scholarly journals More democratic research and innovation

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (03) ◽  
pp. C04 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Braun ◽  
Erich Griessler
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Responsible Research And Innovation ◽  
Framework Programme ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Specific Program ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Program Line

For decades the idea that scientists, policy makers and industry know best in research and innovation has been convincingly challenged. The concept of Responsible Research and Innovation [RRI] combines various strands of critique and takes up the idea that research and innovation need to be democratized and must engage with the public in order to serve the public. The proposed future EU research funding framework programme, Horizon Europe, excludes a specific program line on research in RRI. We propose a number of steps the European Parliament should take to institutionalize RRI in Horizon Europe and beyond.

scholarly journals A key moment for European science policy

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (03) ◽  
pp. C05 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niels Mejlgaard ◽  
Richard Woolley ◽  
Carter Bloch ◽  
Susanne Buehrer ◽  
Erich Griessler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Science Policy ◽  
Considerable Progress ◽  
Responsible Research And Innovation ◽  
Framework Programme ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Science Society ◽  
European Science ◽  
Framework Programmes ◽  
Responsible Research

We argue that the commitment to science-society integration and Responsible Research and Innovation in past European framework programmes has already made considerable progress in better aligning research and innovation with European societies. The framework programmes have important socialisation effects and recent research point to positive trends across key areas of Responsible Research and Innovation within academic organisations. What appears to be a step away from the concerted efforts to facilitate European citizens' meaningful contribution to research and innovation in the upcoming Horizon Europe framework programme seems counter-productive and poorly timed.

Challenges to the Story of Innovation

2020 ◽  
pp. 23-34
Author(s):  
Michiel van Oudheusden
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Science And Technology Studies ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Responsible Research And Innovation ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Technological Decision Making

This chapter sets out the meanings attached to the concept of ‘innovation’ and asks how it has recently come to occupy the political and economic position it now holds. Drawing from science and technology studies, which has long sought to better incorporate the public in technological decision-making, it explores the impetus towards connecting ‘responsibility’ with ‘innovation’ and the context from which this derives. Finally, it examines how this impetus has become incorporated into various frameworks for Responsible (Research and) Innovation, and what is missing from this approach in terms of understanding the place of ‘innovation’ in the present political economy, and the place of politics in innovation.

scholarly journals Introduction to “Science, society and citizens: suggestions (and hopes) on how to foster RRI in Horizon Europe”

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (03) ◽  
pp. C01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marzia Mazzonetto ◽  
Angela Simone
Keyword(s):  
European Commission ◽  
Responsible Research And Innovation ◽  
Framework Programme ◽  
European Research ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Science Society ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Participatory Processes ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Current Proposal

At the beginning of May, 2018, the European Commission has presented its proposal for Horizon Europe, the framework programme which defines priorities and budget distribution for the future of European Research and Innovation (2021–2027). The announcement has raised concerns within the community of stakeholders engaged in Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), a democratization process leading to connecting science to the values and interests of European citizens by mean of participatory processes. Through this flash commentary we aim at providing a wide range of arguments, as well as strong examples and concrete suggestions, to the importance of maintaining and strengthening RRI within Horizon Europe, with the hope to inspire amendments to the current proposal.

The story of lead: a context for learning about responsible research and innovation (RRI) in the chemistry classroom

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 1145-1155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron Blonder ◽  
Esty Zemler ◽  
Sherman Rosenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Responsible Research And Innovation ◽  
Shared Understanding ◽  
Science And Society ◽  
Chemistry Curriculum ◽  
Chemistry Students ◽  
The Public ◽  
Building Trust ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Work Done ◽  
Responsible Research

Responsible research and innovation (RRI) stands at the center of several EU projects and represents a contemporary view of the connection between science and society. The goal of RRI is to create a shared understanding of the appropriate behaviors of governments, business and NGOs which are central to building trust and confidence of the public and other stakeholders in research and innovation. In this paper we describe a 4.5 hour lesson, “The Story of Lead,” which was developed for teaching RRI to high school chemistry students, based on the historical story of lead. The lesson is part of a larger module. The lesson connects the chemistry curriculum, related to the scientific aspects of lead, to the 6 RRI dimensions. We describe the progression of the lesson, provide relevant links and teaching materials, and present responses of teachers, after they tried out the lesson. The RRI dimensions are compared to prior work done in the field of Socioscientific Issues (SSI). Based on this evidence, we suggest that the lesson can be a good introduction to the topic of RRI in chemistry classrooms.

scholarly journals La investigación responsable en los estudios de audiencia y recepción

2019 ◽  
pp. 71
Author(s):  
Mónica Figueras-Maz ◽  
Gema Revuelta
Keyword(s):  
Public Access ◽  
Responsible Research And Innovation ◽  
Reception Studies ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research And Innovation ◽  
Scientific Results ◽  
The One ◽  
Innovation Practices ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Initial Impulse

La investigación responsable incluye, más allá de la ética en el contenido y el proceso, la implicación de múltiples actores y público, un acceso más fácil a los resultados científicos, la perspectiva de género, y la educación científica. El movimiento RRI (Responsible Research and Innovation) pretende que la investigación e innovación estén orientadas a conseguir resultados sostenibles, éticamente aceptables y socialmente deseables y que todo el proceso y las prácticas que comportan la investigación e innovación estén alineados con los valores, las necesidades y las expectativas de la sociedad. La investigación en comunicación, y específicamente, en audiencias y recepción, no se escapa de esta tendencia. En esta nueva concepción, se da un paso adelante respecto a la ética y se atribuye la responsabilidad no sólo al investigador sino que se avanza hacia el concepto de corresponsabilidad. En definitiva, con el impulso inicial de la Comisión Europea, se aboga por una investigación inclusiva y sostenible. Este artículo pretende, por un lado, plantear un breve repaso a la evolución y actualidad de los estudios de audiencia y recepción desde la perspectiva de las rupturas epistemológicas vividas y de los distintos retos a los que se enfrenta (conceptuales, metodológicos y éticos) y, por otro, entender el origen, evolución y tendencias del concepto de RRI para, finalmente, ver cómo puede aplicarse al estudio de la audiencia y recepción. El artículo tiene la vocación de convertirse en un texto que pueda ayudar a los investigadores del campo de la comunicación, y específicamente de las audiencias, a reflexionar sobre cómo poder incorporar la RRI a su trabajo.Responsible research includes, beyond ethics in the content and process, engagement of multiple actors and the public, access to scientific results, gender perspective, and scientific education. The RRI (Responsible Research and Innovation) movement aims to create a society where research and innovation practices are oriented towards achieving sustainable, ethically acceptable and socially desirable results related to the values, needs and expectations of society. Research in communication, and specifically in audiences and reception, does not escape this trend. In this new conception, a step forward with respect to ethics is taken and the responsibility is attributed not only to the researcher but also to the concept of co-responsibility. In short, with the initial impulse of the European Commission, an inclusive and sustainable research is advocated. This article intends, on the one hand, to present a brief review of the evolution and actuality of audience and reception studies from the perspective of the epistemological ruptures experienced and the different challenges it faces (conceptual, methodological and ethical) and, on the other hand, to understand the origin, evolution and trends of the concept of RRI and, finally, to see how it can be applied to the study of the audience and reception. The article has the vocation to become a text that can help researchers in this field to reflect on how to incorporate the RRI into their work.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document