Advertisement

Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation: A Phronetic Perspective

  • Niels Mejlgaard
  • Malene Vinther Christensen
  • Roger Strand
  • Ivan Buljan
  • Mar Carrió
  • Marta Cayetano i Giralt
  • Erich Griessler
  • Alexander Lang
  • Ana Marušić
  • Gema Revuelta
  • Gemma Rodríguez
  • Núria Saladié
  • Milena Wuketich
Original Paper

Abstract

Across the European research area and beyond, efforts are being mobilized to align research and innovation processes and products with societal values and needs, and to create mechanisms for inclusive priority setting and knowledge production. A central concern is how to foster a culture of “Responsible Research and Innovation” (RRI) among scientists and engineers. This paper focuses on RRI teaching at higher education institutions. On the basis of interviews and reviews of academic and policy documents, it highlights the generic aspects of teaching aimed at invoking a sense of care and societal obligation, and provides a set of exemplary cases of RRI-related teaching. It argues that the Aristotelian concept of phronesis can capture core properties of the objectives of RRI-related teaching activities. Teaching should nurture the students’ capacity in terms of practical wisdom, practical ethics, or administrative ability in order to enable them to act virtuously and responsibly in contexts which are often characterized by uncertainty, contention, and controversy.

Keywords

Responsible Research and Innovation RRI teaching Phronesis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The work reported in this paper was performed in the context of the “Higher Education Institutions and Responsible Research and Innovation” (HEIRRI) project, which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No. 666004. The authors wish to acknowledge the valuable advice offered by two anonymous reviewers.

References

  1. Akaygun, S., Adadan, E., Sanyal, A., & Açikel, B. (2016). Nano and health: Teacher notes. Retrieved from http://www.irresistible-project.eu/index.php/en/resources/teaching-modules. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  2. Aristotle. (2009). The Nicomachean ethics (D. Ross, Trans., revised with an introduction and notes by Lesley Brown). Oxford: OUP. ProQuest Ebook Central.Google Scholar
  3. Arnaldi, S., & Bianchi, L. (2016). Responsibility in science and technology: Elements of a social theory. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Birnbacher, D. (1999). The socratic method in teaching medical ethics: Potentials and limitations. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 2, 219–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Broerse, J. (2016). Integrating RRI in universities: Training future students in transdisciplinary research. In Keynote session at the 1st HEIRRI conference “Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation at University”, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
  6. Burget, M., Bardone, E., & Pedaste, M. (2016). Definitions and conceptual dimensions of Responsible Research and Innovation: A literature review. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Department of Information Science and Media Studies. (2015). ViSmediaVisual surveillance technologies and journalism. Retrieved from http://www.uib.no/en/infomedia/94035/vismedia-%E2%80%93-visual-surveillance-technologies-and-journalism. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  8. European Union. (2012). Responsible Research and Innovation: Europe’s ability to respond to societal challenges. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_public_engagement/responsible-research-and-innovation-leaflet_en.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  9. Felt, U., Fochler, M., Müller, A., & Strassnic, M. (2009). Unruly ethics: On the difficulties of a bottom-up approach to ethics in the field of genomics. Public Understanding of Science, 18(3), 354–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Funtowicz, S., & Strand, R. (2011). Change and commitment: Beyond risk and responsibility. Journal of Risk Research, 14, 995–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gibbons, M. (1999). Science’s new social contract with society. Nature, 402, C81–C84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glerup, C., & Horst, M. (2014). Mapping ‘social responsibility’ in science. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1(1), 31–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Griessler, E., & Littig, B. (2006). Neosokratische Dialoge zu ethischen Fragen der Xenotransplantation. Ein Beitrag zur Bearbeitung ethischer Probleme in partizipativer Technikfolgenabschätzung. In E. Buchinger & U. Felt (Eds.), Technik- und Wissenschaftssoziologie in Österreich. Stand und Perspektiven. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Soziologie. Sonderheft (pp. 131–157). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. Hutchings, B. (2006). Principles of enquiry-based learning. The University of Manchester, Centre for Excellence in Enquiry-Based Learning. Retrieved from http://www.ceebl.manchester.ac.uk/resources/papers/ceeblgr002.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  16. IRRESISTIBLE. (2014). The project bringing Responsible Research and Innovation into the classroom. A brief overview of the project. Retrieved from http://www.irresistible-project.eu/images/irr-mat/IRRESISTIBLE_folder_EN_02-2014.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  17. Italian Presidency of the Council of the European Union. (2014). Rome declaration on Responsible Research and Innovation in Europe. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/rome_declaration_RRI_final_21_November.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  18. Kjølberg, K. L., & Strand, R. (2011). Conversations about responsible nanoresearch. Nanoethics, 5, 99–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kristjánsson, K. (2015). Phronesis as an ideal in professional medical ethics: Some preliminary positionings and problematics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 36, 299–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Lindner, R., Kuhlmann, S., & Walhout, B. (2016). Developing an orientating framework for strategic reflection: The Res-AGorA responsibility navigator. Technikfolgenabschätzung: Theorie und Praxis, 25(2), 66–71.Google Scholar
  22. Mejlgaard, N., Buljan, I., Elías, N. S., Cayetano i Giralt, M., Griessler, E., Hansen, L. S., Lang, A., Marušić, A., Revuelta de la Poza, G., Strand, R., & Wuketich, M. (2016a). Stock taking/inventorying (WP2): Deliverable 2.2 state of the art review. Retrieved from http://www.guninetwork.org/files/images/imce/heirri_wp2_d2.2.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  23. Mejlgaard, N., Buljan, I., Saladié, N., Altenhofer, M., Cayetano, M., Gmelch, N., Griessler, E., Gylstroff, S., Lang, A., Marušić, A., Revuelta, G., Strand. R., & Wuketich, M. (2016b). Stock taking/inventorying (WP2): Deliverable 2.3 HEIRRI database. Retrieved from http://www.guninetwork.org/files/images/imce/heirri_wp2_d2.3.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  24. Mejlgaard, N., & Griessler, E. (2016). Monitoring RRI in Europe: Approach and key observations. 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. 115–120). Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer ISI.Google Scholar
  25. Natali, C. (2014). The book on wisdom. In R. Polansky (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Aristotle’s Nicomachean ethics (pp. 180–202). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nyre, L., Gynnild, A., & Guribye, F. (2015). Drones in education: Teaching students to make responsible journalism with new technology. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/heirriproject/docs/smart_drones_for_journalism._teachi. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  27. Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible Research and Innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy, 39, 751–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pakaluk, M. (2005). Aristotle’s Nichomachean ethics: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Puig de la Bellacasa, M. (2011). Matters of care in technoscience: Assembling neglected things. Social Studies of Science, 41, 85–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ribeiro, B. E., Smith, R. D. J., & Millar, K. (2016). A mobilising concept? Unpacking academic representations of Responsible Research and Innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23, 81–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Savery, J. R. (2015). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. In A. Walker, H. Leary, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & P. E. Ertmers (Eds.), Essential readings in problem-based learning. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Shapin, S., & Schaffer, S. (1985). Leviathan and the air-pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Shelley-Egan, C., Wright, D., Benčin, R., Riha, J. S., Strle, G., Ovadia, D., Cañedo, A. P., Angeli, C., & Sotiriou, M. (2014). SATORI deliverable D2.1Report (handbook) of participatory processes. Retrieved from http://satoriproject.eu/media/D2.1_Report-handbook-of-participatory-processes_FINAL1.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  34. Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. STIPS. (2012a). STIPS: Program for education and research on science and technology in public sphere. Retrieved form http://stips.jp/english/. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  36. STIPS. (2012b). Science and technology in public sphere. Retrieved from http://www.stips.kyoto-u.ac.jp/stips_e. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  37. Sunderland, M. E., Taebi, B., Carson, C., & Kastenberg, W. (2014). Teaching global perspectives: Engineering ethics across international and academic borders. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1(2), 228–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tassone, V. C., O’Mahony, C., McKenna, E., Eppink, H. J., & Wals, A. E. J. (2017). (Re-)designing higher education curricula in times of systemic dysfunction: A Responsible Research and Innovation perspective. Higher Education.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0211-4. (online first).Google Scholar
  39. University of Monatana. (2003). Online research ethics course. Retrieved from https://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/montana_round1/research_ethics.html#brief. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  40. van Donzel, M., Dijkstra, G., & Wynstra, F. (2013). Fostering professionalism and integrity in research: Final report of the taskforce scientific integrity. Retrieved from https://www.eur.nl/fileadmin/ASSETS/ieb/integriteit/Taskforce_Scientific_Integrity_EUR.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.
  41. von Schomberg, R. (2011). Research and innovation in the information and communication technologies and security technologies fields. In R. von Schomberg (Ed.), A report from the European commission services. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, European Union.Google Scholar
  42. Wickson, F., & Carew, A. L. (2014). Quality criteria and indicators for Responsible Research and Innovation: Learning from transdisciplinarity. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1, 254–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Winner, L. (1985). Do artifacts have politics? In D. Mackenzie & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The social shaping of technology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Wood, D. F. (2003). Problem based learning. British Medical Journal, 326, 328–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Niels Mejlgaard
    • 1
  • Malene Vinther Christensen
    • 1
  • Roger Strand
    • 2
  • Ivan Buljan
    • 3
  • Mar Carrió
    • 4
  • Marta Cayetano i Giralt
    • 5
  • Erich Griessler
    • 6
  • Alexander Lang
    • 6
  • Ana Marušić
    • 3
  • Gema Revuelta
    • 7
  • Gemma Rodríguez
    • 4
  • Núria Saladié
    • 7
  • Milena Wuketich
    • 6
  1. 1.Danish Centre for Studies in Research and Research Policy, Department of Political ScienceAarhus UniversityAarhus CDenmark
  2. 2.Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the HumanitiesUniversity of BergenBergenNorway
  3. 3.Department of Research in Biomedicine and HealthUniversity of Split School of MedicineSplitCroatia
  4. 4.Health Sciences Education Research Group, Department of Experimental and Health SciencesUniversitat Pompeu FabraBarcelonaSpain
  5. 5.Association of Catalan Public Universities (ACUP) and Global University Network for Innovation (GUNi)Carrer de la Vila, UAB CampusBarcelonaSpain
  6. 6.Institute for Advanced StudiesViennaAustria
  7. 7.Studies Centre on Science, Communication and Society, Department of Experimental and Health SciencesUniversitat Pompeu FabraBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations