Responsible research and innovation: building knowledge arenas for glocal sustainability research

Abstract

In knowledge economies, the prevailing belief is that research and innovation are crucial for societal progress. The call for 'responsible' research and innovation is, however, an indication that the link between science and technology on the one hand and societal progress on the other is less unequivocal than many would like to think. This article wonders why the relationship between knowledge economies and 'responsible' research and innovation is not self-evident. It, consequently, proposes glocal sustainability research (GSR) -and an appropriate process architecture for GSR -as a translation of responsible research and innovation (RRI) and it suggests a type of knowledge arena -and some institutional preconditions for its institutionalisation -as a breeding ground for RRI. IntroductionThe European Commission pleads for responsible research and innovation (RRI) in order to respond more effectively and urgently to the grand societal challenges, such as climate change, ageing population, food, water, materials and energy safety, public health, and security (European Commission 2013; von Schomberg 2013, 51-74). Why this plea? In the first part of this article, this call for 'responsibility' is linked to the observation that the sustainability performance of knowledge economies leaves, indeed, much to be desired and this despite the fact that knowledge economies dispose of huge amounts of scientific knowledge and technological know-how. It, consequently, looks for possible reasons for this astonishing observation. In the second part, it provides some preconditions for research and innovation systems to become 'responsible', namely (a) taking local needs, values, and opportunities as starting points to consider which combinations of new and old disciplinary and practical knowledge and know-how are appropriate to respond effectively to local manifestations of global challenges and (b) checking whether this normative content complies with global ethical principles of strong sustainability, equality, and a-growth, for example, as defined in the Open Working Group proposal for Sustainable Development goals (http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgsproposal, consulted 15/12/2014). Finally, it puts a particular type of knowledge arena (Cornell et al. 2013, 60-70) forward as a breeding ground for RRI.

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

“…Therefore, the themes within this category comprise attitudes, behaviours and impacts of RRI practices in research and innovation activities. For instance, RRI practices can help establish a culture of lifecycle thinking involving critical assessment of environmental sustainability in new product development (Deblonde, 2015;Köhler, 2013;Vincent, 2013). Similarly, responsible attitudes and behaviours would build individual and collective capability to direct research and innovation towards the socioeconomic The core value judgement in risk analysis is monetary while social acceptance is measured by how much people are willing to pay.…”

Towards an inclusive European innovation policy

“…Through SWAFS and its predecessors a European community of practice has blossomed, that has produced a wealth of new ideas, practices and methods for undertaking research and innovation in an open, interactive and co-creative manner [Mejlgaard et al, 2018b]. Already evidence of the effect of "RRI" approaches to R&I are starting to manifest [Bührer et al, 2017;Deblonde, 2015; see also the commentaries of Mejlgaard et al, 2018a;Braun and Griessler, 2018, in this issue].…”

Addressing Climate Change in Responsible Research and Innovation: Recommendations for Its Operationalization

“…As introduced in [84], sustainability challenges are multifaceted and have, amongst others, the following characteristics:…”