Devices of Responsibility: Over a Decade of Responsible Research and Innovation Initiatives for Nanotechnologies
- 294 Downloads
Responsible research and innovation (RRI) has come to represent a change in the relationship between science, technology and society. With origins in the democratisation of science, and the inclusion of ethical and societal aspects in research and development activities, RRI offers a means of integrating society and the research and innovation communities. In this article, we frame RRI activities through the lens of layers of science and technology governance as a means of characterising the context in which the RRI activity is positioned and the goal of those actors promoting the RRI activities in shaping overall governance patterns. RRI began to emerge during a time of considerable deliberation about the societal and governance challenges around nanotechnology, in which stakeholders were looking for new ways of integrating notions of responsibility in nanotechnology research and development. For this reason, this article focuses on nanotechnology as the site for exploring the evolution and growth of RRI.
KeywordsNanoscience and nanotechnology Responsible research and innovation (RRI) Responsibility Governance
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- BASF. (2013a). Dialogforum Nano of BASF 2011/12. Dettenhausen: BASF.Google Scholar
- BASF. (2013b). Future research on effects of nanomaterials, 12 June. http://www.basf.com/en/company/news-and-media/news-releases/2013/06/p-13-323.html. Accessed October 26, 2016.
- BASF. (2015). This is how we implement our Code of Conduct. http://www.nanotechnology.basf.com/group/corporate/nanotechnology/en/microsites/nanotechnology/safety/implementation. Accessed December 12, 2016.
- BASF. (2016). Dialogforum Nano of BASF 2014/15. Dettenhausen: BASF.Google Scholar
- Bowman, D. M. (2014). Two steps forward, one step back: Shaping the nanotechnologies landscape through regulatory choice. In M. Hull & D. M. Bowman (Eds.), Nanotechnology risk management: Perspectives and progress (2nd ed., pp. 313–335). London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Clements, K. (2015). Back from the brink: The creation of a nuclear-free New Zealand. Wellington: Bridget Williams Books.Google Scholar
- Committee to Consider the Social, Ethical and Legal Issues Arising from In Vitro Fertilization. (1983). Report on Donor Gametes in IVF. Melbourne: Victorian Government.Google Scholar
- Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs. (2006). UK voluntary reporting scheme for engineered nanoscale materials. London: Defra.Google Scholar
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. (2016). Expectations. http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/research/framework/expectations/. Accessed December 12, 2016.
- Environmental Defense & DuPont. (2007). Nano risk framework. http://www.nanoriskframework.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/6496_Nano-Risk-Framework.pdf. Accessed October 3, 2016.
- Environmental Defense Fund. (2016a). DuPont-Safer Nanotech. http://business.edf.org/projects/featured/past-projects/dupont-safer-nanotech/. Accessed December 12, 2016.
- Environmental Defense Fund. (2016b). DuPont Nanotech Project: Endorsements and public impact. http://business.edf.org/projects/featured/past-projects/dupont-safer-nanotech/dupont-nanotech-project-endorsements-and-public-impact/?_ga=1.146583988.1418179906.1477426980. Accessed October 26, 2016.
- Environmental Defense Fund. (2016c). DuPont Nanotech Project: Government influence. http://business.edf.org/projects/featured/past-projects/dupont-safer-nanotech/dupont-nanotech-project-government-influence/. Accessed October 26, 2016.
- Environmental Protection Agency. (2008). Notice: Nansocale materials stewardship program. Federal Register, 73(18), 4861–4866.Google Scholar
- ETC Group. (2007). Civil Society Coalition Rejects Fundamentally Flawed DuPont-ED Proposed Framework. http://www.etcgroup.org/content/civil-societylabor-coalition-rejects-fundamentally-flawed-dupont-ed-proposed-nanotechnology. Accessed December 12, 2016.
- European Commission. (2006). Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC, The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Commission, ed. Official J Eur Union 30.12.2006. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=oj:l:2006:396:0001:0849:en:pdf.
- European Commission. (2008). Commission Recommendation of 07/02/2008 on a code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies research. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
- European Commission. (2009). Commission recommendation on A code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies research & Council conclusions on Responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies research. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/nanocode-apr09_en.pdf. Accessed December 12, 2016.
- European Commission. (2016). Horizon 2020—The EU framework programme for research and innovation. http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/responsible-research-innovation. Accessed December 12, 2016.
- Fiedler, F. A., & Reynolds, G. H. (1993). Legal problems of nanotechnology: An overview. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal, 3, 593.Google Scholar
- Fisher, E. (2012). Causing a STIR. International Innovation, 76–79.Google Scholar
- Fisher, E. (undated). Socio-Technical Integration Research (STIR). http://cns.asu.edu/research/stir. Accessed October 26, 2016.
- Fisher, E., & Mahajan, R. L. (2006b). Midstream modulation of nanotechnology research in an academic laboratory. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Technology and Society Division (Publication) TS. American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).Google Scholar
- Fisher, E., & Rip, A. (2013). Responsible innovation. Multi-level dynamics and soft intervention practices. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation: Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 51–74). London: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Foss Hansen, S., Maynard, A. D., Baun, A., Tickner, J. A., & Bowman, D. M. (2013). Nanotechnology—Early lessons from early warnings. In European Environment Agency (Ed.), Late lessons from early warnings 2—In praise of dissent (pp. 562–591). Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
- Grunwald, A. (2011). Ten years of research on nanotechnology and society—Outcomes and achievements. In T. B. Zülsdorf, C. Coenen, A. Ferrari, U. Fiedeler, C. Milburn, & M. Wienroth (Eds.), Quantum engagements: Social reflections of nanoscience and emerging technologies (pp. 41–58). Heidelberg: AKA GmbH.Google Scholar
- Grunwald, A. (2014). Responsible research and innovation: An emerging issue in research policy rooted in the debate on nanotechnology. In S. Arnaldi, A. Ferrari, P. Magaudda, & F. Marin (Eds.). Responsibility in nanotechnology development (pp. 191–205). Library of ethics, law and technology 13. Dordrecht: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-9103-8.
- ICTA. (2008). Principles for the oversight of nanotechnologies and nanomaterials. http://www.icta.org/files/2012/04/080112_ICTA_rev1.pdf. Accessed December 12, 2016.
- Insight Investment, Royal Society, Centre for Process Innovation and Nanotechnology Industries. (2008). Information on the responsible nanocode initiative. London: Insight Investment, Royal Society, Centre for Process Innovation and Nanotechnology Industries.Google Scholar
- Jones, R. (2008). Grand challenges for UK nanotechnology, 12 January. http://www.softmachines.org/wordpress/?p=373. Accessed December 12, 2016.
- Kaiser, M., Kurath, M., Maasen, S., & Rehmann-Sutter, C. (Eds.). (2009). Governing future technologies: Nanotechnology and the rise of an assessment regime (Vol. 27). Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
- Larédo, P., Robinson, D. K. R., Delemarle, A., Lagnau, A., Revollo, M., & Villard, L. (2015). Mapping and characterising the dynamics of emerging technologies to inform policy. Brussels: IFRIS.Google Scholar
- Mazzucato, M., & Robinson D. K. R. (2016). Directing vs. facilitating the economic development of low Earth orbit. In: P. Besha, & A. MacDonald (Eds.), Economic development of low-Earth orbit. NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of Communications (pp. 113–130). Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).Google Scholar
- Miller, S. (2015). Training showcase: The UK’s engineering and physical sciences research council’s framework for responsible innovation. http://www.rri-tools.eu/documents/10184/202174/1_RRITOOLS-EPSRC_Showcase_web.pdf/1afb9414-ee6d-432f-b3ea-c04d499ab83d. Accessed December 15, 2016.
- Miller, G., & Scrinis, G. (2010). The role of NGOs in governing nanotechnologies: Challenging the ‘benefit versus risks’ framing of nanotech innovation. In G. A. Hodge, D. M. Bowman, & A. D. Maynard (Eds.), International handbook on regulating nanotechnologies (pp. 409–445). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
- Nano & Me. (undated). About the responsible nano code. http://www.nanoandme.org/social-and-ethical/corporate-responsibility/responsible-nano-code/. Accessed October 25, 2016.
- National Industrial Chemical Notification and Assessment Scheme. (2007). Summary of call for information and the use of nanomaterials. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
- National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Technology, and Interagency Working Group on Nanoscience, Engineering and Technology. (2000). National Nanotechnology Initiative: Leading to the next industrial revolution, supplement to President’s FY 2001 budget. Washington, DC: NSTC.Google Scholar
- National Science and Technology Council; Subcommittee on Nanoscale Science, Engineering and Technology. (2003). National Nanotechnology Initiative: Research and development supporting the next industrial revolution, supplement to the President’s FY 2004 budget. Washington, DC: NSTC.Google Scholar
- NWO-MVI. (2006). Platform for responsible innovation. http://www.nwo.nl/en/research-and-results/programmes/responsible+innovation. Accessed November 1, 2016.
- OECD. (2014a). OECD reviews of innovation policy Netherlands—Overall Assessment and Recommendations. http://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/netherlands-innovation-review-recommendations.pdf. Accessed November 1, 2016.
- OECD. (2014b). Nanotechnology in the context of technology governance. Report for the working party of nanotechnology. Prepared by Douglas K. R. Robinson and Christien Enzing. DSTI/STP/NANO (2013)10/FINAL Declassified September 2014.Google Scholar
- Parandian, A. (2012). Constructive TA of newly emerging technologies. Stimulating learning by anticipation through bridging events. Dissertation, Technical University Delft.Google Scholar
- Rip, A. (2010). NanoNed flagship technology assessment. In D. Guston (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Nanoscience and Society. London: Sage.Google Scholar
- Rip, A. (2014). The past and future of RRI. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 10(17), 1–15.Google Scholar
- Robinson, D. K. R. (2010). Constructive technology assessment of emerging nanotechnologies: Experiments in interactions. Dissertation, University of Twente.Google Scholar
- Robinson, D. K. R., & Rip, A. (2013). Indications of socio-economic impacts of nanotechnologies: The approach of impact pathways. In K. Konrad, H. van Lente, C. Coenen, A. Dijkstra, & C. Milburn (Eds.), Shaping emerging technologies: Governance, innovation, discourse (pp. 153–166). Berlin: IOS Press.Google Scholar
- Robinson, D. K. R., Schoen, A., Laredo, P. Gallart, J. M., Warnke, P., Kuhlmann, S. & Matamoros, G. O. (2017). Policy lensing of futures intelligence: Research and innovation systems scenarios backcasting that speaks to policy shapers. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, forthcoming in special issue on FTA and Innovation Systems.Google Scholar
- Royal Society & The Royal Academy of Engineering. (2004). Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: Opportunities and uncertainties. London: Royal Society.Google Scholar
- Schulze Greiving, V. C., Konrad, K. E., Robinson, D. K. R., & Le Gac, S. (2016). ‘CTA-lite’ for exploring possible innovation pathways of a nanomedicine-related platform–embedded responsible research and innovation in practice. In D. M. Bowman, A. Dijkstra, C. Fautz, J. S. Guivant, K. Konrad, H. van Lente, & S. Woll (Eds.), Responsibility and emerging technologies: Experience, education and beyond (pp. 25–42). Berlin: IOS Press.Google Scholar
- Shelley-Egan, C. (2011). Ethics in practice: Responding to an evolving problematic situation of nanotechnology in society. Dissertation, University of Twente.Google Scholar
- Smithers, R. (2008). Soil Association bans nanomatter from organic products, The Guardian, 15 January. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/jan/15/organics.nanotechnology. Accessed December 12, 2016.
- Søraker, J. H., & Brey, P. A. E. (2014). Systematic review of industry relevant RRI discourses. Responsible Industry project, D 1.1, pp. 52. http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxyZXNwb25zaWJsZWluZHVzdHJ5d2Vic2l0ZXxneDoxZjQxNzhlNjZhNDZkN2Qx. Accessed October 3, 2016.
- Strand, R. (2015). Indicators for promoting and monitoring responsible research and innovation. Report from the expert group on policy indicators for responsible research and innovation. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
- Sutcliffe, H. (2008). How can business respond to the technical, social and commercial uncertainties of nanotechnology? In E. Fisher, C. Selin, & J. M. Wetmore (Eds.), The yearbook of nanotechnology in society (pp. 195–200). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Tancoigne, É., Randles, S., & Joly, P.-B. (2016). A scientometric analysis of RRI. In R. Lindner, S. Kuhlmann, S. Randles, B. Bedsted, G. Gorgoni, E. Griessler, A. Loconto, & N. Mejlgaard (Eds.), Navigating towards shared responsibility in research and innovation. Approach, process and results of the Res-AGorA Project (pp. 39–46). Self-published Ebook. http://res-agora.eu/news/navigating-towards-shared-responsibility/. Accessed December 12, 2016.
- Valdivia, W. D., & Guston, D. H. (2015). Responsible innovation: A primer for policymakers. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.Google Scholar
- van den Hoven, J., Jacob, K., Nielsen, L., Roure, F., Rudze, L., Stilgoe, J., Blind, K., Guske, A. L., & Martinez Riera, C. (2013). Options for strengthening responsible research and innovation: Report of the expert group on the state of the art in Europe on responsible research and innovation. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
- von Schomberg, R. (2011). Towards responsible research and innovation in the information and communication technologies and security technologies fields. A Report from the European Commission Services. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
- Wolfe, A. (2000). Federal policy making for biotechnology, executive branch, ELSI. In Encyclopedia of ethical, legal and policy issues in biotechnology. New York: Wiley. doi: 10.1002/0471250597.mur045.