IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i10p2963-d234007.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Responsible Research and Innovation: Using the Requirements Tool for Stakeholder Engagement in Developing a Universal Design for Learning Guidelines for Practice

Author

Listed:
  • Sara H. Wilford

    (Centre for Computing and Social Responsibility, De Montfort University, G.H 5.77 Gateway House, Leicester LE1 0BH, UK)

Abstract

Responsible research and innovation (RRI) is growing in importance, and alongside this growth is an acknowledgement that for research and innovation projects to be successful, stakeholders must be involved from the outset. When developing guidelines for practice, stakeholders will often be presented with a document to ratify rather than one to develop or revise. This gap in stakeholder engagement has been recognised and addressed by the development of the requirements tool. This tool was originally created to provide a systematic approach to the development of guidelines for the governance of RRI, but it was quickly recognised that the tool can bridge the gap and involve stakeholders from the outset, thereby increasing the likelihood of buy-in. This paper presents the second validated use of the tool that was used to inform the revision of guidelines for the introduction of a universal design for learning (UDL) at a UK University. The resulting revised guidelines for practice and their adoption by those tasked with producing them provide further evidence of the value and flexibility of the tool and its potential for its continued use in the future development or revision of guidelines.

Suggested Citation

  • Sara H. Wilford, 2019. "Responsible Research and Innovation: Using the Requirements Tool for Stakeholder Engagement in Developing a Universal Design for Learning Guidelines for Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:10:p:2963-:d:234007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/10/2963/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/10/2963/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Owen, John R. & Kemp, Deanna, 2013. "Social licence and mining: A critical perspective," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 29-35.
    2. Bernd Carsten Stahl, 2013. "Responsible research and innovation: The role of privacy in an emerging framework," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(6), pages 708-716, September.
    3. Luciana Maines da Silva & Claudia Cristina Bitencourt & Kadígia Faccin & Tatiana Iakovleva, 2019. "The Role of Stakeholders in the Context of Responsible Innovation: A Meta-Synthesis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-25, March.
    4. Bernd Carsten Stahl & Michael Obach & Emad Yaghmaei & Veikko Ikonen & Kate Chatfield & Alexander Brem, 2017. "The Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) Maturity Model: Linking Theory and Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Agata Gurzawska & Markus Mäkinen & Philip Brey, 2017. "Implementation of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) Practices in Industry: Providing the Right Incentives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-26, September.
    6. Prno, Jason, 2013. "An analysis of factors leading to the establishment of a social licence to operate in the mining industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 577-590.
    7. Jerry Ravetz, 2000. "Science and governance in the European Union: a contribution to the debate," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(5), pages 327-336, October.
    8. Sara H. Wilford, 2018. "First Line Steps in Requirements Identification for Guidelines Development in Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 31(5), pages 539-556, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Milena Gojny-Zbierowska & Przemysław Zbierowski, 2021. "Improvisation as Responsible Innovation in Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Jolita Ceicyte & Monika Petraite, 2018. "Networked Responsibility Approach for Responsible Innovation: Perspective of the Firm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, May.
    3. Thammarat Koottatep & Krisakorn Sukavejworakit & Thanaphol Virasa, 2020. "Roadmap for Innovators in the Process of Innovation for Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Elin Merethe Oftedal & Lene Foss & Tatiana Iakovleva, 2019. "Responsible for Responsibility? A Study of Digital E-health Startups," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Beniamino Callegari & Olga Mikhailova, 2021. "RRI and Corporate Stakeholder Engagement: The Aquadvantage Salmon Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    6. Anja Salzmann & Frode Guribye & Astrid Gynnild, 2021. "Mobile Journalists as Traceable Data Objects: Surveillance Capitalism and Responsible Innovation in Mobile Journalism," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 130-139.
    7. Oier Imaz & Andoni Eizagirre, 2020. "Responsible Innovation for Sustainable Development Goals in Business: An Agenda for Cooperative Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-20, August.
    8. Mercer-Mapstone, Lucy & Rifkin, Will & Moffat, Kieren & Louis, Winnifred, 2017. "Conceptualising the role of dialogue in social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 137-146.
    9. Wright, Susan & Bice, Sara, 2017. "Beyond social capital: A strategic action fields approach to social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 284-295.
    10. van der Plank, Sien & Walsh, Bríd & Behrens, Paul, 2016. "The expected impacts of mining: Stakeholder perceptions of a proposed mineral sands mine in rural Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 129-136.
    11. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz & Kural, Orhan, 2020. "The effects of the mining operation activities permit process on the mining sector in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    12. Richert, Claire & Rogers, Abbie & Burton, Michael, 2015. "Measuring the extent of a Social License to Operate: The influence of marine biodiversity offsets in the oil and gas sector in Western Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 121-129.
    13. Alberto Diantini & Salvatore Eugenio Pappalardo & Tim Edwards Powers & Daniele Codato & Giuseppe Della Fera & Marco Heredia-R & Francesco Facchinelli & Edoardo Crescini & Massimo De Marchi, 2020. "Is this a Real Choice? Critical Exploration of the Social License to Operate in the Oil Extraction Context of the Ecuadorian Amazon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-24, October.
    14. Walsh, Bríd & van der Plank, Sien & Behrens, Paul, 2017. "The effect of community consultation on perceptions of a proposed mine: A case study from southeast Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 163-171.
    15. Tatiana Iakovleva & Elin Oftedal & John Bessant, 2021. "Changing Role of Users—Innovating Responsibly in Digital Health," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    16. Alexander Auer & Katharina Jarmai, 2017. "Implementing Responsible Research and Innovation Practices in SMEs: Insights into Drivers and Barriers from the Austrian Medical Device Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, December.
    17. Stuart, Alice & Bond, Alan & Franco, Aldina M.A. & Baker, Julia & Gerrard, Chris & Danino, Vittoria & Jones, Kylie, 2023. "Conceptualising social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PA).
    18. Mercer-Mapstone, Lucy & Rifkin, Will & Louis, Winnifred & Moffat, Kieren, 2017. "Meaningful dialogue outcomes contribute to laying a foundation for social licence to operate," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 347-355.
    19. Mercer-Mapstone, Lucy & Rifkin, Will & Louis, Winnifred & Moffat, Kieren, 2019. "Power, participation, and exclusion through dialogue in the extractive industries: Who gets a seat at the table?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 190-199.
    20. Jiqing Liu & Gui Zhang & Xiaojing Lv & Jiayu Li, 2022. "Discovering the Landscape and Evolution of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI): Science Mapping Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-32, July.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:10:p:2963-:d:234007. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.