A critical hermeneutic reflection on the paradigm-level assumptions underlying responsible innovation

Abstract

The current challenges of implementing responsible innovation (RI) can in part be traced back to the (implicit) assumptions behind the ways of thinking that ground the different pre-existing theories and approaches that are shared under the RI-umbrella. Achieving the ideals of RI, therefore not only requires a shift on an operational and systemic level but also at the paradigm-level. In order to develop a deeper understanding of this paradigm shift, this paper analyses the paradigm-level assumptions that are (implicitly) being brought forward by the different conceptualizations of RI. To this purpose it deploys (1) a pragmatic stance on paradigms that allows discerning ontological and axiological elements shared by the RI community and (2) an accompanying critical hermeneutic research approach that enables the profiling of paradigmatic beliefs and assumptions of accounts of RI. The research surfaces the distance of four salient RI accounts from the currently dominant techno-economic innovation paradigm RI seeks to shift. With this, our contribution helps to raise the self-awareness of the RI community about their presuppositions and the paradigm level barriers and enablers to reaching the RI ideal. This insight is needed for a successful transition to responsible research and innovation practices.

Responsible Innovation and Climate Engineering. A Step Back to Technology Assessment

“…This stands in opposition to process oriented RRI approaches as well as closely related trends within the STS community (Timmermans and Blok 2018). As discussed above the drive for participation and democratic inclusiveness may face problems of their own such as the possible power imbalance and information asymmetry between different stakeholders as well as questions of feasibility and legitimacy.…”

“…New approaches of RRI are constantly developing and challenging the traditional view on innovation. As pointed out by Timmermans and Blok (2018) this still influential traditional innovation paradigm, shown in the understanding of innovation processes by Schumpeter, is based on certain ontological assumptions: such as understanding innovation predominantly as technological innovation, a focus on economic aspects and the guidance by market-forces. These ontological assumptions correspond to a capitalist worldview, valuing innovation in economic terms and leading to the neglect of considerations for societal or ethical values beyond economic ones.…”

Synergies in Innovation: Lessons Learnt from Innovation Ethics for Responsible Innovation

“…It is of course important to highlight that criticisms have been raised against the underlying techno-economic paradigm of innovation (Bontems 2014;Blok and Lemmens 2015;Godin 2015). According to the critical assessment by Blok and Lemmens (2015: 31), "the analysis of the concept of innovation which is presupposed in current literature on responsible innovation shows that innovation is self-evidently seen as (1) technological innovation, (2) primarily perceived from an economic perspective, (3) inherently good, and (4) presupposes a symmetry between moral agents and moral addressees" (see also Timmermans and Blok 2018).…”

“…2 On the second level, our objective is to diversify the community of scholars working on RI issues. So far, Science and Technology Studies (STS) and Constructive Technology Assessment (CTA) traditions have led the debate on RI (Timmermans and Blok 2018). The "detour" by IE will bring distinct fields of applied philosophy into the dialogue on RI.…”

Technology in the Age of Innovation: Responsible Innovation as a New Subdomain Within the Philosophy of Technology

“…Instead, almost any study related to innovation both within and beyond the RI literature, self-evidently presupposes the concept of innovation in terms of technological innovation. That is to say, it has become exceptionally common to connect innovation with the field of emerging technologies (Timmermans and Blok 2018).…”