Responsible research and innovation: a systematic review of the literature and its applications to regional studies

Thapa, Rajan Kumar; Iakovleva, Tatiana; Foss, Lene

doi:10.1080/09654313.2019.1625871

Cited by 57 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 77 publications

(108 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The RRI literature has been criticized for being particularly occupied with the materiality of innovation, in terms of technology development and research-driven innovation. Much RRI research has investigated the research and innovation process around the development of technologies such as nanotechnology, biotechnology, and various forms of digitalization, with an emphasis on their potential negative impacts [17]. Studies have also addressed how to implement the RRI framework in public research funding institutions throughout Europe and the USA [18].…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Place-Based Directionality of Innovation: Tasmanian Salmon Farming and Responsible Innovation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper has been to explore, in depth, the place-based conditions enabling and constraining the directionality of responsible innovation in the Tasmanian salmon farming industry, and to discuss how this case can inform the broader literature on directionality of innovations. Theoretically, we argue that the combination of literature on responsible research and innovation (RRI), regional innovation system (RIS) and discourse theory is a useful starting point for addressing innovation as a territorial complex consisting of a material dimension in terms of technologies and resources, an organizational dimension in terms of innovation systems and regulations, and a discursive dimension in terms of narratives in play. When applying the complex to analyze how place-based conditions have enabled and constrained the directionality of responsible innovation in the Tasmanian salmon industry, the case discerns that the directionality of responsible innovation arises from a rather mature and well-organized regional innovation system, which allows multiple stakeholders to articulate their narratives. Under such circumstances, responsible innovation becomes a multidimensional, interactive, and co-created phenomenon consisting of several dilemmas. Still, although the contextualization of responsible innovation is highlighted, our case study acknowledges that certain “universal” characteristics shine through. By this we mean that context sensitivity must not supersede the fact that place-based responsible innovation is always subject to some generic dynamism: under all circumstances there will be a territorial innovation complex at play.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Place-Based Directionality of Innovation: Tasmanian Salmon Farming and Responsible Innovation

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much RRI research has investigated the research and innovation process surrounding the development of sensitive technologies such as nanotechnology, biotechnology and various forms of digitalization, with an emphasis on these new technologies' potential negative impacts (Thapa, Iakovleva, & Foss, 2019). Studies have also addressed ways to implement the RRI framework in publicly funded research institutions in Europe and the U.S. (Kerr, Hill, & Till, 2018).…”

Section: Rrithe Development Of a Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding the field of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) – from responsible research to responsible innovation

Jakobsen

Fløysand

Overton

2019

European Planning Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last decade, Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has earned a prominent position in policy spheres by offering forward-looking approaches and a framework for reflecting on the societal impact of research and innovation. Nevertheless, RRI remains an immature and relatively narrow area of inquiry, with a top-down approach and guided by standardized principles. Further, the field lacks focus on how researchers, firms and other actors actually perform responsible research and innovation. By unveiling the heterogeneity of responsibility practice, this special issue broadens RRI's scope in two ways. First, by expanding RRI's narrow focus on the research processes towards an approach that also takes into account how new knowledge and new ideas are becoming research-based innovations in society. Second, by including a wider spectrum of responsible innovation processes, and not only those that are research-driven. This special issue includes 10 investigations of heterogeneous responsible innovation practices that cross sectors and regions. Using the lessons these contributions teach, we close the issue with suggestions for a new multidimensional, multi-scale avenue for RRI.

show abstract

“…While only recently introduced [1,2], the concept has proven very popular within the academic community, resulting in an explosive number of contributions in the last few years [3][4][5][6]. However, actual change in terms of practice has been more modest in scope [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

RRI and Corporate Stakeholder Engagement: The Aquadvantage Salmon Case

Callegari

Михайлова

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Responsible research and innovation: a systematic review of the literature and its applications to regional studies

Cited by 57 publications

References 77 publications

Place-Based Directionality of Innovation: Tasmanian Salmon Farming and Responsible Innovation

Place-Based Directionality of Innovation: Tasmanian Salmon Farming and Responsible Innovation

Expanding the field of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) – from responsible research to responsible innovation

RRI and Corporate Stakeholder Engagement: The Aquadvantage Salmon Case

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About