In response to widespread policy prescriptions for responsible innovation, social scientists and engineering ethicists, among others, have sought to engage natural scientists and engineers at the ‘midstream’: building interdisciplinary collaborations to integrate social and ethical considerations with research and development processes. Two ‘laboratory engagement studies’ have explored how applying the framework of midstream modulation could enhance the reflections of natural scientists on the socio-ethical context of their work. The results of these interdisciplinary collaborations confirm the utility of midstream modulation in encouraging both first- and second-order reflective learning. The potential for second-order reflective learning, in which underlying value systems become the object of reflection, is particularly significant with respect to addressing social responsibility in research practices. Midstream modulation served to render the socio-ethical context of research visible in the laboratory and helped enable research participants to more critically reflect on this broader context. While lab-based collaborations would benefit from being carried out in concert with activities at institutional and policy levels, midstream modulation could prove a valuable asset in the toolbox of interdisciplinary methods aimed at responsible innovation.

No abstract

As part of a larger trend across industrialized nations, European research policy discourse has placed increasing emphasis on socio-technical integration: the explicit incorporation of activities devoted to broader social aspects into scientific activities. In order to compare these high-level integration discourses against patterns at the level of resource allocation, we analyze nearly 2,500 research solicitations from the three European Framework Programmes for R&D during the period 1998-2010. We identify four distinct types of integration (socioethical, stakeholder, socio-economic and industrial) that occur either as core or parallel components of R&D solicitations. Quantitative analysis reveals an overall trend towards increasing integration, with requests integrating industrial and socio-economic aspects substantially outnumbering those integrating socio-ethical and stakeholder aspects-by a 2 to 1 margin. Meanwhile, calls for socio-technical integration have become slightly more extensive (ranging across a broader range of research areas addressed), significantly more pervasive (shifting from the periphery to the core of R&D practices), and arguably less diverse (involving a wider variety of integration types) over time. The relative lack of attention to socio-ethical aspects and stakeholder participation in European research is particularly notable given that we focus on potentially controversial areas (life sciences, energy, and nanotechnology), which likely overemphasizes the prevalence of integration throughout the Framework Programmes.

No abstract