The Institutionalisation of a New Paradigm at Policy Level

Abstract

The concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has experienced a remarkable career within the European Union’s policies for funding research and innovation, culminating in the embedding of RRI as a cross-cutting issue in the Horizon 2020 (H2020) framework programme. However, despite favourable conditions, empirical evidence shows that efforts to mainstream RRI at the level of policy practice and implementation by and large failed. With the aim of better understanding the reasons for the limited success of mainstreaming RRI, the authors draw on the concept of Deep Institutionalisation (DI) and adapt it to the analysis of institutionalisation processes related to policy practice and implementation. The adapted DI concept is applied to H2020 by using recent findings from RRI research to provide empirical illustration. The results suggest that key preconditions for the successful institutionalisation of RRI policies were not fulfilled. Specifically, broader policy debates reaching beyond the confines of a small policy arena within the European Commission, a lack of experimental embedding allowing for adjustment to different contexts, and the development of ownership in particular were not achieved. Building on the cornerstones of the DI concept, the authors conclude that attempts to mainstream RRI in H2020 have been premature.

The farm to fork strategy and the digital transformation of the agrifood sector—An assessment from the perspective of innovation systems

“…Policy in such systems must not only address blocking mechanisms, but become itself a catalyst for innovation system performance (Nevzorova & Karakaya, 2020). So far, no clear analytical standard has emerged to capture all the dimensions of directionality (Hekkert et al, 2020; Lindner et al, 2016). In this article, the classical TIS framework is therefore applied, and aspects of directionality are discussed in the conclusions.…”

Research governance for change: funding project-based measures in the field of responsible research and innovation (RRI) and their potential for organisational learning

“…For instance, it has been claimed that projects are too short-lived to achieve long-term impacts (let alone to be able to measure them) and that systemic aspects are disregarded (such as reward structures for scientists) (Fisher & Rip, 2013; Macnaghten & Chilvers, 2014; Owen et al, 2013; Ribeiro, Smith, & Millar, 2017; Rip, 2016; Shanley, Cohen, Surber, & Stack, 2022). Other studies show that expectations of the funding/programming are often unclear regarding the objectives of projects (Torka, 2006) and when focusing on the institutionalisation of RRI, a clear narrative of change is missing (Daimer, Berghäuser, & Lindner, 2022). Thus, in this paper, we take a more general approach and study the institutionalisation of RRI to discover the translation of the policy into practice in terms of organisational learning processes.…”

Ten simple rules for socially responsible science

“…It is also arguable that promoting socially responsible science should rely on institutionalization and regulation by scientific organizations rather than thrusting more responsibilities upon individual scientists. Policy and structural factors, rather than individual actions, are viewed as the key to ensuring responsibility and societal desirability of the scientific process and its outputs [2,3,34,35]. Indeed, without relevant education, clearly articulated and regulated standards, and support in their interpretation and implementation, it is unlikely that already overburdened individual scientists will successfully integrate all ethical considerations in their research.…”