainability goals. Through the discussion of key dimensions of RRI in relation to this case, the article puts forward a set of critical aspects of landscape design processes that require further attention from theorists and practitioners in the field of landscape-based planning. These include the power imbalance that exists between the diverse actors involved in project activities, a need for improving the flexibility of the configuration of socio-technical systems, revising assumptions on ‘valid’ knowledge, and improving the deliberative component of planning processes.

Experiments in interdisciplinarity: Responsible research and innovation and the public good

In Europe, responsible research and innovation (RRI) has emerged as a science policy measure that demands the early integration of a broad range of social actors and perspectives into research and development (R&D). More collaboration of the social sciences and humanities (SSH) with science and engineering appears within this policy framework as a crucial element that will enable better technological development. However, RRI is new to both natural scientists and SSH scholars, and interdisciplinary collaborations are challenging for many reasons. In this paper, we discuss these challenges while suggesting that what RRI can be in a particular project is not a given but remains an empirical question. Natural scientists and SSH scholars need to coresearch RRI in an experimental mode.

Risk analysis and technology assessment in support of technology development: Putting responsible innovation in practice in a case study for nanotechnology

Governments invest in "key enabling technologies," such as nanotechnology, to solve societal challenges and boost the economy. At the same time, governmental agencies demand risk reduction to prohibit any often unknown adverse effects, and industrial parties demand smart approaches to reduce uncertainties. Responsible research and innovation (RRI) is therefore a central theme in policy making. Risk analysis and technology assessment, together referred to as "RATA," can provide a basis to assess human, environmental, and societal risks of new technological developments during the various stages of technological development. This assessment can help both governmental authorities and innovative industry to move forward in a sustainable manner. Here we describe the developed procedures and products and our experiences to bring RATA in practice within a large Dutch nanotechnology consortium. This is an example of how to put responsible innovation in practice as an integrated part of a research program, how to increase awareness of RATA, and how to help technology developers perform and use RATA. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:9-16. © 2017 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).

Synthetic biology, metaphors and responsibility

Metaphors are not just decorative rhetorical devices that make speech pretty. They are fundamental tools for thinking about the world and acting on the world. The language we use to make a better world matters; words matter; metaphors matter. Words have consequences - ethical, social and legal ones, as well as political and economic ones. They need to be used 'responsibly'. They also need to be studied carefully - this is what we want to do through this editorial and the related thematic collection. In the context of synthetic biology, natural and social scientists have become increasingly interested in metaphors, a wave of interest that we want to exploit and amplify. We want to build on emerging articles and books on synthetic biology, metaphors of life and the ethical and moral implications of such metaphors. This editorial provides a brief introduction to synthetic biology and responsible innovation, as well as a comprehensive review of literature on the social, cultural and ethical impacts of metaphor use in genomics and synthetic biology. Our aim is to stimulate an interdisciplinary and international discussion on the impact that metaphors can have on science, policy and publics in the context of synthetic biology.

Integrated assessment of emerging science and technologies as creating learning processes among assessment communities

Emerging science and technologies are often characterised by complexity, uncertainty and controversy. Regulation and governance of such scientific and technological developments needs to build on knowledge and evidence that reflect this complicated situation. This insight is sometimes formulated as a call for integrated assessment of emerging science and technologies, and such a call is analysed in this article. The article addresses two overall questions. The first is: to what extent are emerging science and technologies currently assessed in an integrated way. The second is: if there appears to be a need for further integration, what should such integration consist in? In the article we briefly outline the pedigree of the term 'integrated assessment' and present a number of interpretations of the concept that are useful for informing current analyses and discussions of integration in assessment. Based on four case studies of assessment of emerging science and technologies, studies of assessment traditions, literature analysis and dialogues with assessment professionals, currently under-developed integration dimensions are identified. It is suggested how these dimensions can be addressed in a practical approach to assessment where representatives of different assessment communities and stakeholders are involved. We call this approach the Trans Domain Technology Evaluation Process (TranSTEP).