Abstract
Projects that deal with unconventional ways to produce, store, or transport energy often give rise to resistance by local communities. The value-laden basis of such resistance is often ignored by decision makers. This chapter operationalizes the concept of Responsible Innovation by using and adapting the approach of value sensitive design. This approach holds that the variety of stakeholders’ values might be taken as a point of departure for the (re)design of a technological system in such a way that divergent values can be accommodated. The scope of value sensitive design can be extended beyond the technology, however. Values are also embedded in the institutional context and in the processes of interaction between stakeholders. Hence, the prevention of controversies over conflicting values may be pursued by redesigning the institutional context, and by taking the dynamics of stakeholder interaction explicitly into account.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Although economists use the word ‘actor’ rather than ‘stakeholder’ in this context, we use the word ‘stakeholder’ throughout this chapter for reasons of consistency. A stakeholder is defined as any person or party who is affected by, or can affect, the technology and/or its institutional and societal context.
References
Beierle, T.C., and D.M. Konisky. 2000. Values, conflict, and trust in participatory environmental planning. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 19: 587–602.
Bell, D., T. Gray, and C. Haggett. 2005. The ‘social gap’ in wind farm siting decisions: Explanations and policy responses. Environmental Politics 14: 460–477.
Broekhans, B., A. Correljé, and J. Van Ast. 2010. Allemaal op de bok. Kijk op waterveiligheid, 123.
Coase, R.H. 1960. The problem of social cost. Journal of Law and Economics 3: 1.
Commons, J.R. 1936. Institutional economics. The American Economic Review 26: 237–249.
Correljé, A., and B. Broekhans. 2013. Floodrisk management in the Netherlands after the 1953 flood: A competition between the public value(s) of water. Journal of Flood Risk Management.
Correlje, A.F., and J.P. Groenewegen. 2009. Public values in the energy sector: Economic perspectives. International Journal of Public Policy 4: 395–413.
Devine-Wright, P. 2012. Renewable energy and the public: From NIMBY to Participation: London: Routledge.
Eden, C. 1996. The stakeholder/collaborator strategy workshop. In Creating collaborative advantage, 44–56. London: Sage.
Ellis, G., J. Barry, and C. Robinson. 2007. Many ways to say ‘no’, different ways to say ‘yes’: Applying Q-methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 50: 517–551.
Feenstra, C., T. Mikunda, and Brunsting, S. 2012. What happened in Barendrecht?! Case study on the planned onshore carbon dioxide storage in Barendrecht, the Netherlands. Policy Studies, 2011, 2010.
Friedman, B. and P.H. Kahn Jr. 2000. New directions: A value-sensitive design approach to augmented reality. In Proceedings of DARE 2000 on designing augmented reality environments, 163–164. New York: ACM.
Friedman, B. and Peter H. Kahn Jr. 2000. New directions: A value-sensitive design approach to augmented reality. In Proceedings of DARE 2000 on designing augmented reality environments, 163–164. Elsinore, Denmark: ACM.
Friedman, B. and P.H. Kahn Jr. 2002. Human values, ethics, and designed. The human-computer interaction handbook, 1177–1201. New Jersey: L. Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Manders-Huits, N. 2011. What values in design? The challenge of incorporating moral values into design. Science and Engineering Ethics 17: 271–287.
Nissenbaum, H. 2005. Values in technical design. In Encyclopedia of science, technology and society, ed. C. Mitcham. MacMillan: New York.
Oudshoorn, N., A.R. Saetnan, and M. Lie. 2002. On gender and things: Reflections on an exhibition on gendered artifacts. Women’s Studies International Forum 25: 471–483.
Persson, M. 2012. Bodem-oorlog De Volkskrant, 7 January 2012.
Roeser, S. 2011. Nuclear energy, risk, and emotions. Philosophy and Technology 24: 197–201.
Taebi, B., and J.L. Kloosterman. 2014. Design for values in nuclear technology. In Handbook of ethics, values, and technological design: Sources, Theory, Values and Application Domains, ed. J. Van den Hoven, P. Vermaas and I. Van de Poel. Dordrecht: Springer.
Taebi, B., A. Correljé, E. Cuppen, M. Dignum, and U. Pesch. 2014. Responsible innovation as an endorsement of public values: The need for interdisciplinary research. Journal of Responsible Innovation 1: 118–124.
Van De Poel, I.R. 2009a. De Oosterscheldekering. Een voorbeeld van waardenbewust ontwerpen. In De politiek der dingen, ed. F. Bolkestein, J.M. Van Den Hoven, I.R. Van Den Poel, and I. Oosterlaken, 63–78. Budel: Damon.
Van De Poel, I.R. 2009b. Values in engineering design. In Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences, ed. A. Meijer, 973–1006. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Van De Poel, I. 2014. Translating values into design requirements. In Philosophy and Engineering: Reflections on practice, principles and process, ed. D. Mitchfelder, N. Mccarty and D.E. Goldberg, 253–266. Dordrecht: Springer.
Van Den Hoven, J. 2005. Design for values and values for design. Information Age 4: 4–7.
Van Den Hoven, J. 2007. ICT and value sensitive design. In The information society: Innovation, legitimacy, ethics and democracy in honor of Professor Jacques Berleur sj, ed. P. Goujon, S. Lavelle, P. Duquenoy, K. Kimppa and V. Laurent, 67–72. Boston: Springer.
Van Den Hoven, J. 2008. Moral methodology and information technology. In The handbook of information and computer ethics, ed. K.E. Himma and H.T. Tavani, 49–68. New York: Wiley.
Van Den Hoven, J., P. Vermaas, and I. Van de Poel. 2014. Handbook of ethics and values in technological design. Dordrecht: Springer.
Veenman, S., D. Liefferink, and B. Arts. 2009. A short history of Dutch forest policy: The ‘de-institutionalisation’of a policy arrangement. Forest Policy and Economics 11: 202–208.
Verbeek, P.P. 2006. Materializing morality design ethics and technological mediation. Science, Technology and Human Values 31: 361–380.
Walker, G., N. Cass, K. Burningham, and J. Barnett. 2010. Renewable energy and sociotechnical change: Imagined subjectivities of ‘the public’ and their implications. Environment and Planning A 42: 931–947.
Walker, G., Devine-Wright, P., Barnett, J., Burningham, K., Cass, N., Devine-Wright, H., Speller, G., Barton, J., Evans, B. and Heath, Y. 2011. Symmetries, expectations, dynamics, and contexts: A framework for understanding public engagement with renewable energy projects. Renewable Energy and the Public. From NIMBY to Participation, 1–14.
Winner, L. 1980. Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus 109: 121–136.
Wolsink, M. 2000. Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support. Renewable Energy 21: 49–64.
Wolsink, M. 2006. Invalid theory impedes our understanding: A critique on the persistence of the language of NIMBY. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 31: 85–91.
Wüstenhagen, R., M. Wolsink, and M.J. Bürer. 2007. Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept. Energy Policy 35: 2683–2691.
Wynne, B. 1992. Misunderstood misunderstanding: Social identities and public uptake of science. Public Understanding of Science 1: 281–304.
Wynne, B. 1993. Public uptake of science: A case for institutional reflexivity. Public Understanding of Science 2: 321–337.
Wynne, B. 2001. Creating public alienation: Expert cultures of risk and ethics on GMOs. Science as Culture 10: 445–481.
Wynne, B. and Irwin, A. 1996. Misunderstanding science. The Public Reconstruction of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgements
The work for this article has been funded by NWO (the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research) [grant number 313 99 007].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Correljé, A., Cuppen, E., Dignum, M., Pesch, U., Taebi, B. (2015). Responsible Innovation in Energy Projects: Values in the Design of Technologies, Institutions and Stakeholder Interactions. In: Koops, BJ., Oosterlaken, I., Romijn, H., Swierstra, T., van den Hoven, J. (eds) Responsible Innovation 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17308-5_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17308-5_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17307-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17308-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)