Responsible techno-innovation in aquaculture: Employing ethical engagement to explore attitudes to GM salmon in Northern Europe

Bremer, Scott; Millar, Kate; Wright, Nick; Kaiser, Matthias

doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2014.12.031

Cited by 26 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, the studies are focused on bioeconomy, like the biofuel sectors [75,76], sanitation [77], foods [78], and health. In the latter theme, the studies deal with diseases such as dementia [79], public safety through neuroimaging [80], and the process of developing new drugs [35].…”

Section: Overall Article Rating General Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The study by de Jong et al [80] points to a change in perception of one stakeholder group over another group. Finally, the study by Bremer et al [78] uses stakeholder inclusion to develop policies. The authors, however, highlight the need for the inclusion of these same stakeholders in the initial stages of the process, corroborating Burget et al's [3] and Owen et al's [7] proposal.…”

Section: Overall Article Rating General Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of Stakeholders in the Context of Responsible Innovation: A Meta-Synthesis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper contributes to the sustainability debate by analyzing the inclusion dimension in the responsible research and innovation (RRI) process. RRI is claimed to be an important tool for addressing global challenges and achieving sustainable development goals. While stakeholder involvement is considered to be imperative for the RRI process, there is little empirical evidence on (1) who the stakeholders participating in the RRI process are; (2) when stakeholders participate; (3) how stakeholders’ inclusion contributes to the sustainable innovation process; and (4) who the agents are who orchestrate stakeholders’ inclusion. This paper addresses the issue of stakeholder involvement through the lens of innovation management literature by attempting to link the innovation process to the responsibility concept. We employed a meta-synthesis of empirical studies of RRI to develop a deep understanding of stakeholder inclusion. After screening 139 articles, we identified seven empirical papers highlighting RRI process, mainly from projects nested in academic contexts. The findings indicate that multiple stakeholders are included at a late stage of the innovation process—during the market launch. To some extent, this allows for the adaptation of the solution, but such adaptations are limited in nature. This study also identifies the agents who stimulate stakeholder inclusion as being mainly academic researchers and researchers linked to multi-institutional projects. Our findings indicate that innovation management thinking is rarely applied in the governance of research and innovation projects ‘born’ in academia. We suggest enhancing RRI theoretical development by incorporating elements of innovation management such as early inclusion of users in the innovation process. For practitioners, this means an extension of the design space to allow early stakeholder inclusion in the innovation process to ensure responsible outcomes. We also identified avenues for future research. There is a need to systematically investigate which tools and frameworks for deliberate stakeholder inclusion are relevant at the various stages of the innovation and development process.

show abstract

Section: Overall Article Rating General Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Overall Article Rating General Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Stakeholders in the Context of Responsible Innovation: A Meta-Synthesis

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is important to recognize that different roles and interest can often be conflicting, even for individual stakeholders. Although each workshop developed unique perspectives, the workshop groups as a whole recognised the uncertainties connected to GM salmon and favoured a precautionary approach (Bremer et al, 2015). Additionally, the participants weighed the welfare of salmon against the potential benefits for other stakeholders (industry vs. GM developers, big companies vs. small companies, consumers vs. environment), and found autonomy to be of importance to all stakeholders.…”

Section: Ethical Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several examples focusing on biotechnology and aquaculture have been published in recent years (Kaiser, 2005, Kaiser and Forsberg, 2001, Kaiser et al, 2007, Mepham, 2006, Mepham, 2000, Bremer et al, 2015. Within such a matrix the different interest groups, parties or entities that may be impacted by the issue at hand are listed on one axis and ethical principles such as "beneficence", "non-maleficence", "autonomy" and "justice" on the other axis.…”

Section: Ethical Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Application of a top-down approach entails that the facilitators set the matrix, while a bottom-up approach allows the participants to modify the matrix in accordance with their own perception of the issue at hand. Bremer et al (2015) facilitated workshops in Norway, Germany and the United Kingdom asking stakeholders to discuss and deliberate on ethical issues raised by GM Atlantic salmon (AquAdvantage) using the ethical matrix tool. The study had a bottom-up approach, which led to the inclusion of the scientific community as one of the stakeholders as the participants felt that the scientific community did not necessarily belong with the industry.…”

Section: Ethical Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation