Quality criteria and indicators for responsible research and innovation: learning from transdisciplinarity

被引:106
作者
Wickson, Fern [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Carew, Anna L. [4 ]
机构
[1] GenOk Ctr Biosafety, Forskningsparken, PB 6418, N-9294 Tromso, Norway
[2] Oslo Grp Responsible Innovat, Oslo, Norway
[3] Akershus Univ Coll Appl Sci, NO-0130 Oslo, Norway
[4] Univ Tasmania, Tasmanian Inst Agr, Hobart, Tas 7001, Australia
关键词
responsible innovation; transdisciplinary research; nanoremediation; evaluation; quality;
D O I
10.1080/23299460.2014.963004
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
The concept of 'responsible innovation' (RI) or 'responsible research and innovation' (RRI) is rapidly gaining currency. However, a persistent critique is that without more concrete elaboration, the interpretive flexibility of the concept is so broad as to effectively render it meaningless. The articulation of quality criteria and indicators therefore seems crucial for RRI to be understood and operationalized by researchers, research funders, innovators and other relevant stakeholders. In this paper, we specifically draw on our knowledge and experience from the transdisciplinary research community, combined with recent multistakeholder deliberative work on the concrete case of nanoremediation, to make an offering on the challenge of articulating quality criteria and approaches to evaluate RRI. In doing so, we present an iteratively arrived at set of quality criteria, designate significant elements of each of these, and then develop an evaluative rubric of performance indicators across them. While the criteria and rubric we present were initiated through the specific context of our work on advancing RI in the research, development and use of nanoparticles for environmental remediation, we believe that they can serve as a useful example for how evaluative criteria and approaches can be developed and offer a helpful frame for sponsoring and structuring the ongoing conversations on quality criteria and indicators that are necessary if RRI is to reach its full potential.
引用
收藏
页码:254 / 273
页数:20
相关论文
共 47 条
[1]  
Barad, 2007, M UNIVERSE HALFWAY Q
[2]  
Bardach E., 2012, PRACTICAL GUIDE POLI
[3]  
Bergmann M., 2005, QUALITY CRITERIA TRA
[4]  
Bohr N., 1949, A EINSTEIN PHILOS SC, P199
[5]  
Boix Mansilla V., 2003, INTERDISCIPLINES
[6]  
Bozeman B, 2005, SCI PUBL POLICY, V32, P119, DOI DOI 10.3152/147154305781779588
[7]   Public Value Mapping and Science Policy Evaluation [J].
Bozeman, Barry ;
Sarewitz, Daniel .
MINERVA, 2011, 49 (01) :1-23
[8]  
Brown J., 2005, WORLD CAFE SHAPING O
[9]  
Burgess J., 2006, Science and Public Policy, V33, P713, DOI 10.3152/147154306781778551
[10]   Deliberative mapping: a novel analytic-deliberative methodology to support contested science-policy decisions [J].
Burgess, Jacquelin ;
Stirling, Andy ;
Clark, Judy ;
Davies, Gail ;
Eames, Malcolm ;
Staley, Kristina ;
Williamson, Suzanne .
PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF SCIENCE, 2007, 16 (03) :299-322