Journal of Responsible Innovation – Special issue

8 minute read

Responsible Research and Innovation

The concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has gained political relevance in recent years, particularly in the OECD and the European Commission projects (von Schomberg, 2013). Integrating environmental and social concerns into engineering and technology management, the RRI concept provides a possible response to the current challenges of sustainable development. Its principles take into account the potential impacts of innovations on social well-being using social and environmental purposes as the starting point for innovation. It involves anticipating impacts by analyzing not only the outcome of the innovation but the innovation process in its entirety. RRI also provides means of governance to support the development of innovation while ensuring a broader inclusion of stakeholders during decision-making.

Despite the growing body of research on the RRI, it is recognized that there is still no general consensus on its definition (Randles et al. 2022; Wiarda et al., 2021). Further theoretical and conceptual groundwork is needed to clarify its ontological and epistemological foundations. Above all, there is a real need to more clearly and effectively link RRI to other more established and operational concepts and practices that deal with responsibility in engineering and technology management (Nazarko & Melnikas, 2019 ; van Est, 2017). Integrating RRI practices and principles into engineering and technology management will help ensure both the control and the assessment of technology while paying the necessary attention to the politically and socially desired effects. Consequently, a more intensive interaction between practitioners—in particular innovators, engineers and industrialists—with publics, theorists and innovation policy actors in the development of RRI is required.

Yet, such integration faces significant challenges. As some researchers point out, in terms of used language and operationalization, RRI does not currently resonate enough outside the context of publicly funded research (academics, and public research institutions) (Martinuzzi et al., 2018). Its applicability to innovative companies and industries, for example, consists mainly in the opportunity of self-reflection and self-assessment (Nazarko & Melnikas, 2019). This approach remains fragmented and focuses attention on the most immediate issues and legal compliance, to the detriment of broader societal issues (Stahl et al., 2019). Additionally, the lack of a globally applicable theoretical framework leads to ambiguity in the way RRI is implemented, evaluated and institutionalized in practice. This points to fundamental value conflicts and differing motivations for performing (responsible) research and innovation. For example, inclusive and deliberative engagement may be in tension with the ability of firms to commercially exploit their innovations (Brand & Blok, 2019; Ruckstuhl et al., 2020).

Apart from this conceptual confusion, more practical studies and widely applicable methodologies are still needed (e.g., Fisher et al. 2015; Lehoux et al., 2020; Long et al. 2020a). Existing studies do not provide sufficient guidelines that can be adapted to different types of actors who develop and manage technology and innovation, including laboratory, industrial, institutional, and associative actors, whose contexts, motivations, objectives, capacities and visions vary. This is a challenge to both individual action and, more specifically, collective responsiveness, co-responsibility and coordinated interaction (Wiarda et al., 2021).

Furthermore, some studies have shown that the analytical foundations of RRI have been largely built on Northern development models. This excludes consideration of other political, cultural or economic circumstances and practices (Macnaghten et al., 2014; Owen et al., 2013; Stilgoe et al., 2013; Wiarda et al., 2021; Wong 2016). An adaptation of RRI to local scales with their particular conditions seems necessary.

Finally, the roles played by the scientists, engineers, and managers whose professional job it is to develop and implement the technological innovations in question, are largely undertheorized and undetermined. Scholarly treatment of these centrally important actors is often limited to accounts of their conceptions of responsibility (Glerup et al. 2017) and to documenting their lack of engagement with the broader dimensions of their work (Cech 2014; Politi & Grinbaum, 2020). Only a few scholars provide analytical and operational tools to support the management of RRI such as (Flipse & van de Loo, 2018) that underline the importance of considering RRI during the early phases of innovation project management in order to accompany managers and engineers to advance their projects while integrating upstream the broader socio-ethical and socio-economic concerns of their work. Other researchers have raised the question of the necessary modification of the educational experience of engineers to better generate ethical engagement, taking a proactive stance toward their projects and future profession, thinking creatively about how to prevent damage through the technologies they help develop (Grunsven et al. 2021). Indeed, studies that investigate or conceptualize the technology, engineering, and innovation communities as enablers of RRI are sparse, and the tools for meaningful reflection need further development if they are to be more widely applicable (e.g., Flipse et al. 2013; Long et al. 2020b).

Special Issue on RRI

These related challenges and limitations encourage us to look up for new scientific insights into the practical application of RRI within specific technology, innovation, and management contexts. In this call for papers we welcome theoretical proposals, empirical contributions, new methodological frameworks and practical feedback in order to address the shortcomings of the literature and to draw new lessons for scientists, engineers, and innovation managers in particular.

Contributions are invited to address one or more of the following themes (without excluding other reflections):

  • What are the distinct features of RRI as a technology and innovation management approach and how do these translate into practice?
  • How can RRI processes be designed and integrated to drive organizational and institutional change in different organizations and contexts, with a focus on engineering and management practices?
  • What are the key dimensions that contribute to the implementation of RRI in technology companies and the institutions that regulate them?
  • How to foster collective management and governance of RRI practices among heterogeneous actors, including engineers and innovation managers?
  • How to mobilize creative approaches and processes for RRI, specifically within engineering and management contexts?
  • What differences in the implementation of RRI upstream and downstream new product/ service development processes?
  • What are the strengths and challenges of implementing RRI within engineering and innovation management practices, and how do they vary according to the diversity of actors and the socio-economic and political context?
  • What management-friendly tools can be used to assess the impact of RRI on the performance of industrial laboratories, companies, and institutions?

Submission instructions

RRI-Special-Issue Full papers should be submitted by 31 July 2023 on the Submission Portal. Please indicate upon submission that you aim to be included in this special issue. Accepted papers will be immediately published online.

Instructions for authors: Instructions for Authors

The Journal of Responsible Innovation metrics for 2020 include: 4.034 Impact Factor, Q1 Impact Factor Best Quartile, and Q1 Cite Score Best Quartile. In 2021 JRI had 177K annual downloads/views. As a fully Open Access journal, JRI can provide a limited number of article processing fee waivers / reductions for authors from beyond Europe and North America, and for lead authors from any country who are early career researchers (i.e., within 5 years of obtaining their PhD). Find out more about article publishing charges and funding options.

Contacts:

Vincent Boy (vincent.boly{@}univ-lorraine.fr), Fedoua Kasmi (fedoua.kasmi{@}univ-lorraine.fr), Mauricio Camargo (mauricio.camargo{@}univ-lorraine.fr)

Bibliographic references

  • Brand, T., & Blok, V. (2019). Responsible innovation in business: A critical reflection on deliberative engagement as a central governance mechanism. Journal of responsible innovation, 6(1), 4-24. Cech, E. A. (2014). Culture of disengagement in engineering education?. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 39(1), 42-72.
  • Fisher, E., O’Rourke, M., Evans, R., Kennedy, E. B., Gorman, M. E., & Seager, T. P. (2015). Mapping the integrative field: Taking stock of socio-technical collaborations. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2(1), 39-61.
  • Fisher, E., Mahajan, R. L., & Mitcham, C. (2006). Midstream modulation of technology: governance from within. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 26(6), 485-496.
  • Flipse, S. M., van der Sanden, M. C., & Osseweijer, P. (2013). Midstream modulation in biotechnology industry: Redefining what is ‘part of the job’of researchers in industry. Science and engineering ethics, 19(3), 1141-1164.
  • Flipse, S. M., & van de Loo, C. J. (2018). Responsible innovation during front-end development: Increasing intervention capacities for enhancing project management reflections on complexity. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 5(2), 225‑240.
  • Glerup, C., Davies, S. R., & Horst, M. (2017). ‘Nothing really responsible goes on here’: scientists’ experience and practice of responsibility. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 4(3), 319-336.
  • Lehoux, P., Silva, H. P., Oliveira, R. R., & Rivard, L. (2020). The responsible innovation in health tool and the need to reconcile formative and summative ends in RRI tools for business. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 7(3), 646-671.
  • Long, T. B., Blok, V., Dorrestijn, S., & Macnaghten, P. (2020a). The design and testing of a tool for developing responsible innovation in start-up enterprises. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 7(1), 45-75.
  • Long, T. B., Iñigo, E., & Blok, V. (2020b). Responsible management of innovation in business. In Research Handbook of Responsible Management (pp. 606-623). Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Macnaghten, P., Owen, R., Stilgoe, J., Wynne, B., Azevedo, A., de Campos, A., Chilvers, J., Dagnino, R., di Giulio, G., Frow, E., Garvey, B., Groves, C., Hartley, S., Knobel, M., Kobayashi, E., Lehtonen, M., - Lezaun, J., Mello, L., Monteiro, M., … Velho, L. (2014). Responsible innovation across borders: Tensions, paradoxes and possibilities. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1(2), 191‑199.
  • Martinuzzi, A., Blok, V., Brem, A., Stahl, B., & Schönherr, N. (2018). Responsible Research and Innovation in Industry—Challenges, Insights and Perspectives. Sustainability, 10(3), 702. Nazarko, L., & Melnikas, B. (2019). Responsible Research and Innovation in Engineering and Technology Management : Concept, Metrics and Assessment. 2019 IEEE Technology & Engineering Management Conference (TEMSCON), 1‑5.
  • Owen, R., Stilgoe, J., Macnaghten, P., Gorman, M., Fisher, E., & Guston, D. (2013). A Framework for Responsible Innovation. In Responsible Innovation (p. 27‑50). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
  • Ruckstuhl, K., Costa Camoes Rabello, R., & Davenport, S. (2020). Design and responsible research innovation in the additive manufacturing industry. Design Studies, 71, 100966.
  • Stahl, B. C., Chatfield, K., Ten Holter, C., & Brem, A. (2019). Ethics in corporate research and development : Can responsible research and innovation approaches aid sustainability? Journal of Cleaner Production, 239, 118044. Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568‑1580.
  • van Est, R. (2017). Responsible Innovation as a source of inspiration for Technology Assessment, and vice versa : The common challenge of responsibility, representation, issue identification, and orientation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 4(2), 268‑277.
  • von Schomberg, R. (2013). A Vision of Responsible Research and Innovation. In Responsible Innovation (p. 51‑74). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
  • Wong, P. H. (2016). Responsible innovation for decent nonliberal peoples: a dilemma?. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 3(2), 154-168.
  • Wiarda, M., van de Kaa, G., Yaghmaei, E., & Doorn, N. (2021). A comprehensive appraisal of responsible research and innovation : From roots to leaves. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 172, 121053.

Updated: