Improve alignment of research policy and societal values

Novitzky, Peter; Bernstein, Michael J.; Blok, Vincent; Braun, Róbert; Chan, Tung Tung; Lamers, Wout S.; Loeber, Anne; Meijer, Ingeborg; Lindner, Ralf; Grießler, Erich

doi:10.1126/science.abb3415

Cited by 61 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This might include empirical exploration of organisational decoupling (Bromley andPowell, 2017), recoupling (Hallett, 2010) and how this might be influenced by relationships of mutual dependency, accountability and power, such as may exist between research funders, universities and disciplines within these (Kern et al, 2018). It also offers potential to provide insights for case studies of institutionalisation of other policy-relevant cognates (Forsberg, 2014) of which the EC discourse of RRI (Novitzky et al, 2020) is just one.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This latter period has witnessed a shift in policy emphasis at the EPSRC towards embedding RI into organisational practice, with the ambition for this to become 'business as usual' for both itself and the research communities in universities that it funds (EPSRC, 2019). This has mirrored a policy ambition by the EC over the last five years to 'mainstream' RRI across Europe (Novitzky et al, 2020;Rome Declaration, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Organisational institutionalisation of responsible innovation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe the institutionalisation of responsible innovation (RI) over the last decade at the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and universities funded by it as a focal point for RI in the UK. Drawing on organisational theory we identify factors influencing the dynamics of RI institutionalisation, including forces of legitimation, entrepreneurship and decoupling. We report significant institutionalisation at the EPSRC prior to 2013, when it published its RI policy. Notwithstanding instances of experimentation and assimilation since, we report limited institutionalisation within research communities in universities as RI has encountered competing institutional logics, responsibility norms and epistemic practices. Our findings suggest an ongoing and dynamic process of translation that reflects RI's status as a performative and contested discourse 'in the making'.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organisational institutionalisation of responsible innovation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…RRI has arisen as a science policy measure to establish codes of responsible conduct in science and to enable inclusive and sustainable research and innovation processes [1,4,14]. This policy-driven initiative was introduced to tackle lack of public faith in science and evidence-based policy-making, as well as to increase the ability of democratic societies to address challenges associated with emerging and disruptive technologies [15].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

RRI and Corporate Stakeholder Engagement: The Aquadvantage Salmon Case

Callegari

Михайлова

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Declining public trust in science and innovation triggered the emergence and development of the responsible research and innovation (RRI) concept among policymakers and academics. Engaging stakeholders in the early phases of innovation processes has been identified as a major driver of inclusive, responsible, and sustainable development. Firms however have often adopted practices entirely opposite to those being advocated within the RRI framework, namely, reducing external interaction with stakeholders, focusing on exclusive communication with the scientific community and legal authorities while avoiding the social spotlight. We illustrate these practices, their causes and consequences using the case of the Aquadvantage salmon, the first genetically modified (GM) animal approved to petition for the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for human consumption. We find that such practices heighten the risk of social backlash, being undesirable from the perspective of both the organizations involved and society at large. Stakeholder engagement remains necessary in order to gain the minimum social acceptance required for contentious innovative products to enter the market. However, stakeholder engagement must be selective, focused on pragmatic organizations whose aims and interests are sufficiently broad to potentially align with corporate interests. Strategic stakeholder engagement offers a meeting point between the transformative aspirations of RRI framework proponents and legitimate business interests.

show abstract

“…One consequence of administrative capture is that it can undermine public trust in both science and public policy decision-making. If the sciencepolicy interface is constrained such that the scientific questions asked cannot be open and tested (Cullen 2011a; Novitsky et al 2020), then it is not the best available science and will likely be distrusted. This issue is especially problematic in a 'post-truth' world where evidence and indisputable facts are considered 'fake news', and where opinions and falsehoods are represented as facts .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific integrity, public policy and water governance in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia

Colloff

Grafton

Williams

2021

Australasian Journal of Water Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the impediments to scientific integrity with an analysis of the water science-policy interface for the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB), Australia. We highlight the dangers to the public interest of 'administrative capture' of science, whereby scientists are incentivised to narrow or close down the scientific questions asked, the debates on evidence and the scientific dialogue so to support predetermined policy actions. Administrative capture of science is not intended to be objective or disinterested and contributes to a diminution of trust in science and scientists. Using an integrative theoretical framework for analysis of the different stances taken by scientists in science-policy interactions, we show how scientists as Issue Advocates have sought to limit debate and the options available in relation to water reform in the MDB. We provide six possible actions to reduce administrative capture that encourages scientists to become Issue Advocates. These actions include procedural, professional, evaluative, judicial, instrumental and external controls that support scientific integrity by individuals and agencies that use and/or undertake publicly funded research.

show abstract

Improve alignment of research policy and societal values

Abstract: The EU promotes Responsible Research and Innovation in principle, but implementation leaves much to be desired

Cited by 61 publications

References 11 publications

Organisational institutionalisation of responsible innovation

Organisational institutionalisation of responsible innovation

RRI and Corporate Stakeholder Engagement: The Aquadvantage Salmon Case

Scientific integrity, public policy and water governance in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About