IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v46y2019i2p198-209..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Responsible research and innovation in Europe: A cross-country comparative analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Niels Mejlgaard
  • Carter Bloch
  • Emil Bargmann Madsen

Abstract

The objective of this article is to contribute to the emerging attempts to foster empirical, quantitative approaches to Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), and to provide a low-resolution map of the European RRI landscape, which can serve as a vehicle for international learning. The article presents indicators of RRI aimed at characterising countries. It examines the empirical structure of the data collected in the ‘Monitoring the evolution and benefits of Responsible Research and Innovation’ (MoRRI) project and reports patterns across Europe. Factor analysis is applied to identify 11 empirically-anchored dimensions of RRI. Based on indices for these dimensions, cluster analysis reveals four distinct clusters of countries. These results point to diversity regarding the empirically-manifest components of RRI as well as diversity in the RRI profiles of the 28 European Union Member States.

Suggested Citation

  • Niels Mejlgaard & Carter Bloch & Emil Bargmann Madsen, 2019. "Responsible research and innovation in Europe: A cross-country comparative analysis," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 198-209.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:46:y:2019:i:2:p:198-209.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scy048
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Fellnhofer, Katharina, 2022. "Entrepreneurial alertness toward responsible research and innovation: Digital technology makes the psychological heart of entrepreneurship pound," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    2. Michael O’Grady & Eleni Mangina, 2022. "Adoption of Responsible Research and Innovation in Citizen Observatories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-14, June.
    3. Joshua B Cohen & Anne M C Loeber & ilse Marschalek & Michael J Bernstein & Vincent Blok & Raúl Tabarés & Robert Gianni & Erich Griessler, 2024. "From experimentation to structural change: fostering institutional entrepreneurship for public engagement in research and innovation," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 324-336.
    4. Marja Vehviläinen & Liekki Valaskivi, 2022. "Situated gender equality in regional research and innovation: Collaborative knowledge production [Policies as Gendering Practices: Re-Viewing Categorical Distinctions]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 561-572.
    5. Marta Entradas & João M. Santos, 2021. "Returns of research funding are maximised in media visibility for excellent institutes," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-8, December.

    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:oup:scippl:v:46:y:2019:i:2:p:198-209.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.