IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v79y2024ics0160791x24002574.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Responsible innovation for disruptive science and technology: The role of public trust and social expectations

Author

Listed:
  • McCrea, Rod
  • Coates, Rebecca
  • Hobman, Elizabeth V.
  • Bentley, Sarah
  • Lacey, Justine

Abstract

As the world increasingly faces intersecting and complex environmental, social, and economic challenges, there are rising demands on emerging science and technology to produce innovative and potentially disruptive solutions. However, these solutions may also introduce different problems, uncertainties, and risks. Responsible innovation (RI) offers a way to identify and mitigate the social and ethical risks associated with new science and technology developments while delivering socially desirable and responsible outcomes. But how does the public view RI? In this paper, we argue that those undertaking disruptive science and technology research need a better understanding of the drivers of public trust in the research and innovation sector, and broader societal expectations of what constitutes socially responsible outcomes arising from their work. Few studies have explored if and how RI, trust, and social expectations are interrelated in the eyes of the public. This research investigates public perceptions of RI relevant to the development of novel and potentially disruptive science and technology, and their relationships with two key social outcomes: (1) public trust in the research and innovation sector; and (2) public expectations that innovative and potentially disruptive research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Through surveying 4080 Australians, this research identifies how these four elements of RI – (i) practices of scientists, (ii) institutional compliance with research ethics, (iii) risk management effectiveness, and (iv) governance arrangements – are associated with public trust and expectations of socially responsible outcomes. Our best fitting path model showed that these elements of RI explain a large proportion of variability in trust in scientists and research institutions undertaking disruptive science, and most of the variability in public expectations that such research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Of the four elements of RI, practices of scientists are most important for explaining trust in the research and innovation sector, and risk management effectiveness is most important for expectations of socially responsible outcomes from disruptive science and technology.

Suggested Citation

  • McCrea, Rod & Coates, Rebecca & Hobman, Elizabeth V. & Bentley, Sarah & Lacey, Justine, 2024. "Responsible innovation for disruptive science and technology: The role of public trust and social expectations," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:79:y:2024:i:c:s0160791x24002574
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102709
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X24002574
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102709?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:79:y:2024:i:c:s0160791x24002574. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.