IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i17p9901-d628178.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Shared Taxonomy for the Implementation of Responsible Innovation Approach in Industrial Ecosystems

Author

Listed:
  • Asta Valackienė

    (Institute of Business and Economics, Faculty of Public Governance and Business, Mykolas Romeris University, LT-08303 Vilnius, Lithuania)

  • Rafał Nagaj

    (Institute of Economics and Finance, University of Szczecin, 71-101 Szczecin, Poland)

Abstract

Symbolic narratives, such as an “ivory tower”, a “grey zone”, or a “black box” tell us about the gap between university and society, and academia and industry. Recently, they have been replaced by the Quadruple Helix model, which closes the gap by connecting four main stakeholders—government, university, industry, and society, into an innovation ecosystem. However, the roles of the different stakeholders are often blurred and difficult to define, and it is difficult to develop a basic approach to implement responsible innovations in industrial ecosystems in general. On the other hand, the interactions between stakeholder groups, especially universities and industry, are not sufficiently demonstrated in both scientific literature and empirical studies. We note that the responsible research and innovation (RRI) approach should facilitate a framework of shared taxonomy among stakeholders. By highlighting this situation, we follow the paradigm of emerging thinking and we seek to fill this knowledge gap theoretically and empirically. Therefore, in this study, we combined several strategies and perspectives. First, we conducted survey research concerning social capital in Poland and Lithuania to understand the impact of social capital and trust on stakeholder cooperation. Second, we conducted interviews with scientists who actively work to transfer knowledge into industry. Third, we utilized field notes from working experiences in research management. This work has theoretical and practical implications. The theoretical contribution of the paper demonstrates the construction of methodology based on emerging perspectives, and new theoretical insights, on professional discourses for implementing the responsible innovation approach in industrial ecosystems, by highlighting the commitments of main stakeholder groups. Practical input: our insights and empirical research will contribute toward sustainability policymaking and achieving substantial results in industrial ecosystems. The results indicate that if there is trust, then the government, companies, and society (in Poland and Lithuania) would be willing to cooperate with each other. However, there is a lack of trust and cooperation between universities and businesses. Stakeholders have become increasingly aware of the emergence of a science and industry cooperation as an open platform, enlarged with society and policies. They note the problem of making research public and transparent as part of a new mode of cooperation; however, they articulate RRI as a framework of shared taxonomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Asta Valackienė & Rafał Nagaj, 2021. "Shared Taxonomy for the Implementation of Responsible Innovation Approach in Industrial Ecosystems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-21, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9901-:d:628178
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9901/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9901/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Pirson & Deepak Malhotra, 2011. "Foundations of Organizational Trust: What Matters to Different Stakeholders?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 1087-1104, August.
    2. Abdulrahman Obaid AI-Youbi & Abdulmonem Al-Hayani & Hisham J. Bardesi & Mohammed Basheri & Miltiadis D. Lytras & Naif Radi Aljohani, 2020. "The King Abdulaziz University (KAU) Pandemic Framework: A Methodological Approach to Leverage Social Media for the Sustainable Management of Higher Education in Crisis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-21, May.
    3. Mazzucchelli, Alice & Chierici, Roberto & Tortora, Debora & Fontana, Stefano, 2021. "Innovation capability in geographically dispersed R&D teams: The role of social capital and IT support," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 742-751.
    4. Bellandi, Marco & Donati, Letizia & Cataneo, Alessandra, 2021. "Social innovation governance and the role of universities: Cases of quadruple helix partnerships in Italy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    5. Robert J. R. Elliott & Ingmar Schumacher & Cees Withagen, 2020. "Suggestions for a Covid-19 Post-Pandemic Research Agenda in Environmental Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 1187-1213, August.
    6. 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.
    7. Loet Leydesdorff & Henry Etzkowitz, 2003. "Can ‘the public’ be considered as a fourth helix in university-industry-government relations? Report on the Fourth Triple Helix Conference, 2002," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(1), pages 55-61, February.
    8. Argentiero, Amedeo & Cerqueti, Roy & Sabatini, Fabio, 2021. "Does social capital explain the Solow residual? A DSGE approach," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 35-53.
    9. Hadjielias, Elias & Dada, Olufunmilola (Lola) & Eliades, Kostas, 2021. "Entrepreneurial process in international multiunit franchise outlets: A social capital perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 13-28.
    10. Sharma, D. Deo & Blomstermo, Anders, 2003. "The internationalization process of Born Globals: a network view," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 12(6), pages 739-753, December.
    11. Cope, Jason, 2011. "Entrepreneurial learning from failure: An interpretative phenomenological analysis," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 604-623.
    12. Hodgson, Geoffrey M., 2019. "Taxonomic definitions in social science, with firms, markets and institutions as case studies," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 207-233, April.
    13. Meisam Ranjbari & Zahra Shams Esfandabadi & Simone Domenico Scagnelli & Peer-Olaf Siebers & Francesco Quatraro, 2021. "Recovery agenda for sustainable development post COVID-19 at the country level: developing a fuzzy action priority surface," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(11), pages 16646-16673, November.
    14. Jennifer Goodman & Angelina Korsunova & Minna Halme, 2017. "Our Collaborative Future: Activities and Roles of Stakeholders in Sustainability‐Oriented Innovation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 731-753, September.
    15. André Martinuzzi & Vincent Blok & Alexander Brem & Bernd Stahl & Norma Schönherr, 2018. "Responsible Research and Innovation in Industry—Challenges, Insights and Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-9, March.
    16. Rob Lubberink & Vincent Blok & Johan Van Ophem & Onno Omta, 2017. "Lessons for Responsible Innovation in the Business Context: A Systematic Literature Review of Responsible, Social and Sustainable Innovation Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-31, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Olga Navickienė & Asta Valackienė & Renata Činčikaitė & Ieva Meidute-Kavaliauskiene, 2023. "A Theoretical Model of the Development of Public Citizenship in a Sustainable Environment: Case of Lithuania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-15, February.

    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. 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.
    2. André Martinuzzi & Vincent Blok & Alexander Brem & Bernd Stahl & Norma Schönherr, 2018. "Responsible Research and Innovation in Industry—Challenges, Insights and Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-9, March.
    3. Agata Gurzawska, 2021. "Responsible Innovation in Business: Perceptions, Evaluation Practices and Lessons Learnt," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-27, February.
    4. Lehoux, P. & Miller, F.A. & Williams-Jones, B., 2020. "Anticipatory governance and moral imagination: Methodological insights from a scenario-based public deliberation study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    5. Milena Gojny-Zbierowska & Przemysław Zbierowski, 2021. "Improvisation as Responsible Innovation in Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-20, February.
    6. Jolita Ceicyte & Monika Petraite, 2018. "Networked Responsibility Approach for Responsible Innovation: Perspective of the Firm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, May.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Agata Sudolska & Andrzej Lis & Monika Chodorek, 2019. "Research Profiling for Responsible and Sustainable Innovations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-31, November.
    10. Winston Jerónimo Silvestre & Ana Fonseca & Sandra Naomi Morioka, 2022. "Strategic sustainability integration: Merging management tools to support business model decisions," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 2052-2067, July.
    11. Matthews, Nicholas & Stamford, Laurence & Shapira, Philip, 2021. "The role of business in constructing sustainable technologies: Can the Silicon Valley model be aligned with sustainable development?," SocArXiv sh9an, Center for Open Science.
    12. Ibo Van de Poel & Lotte Asveld & Steven Flipse & Pim Klaassen & Victor Scholten & Emad Yaghmaei, 2017. "Company Strategies for Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI): A Conceptual Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-18, November.
    13. 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.
    14. Beniamino Callegari & Olga Mikhailova, 2021. "RRI and Corporate Stakeholder Engagement: The Aquadvantage Salmon Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-18, February.
    15. Jilde Garst & Vincent Blok & Léon Jansen & Onno S. W. F. Omta, 2017. "Responsibility versus Profit: The Motives of Food Firms for Healthy Product Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-29, December.
    16. Wiarda, Martijn & van de Kaa, Geerten & Yaghmaei, Emad & Doorn, Neelke, 2021. "A comprehensive appraisal of responsible research and innovation: From roots to leaves," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    17. Mazzucchelli, Alice & Chierici, Roberto & Tortora, Debora & Fontana, Stefano, 2021. "Innovation capability in geographically dispersed R&D teams: The role of social capital and IT support," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 742-751.
    18. Alice Panciroli & Angela Santangelo & Simona Tondelli, 2020. "Mapping RRI Dimensions and Sustainability into Regional Development Policies and Urban Planning Instruments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-31, July.
    19. Carla Gonzales-Gemio & Claudio Cruz-Cázares & Mary Jane Parmentier, 2020. "Responsible Innovation in SMEs: A Systematic Literature Review for a Conceptual Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-27, December.
    20. Petr Hájek & Jan Stejskal, 2018. "R&D Cooperation and Knowledge Spillover Effects for Sustainable Business Innovation in the Chemical Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, April.

    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:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9901-:d:628178. 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.