Practices of Responsible Research and Innovation: A Review

Exploring the dimensions of responsible research systems and cultures: a scoping review

The responsible conduct of research is foundational to the production of valid and trustworthy research. Despite this, our grasp of what dimensions responsible conduct of research (RCR) might contain-and how it differs across disciplines (i.e. how it is conceptualized and operationalized)-is tenuous. Moreover, many initiatives related to developing and maintaining RCR are developed within disciplinary and institutional silos which naturally limits the benefits that RCR practice can have. To this end, we are working to develop a better understanding of how RCR is conceived and realized, both across disciplines and across institutions in Europe. The first step in doing this is to scope existing knowledge on the topic, of which this scoping review is a part. We searched several electronic databases for relevant published and grey literature. An initial sample of 715 articles was identified, with 75 articles included in the final sample for qualitative analysis. We find several dimensions of RCR that are underemphasized or are excluded from the well-established World Conferences on Research Integrity (WCRI) Singapore Statement on Research Integrity and explore facets of these dimensions that find special relevance in a range of research disciplines.

Creating a developmental framework for evaluating RRI implementation in research organisations

The evaluation of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) actions presents important challenges for the key stakeholders engaged in the process of RRI implementation, such as policy makers, programme managers, and researchers. While there is a considerable body of literature on the conceptualization of responsibility in research and a plethora of attempts to practice RRI, there is a need for increased attention to the monitoring and evaluation of case studies of RRI implementations in research organisations, in particular regarding their structural change effects. This paper aims to discuss a contextualised developmental framework for evaluating RRI implementation in research organisations, with a specific focus on achieving structural change through tailor-made action plans. The framework, developed through RRI evaluation work in the field of biosciences, adopts a systemic and process-oriented perspective, encompassing participatory, anticipatory, reflexive, and responsive dimensions. Concrete empirical examples from bioscience organizations are provided to illustrate how the framework relates to specific conditions, experiences, and solutions, demonstrating how conceptual insights have emerged from real-life practices and data analysis. While the framework was initially customized for the specific contexts of six bioscience research organizations, it holds potential for broader relevance and applicability in addressing challenges related to RRI design, implementation, and evaluation.

Citizens' Perceptions of Research and Innovation Dilemmas: Insights from a Large-Scale Survey in Four European Regions

This study presents a valuable dataset supporting regional research and innovation systems in four European regions: Vestland (Norway), Kriti (Greece), Galicia (Spain), and Overijssel (Netherlands). It focuses on understanding citizens' perceptions of research and innovation dilemmas within these regions. The dataset comprises 14 questions aligned with the Responsible Research and Innovation framework, evaluating stakeholders' techno-moral attitudes towards technological change and socio-economic outcomes. A survey conducted between April and July 2020 gathered responses from 7,729 individuals, ensuring broad age and gender representation. This dataset is highly valuable for regional policymaking and policymakers' engagement strategies, enhancing equity and effectiveness in addressing grand societal challenges. Research outcomes reveal citizens' aspirations for developmental trajectories prioritizing quality-of-life, renewable energy, and support for innovative SMEs in their regions. The study contributes to existing research by highlighting limited citizen trust and expectations of effective government actions in addressing societal challenges at the regional level.

Ten simple rules for socially responsible science

Guidelines concerning the potentially harmful effects of scientific studies have historically focused on ethical considerations for minimizing risk for participants. However, studies can also indirectly inflict harm on individuals and social groups through how they are designed, reported, and disseminated. As evidenced by recent criticisms and retractions of high-profile studies dealing with a wide variety of social issues, there is a scarcity of resources and guidance on how one can conduct research in a socially responsible manner. As such, even motivated researchers might publish work that has negative social impacts due to a lack of awareness. To address this, we propose 10 simple rules for researchers who wish to conduct socially responsible science. These rules, which cover major considerations throughout the life cycle of a study from inception to dissemination, are not aimed as a prescriptive list or a deterministic code of conduct. Rather, they are meant to help motivated scientists to reflect on their social responsibility as researchers and actively engage with the potential social impact of their research.

The potential for learning from good RRI practices and implications for the usefulness of RRI as an umbrella concept

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to analyze reported good institutional responsible research and innovation (RRI) practices from an organizational and learning perspective to discuss the usefulness of RRI as a broad umbrella concept.

Design/methodology/approach

This study connects neo-institutional and translation accounts of diffusion to different modes of learning and discusses reported best practices from 12 reports, including in total 23 organizations in the research system worldwide, in light of this theoretical framework. This study categorizes the good practices identified in the reports and discusses how the nature of the practices influences the potential learning from them. The authors then apply the results from the discussion of this study to current policy developments on RRI.

Findings

The two most often mentioned good practices overall are organizational policies and the establishment of organizational units, but the type of good practices recommended differs across the various aspects of the RRI umbrella concept. This diversity within the RRI construct is a practical argument against the effectiveness of RRI as an umbrella concept.

Originality/value

This study is novel in the fact that the authors, building on Wæraas (2020), systematically relate types of good practice to neo-institutional theory and translation perspectives explicitly combined with learning approaches and apply this approach in the field of research organizations. The policy implications from the empirical and theoretical analyses are novel and timely in these early phases of the EU funding framework programme Horizon Europe and can also be relevant for the increasingly important umbrella concept of Open Science.

Discovering the Landscape and Evolution of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI): Science Mapping Based on Bibliometric Analysis

The growing number of papers on Responsible Innovation (RI) and Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) have shaped the popularity and usefulness of RI and RRI as a technology governance concept. This study reviews and assesses the development of RRI research through a bibliometric analysis of 702 RRI-focused papers and 26,471 secondary references published in the Web of Science Core Collection database between 2006 and 2020. Firstly, the paper provides a broad outline of the field based on annual growth trends, journal distribution, and disciplinary distribution for RRI publications. Secondly, this study reveals the current state of RRI research by identifying influential literature, journals, authors, countries, and institutions. Thirdly, a phased keyword analysis is conducted to determine the stage characteristics of the RRI field. Finally, based on the bibliometric analyses, this study summarises the evolutionary trajectory of RRI and makes recommendations for future research directions. As a complement to the previous qualitative literature review, the paper provides a systematic and dynamic understanding of RRI research.

Adoption of Responsible Research and Innovation in Citizen Observatories

An ethos of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has been promoted in the last decade, especially within European research. The broad objective is to ensure that research and innovation activities align with society’s needs and expectations. In parallel, citizen observatories seek to mainstream citizen science as a valid paradigm for scientific investigation but additionally as a model for increasing societal participation in local democracy and policy definition. This paper explores how precepts of RRI have permeated research in citizen observatories. The methodology adopted is that of a scoping review. Results confirm a relatively simple adoption of RRI principles. However, the adoption is uneven and shallow, perhaps reflecting the ongoing evolution of both RRI and the citizen observatory model. It is recommended that the diverse actors charged with the definition, design, validation, and deployment of citizen observatories unambiguously integrate, promote, and report on how the RRI principles are reflected in their activities.

The Societal Readiness Thinking Tool: A Practical Resource for Maturing the Societal Readiness of Research Projects

In this paper, we introduce the Societal Readiness (SR) Thinking Tool to aid researchers and innovators in developing research projects with greater responsiveness to societal values, needs, and expectations. The need for societally-focused approaches to research and innovation-complementary to Technology Readiness (TR) frameworks-is presented. Insights from responsible research and innovation (RRI) concepts and practice, organized across critical stages of project-life cycles are discussed with reference to the development of the SR Thinking Tool. The tool is designed to complement not only shortfalls in TR approaches, but also improve upon other efforts to integrate RRI, sustainability, and design thinking in research and innovation cycles. Operationalization and early-stage user tests of the Tool are reported, along with discussion of potential future iterations and applications.

Ethical challenges of researching emergent socio-material-technological phenomena: insights from an interdisciplinary mixed-methods project using mobile eye-tracking

Purpose

This paper aims to discuss research ethics in mixed-methods research (MMR) and MMR development with a focus on ethical challenges that stem from working with technical instruments such as mobile eye-trackers.

Design/methodology/approach

The case of an interdisciplinary mixed-methods development study that aimed at researching the impacts of emerging mobile augmented-reality technologies on the perception of public places serves as an example to discuss research-ethical challenges regarding (1) the practical implementation of the study, (2) data processing and management and (3) societal implications of developing instruments to track and understand human practices.

Findings

This study reports challenges and experiences in ethical decision-making in the practical implementation of the study regarding the relationship to research subjects, the use of mobile research instruments in public places and the interdisciplinary cooperation among research team members. Further, this paper expounds on ethical challenges and recommendations in data processing and management and with a view to societal implications of method development and the aspirations of transdisciplinarity. This study concludes that institutionalized ethics need to become more flexible, while applied ethics and reflection must make their entry into university curricula across disciplines.

Originality/value

Complex interdisciplinary mobile and mixed-methods projects that involve sensors and instruments such as mobile eye-trackers are on the rise. However, there is a significant lack of engagement with practical research ethical challenges, practices and requirements in both mixed-methods and method-development literature. By taking a context- and process-oriented perspective focusing on doing ethics, the paper contributes a concrete empirical case to these underdeveloped fields.

Access to and interest in assistive technology for home-dwelling people with dementia during the COVID-19 pandemic (PAN.DEM)

The COVID-19 restrictions affect daily living in Norway, including home-dwelling people with dementia, and researchers conducting clinical trials in dementia care. In this paper, we 1) describe the development of a pandemic cohort (PAN.DEM) incorporated in the LIVE@Home.Path, an ongoing clinical intervention trial on resource utilisation including home-dwelling people with dementia and their caregivers (N = 438 dyads), 2) describe pre-pandemic use of assistive technology and 3) explore the extent to which COVID-19 restrictions increase caregivers interest in innovation in the PAN.DEM cohort (N = 126). Our main finding is that assistive technology is available to 71% pre-pandemic; the vast majority utilise traditional stove guards and safety alarms, only a few operate sensor technology, including GPS, fall detectors or communication aids. In response to COVID-19, 17% show increased interest in technology; being less familiar with operating a telephone and having higher cognitive functioning are both associated with increased interest. We conclude that wearable and sensor technology has not yet been fully implemented among people with dementia in Norway, and few caregivers show increased interest under the restrictions. Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT0404336).

A Q methodology study on divergent perspectives on CRISPR-Cas9 in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

CRISPR-Cas9, a technology enabling modification of the human genome, is developing rapidly. There have been calls for public debate to discuss its ethics, societal implications, and governance. So far, however, little is known about public attitudes on CRISPR-Cas9. This study contributes to a better understanding of public perspectives by exploring the various holistic perspectives Dutch citizens have on CRISPR-Cas9.

METHODS

This study used Q methodology to identify different perspectives of Dutch citizens (N = 30) on the use of CRISPR-Cas9. The Q-sort method aims at segmenting audiences based on the structural characteristics of their perspectives. Participants individually ranked 32 statements about CRISPR-Cas9 and discussed their rankings in small groups. By-person factor analysis was performed using PQMethod. Participants' contributions to the discussions were used to further make sense of the audience segments identified.

RESULTS

Five perspectives on CRISPR-Cas9 were identified: (1) pragmatic optimism (2) concerned scepticism; (3) normative optimism; (4) enthusiastic support; and (5) benevolent generalism. Each perspective represents a unique position motivated by different ranking rationales. Sorting rationales included improving health, preventing negative impacts on society, and fear of a slippery slope. Overall, there is broad, but not universal support for medical uses of CRISPR-Cas9.

CONCLUSIONS

Research on CRISPR-Cas9 should prioritise the broadly supported applications of the technology. Research and public debates on CRISPR-Cas9, its uses, its broader implications, and the governance of CRISPR-Cas9 are recommended. A discourse that includes all perspectives can contribute to the embedding of future uses of CRISPR-Cas9 in society. This study shows that Q methodology followed by group discussions enables citizens to contribute meaningfully to discourses about research.

RRI and Corporate Stakeholder Engagement: The Aquadvantage Salmon Case

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.