Does Proof of Concept Trump All? RRI Dilemmas in Research Practices

Author:

Borch AnitaORCID,Throne-Holst HaraldORCID

Abstract

AbstractResponsible Research and Innovation (RRI) is described as a new way of doing science that brings science closer to society. Based on a qualitatively oriented case study, this article supports previous research indicating that researchers face a variety of ethical problems and dilemmas when implementing RRI for the first time. These include difficulties with anticipating and controlling future impacts, an asymmetry of power between project partners and an elusive understanding of the RRI concept. The researchers’ challenges were rooted in conventional research ethics and could be boiled down to one core dilemma: If RRI had been applied from the very beginning of the project period, the chance of realising proof of concept within the scheduled time may decrease. The researchers’ solution to this dilemma was to prioritize proof of concept and postpone RRI activities to later stages of the project. If RRI is expected to live up to its ambition of representing a new way of doing science, more effort is needed at the political level to facilitate change.

Funder

The Research Council of Norway

OsloMet - Oslo Metropolitan University

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Management of Technology and Innovation,Health Policy,Issues, ethics and legal aspects,Health(social science)

Reference61 articles.

1. Blok, V., & Lemmens, P. (2015). The emerging concept of responsible innovation. Three reasons why it is questionable and calls for a radical transformation of the concept of innovation. In B-J. Koops, I. Oosterlaken, H. Romijn, T. Swierstra, & J. van den Hoven (Eds.), Responsible innovation 2 (pp. 19–35). Cham: Springer.

2. Borch, A., Vittersø, G., & Stø, E. (2015). Studying sustainable change: From ABC to practice. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 24(2), 102–107.

3. Burget, M., Bardone, E., & Pedaste, M. (2017). Definitions and conceptual dimensions of responsible research and innovation: A literature review. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9782-1.

4. Bush, A. (1945). Science The Endless Frontier. A Report to the President by Vannevar Bush, Director of the Office of Scientific Research and

5. Development, July 1945 (p. 194). Washington: United States Government Printing Office.

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3