IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/syspar/v31y2018i5d10.1007_s11213-018-9445-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

First Line Steps in Requirements Identification for Guidelines Development in Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)

Author

Listed:
  • Sara H. Wilford

    (De Montfort University)

Abstract

Responsible research and innovation (RRI) considers the impact of research and development on those who are likely to be directly or indirectly impacted by those activities, and provides a direction for the future of research practices in science and technology for the greater good. In the practical world of the lab or research group therefore, guidelines to assist researchers and scientists in the application of those RRI principles are needed. However, this paper is not concerned with the creation of guidelines themselves, but presents an RRI approach to identifying the requirements for guidelines. This is a first step that is often overlooked or presented as a fait accompli and yet it provides an essential factor in the eventual success or failure of guidelines, created for any purpose. What is required in a set of guidelines however, is not only dictated by the preferred outcome, but is also reflected in the process of its creation. Therefore, an RRI approach to identifying those requirements should also practice what the resulting RRI guidelines preach. Whilst initially developed for the production of guidelines for researchers in an EU RRI project, these approaches and principles can be applied across all disciplines when a set of guidelines need to be developed. The approach taken here, utilized several steps in its implementation. Firstly, through a review of the literature and an examination of guideline development in several research projects, a set of indicative requirements were created. A workshop/focus group with researchers from a range of disciplines, career stages and institutions led to the production of the second iteration, which then received further input from both experts in the field of RRI, philosophy and ethics. This led to the creation of the table of requirements for guidelines. By utilizing the core principles of RRI and through a critical and reflexive approach, this work presents a new technique for identifying first line steps in the creation of guidelines. The practical and flexible nature of this approach means that researchers and policy-makers are invited to use this method in their own guideline development.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:syspar:v:31:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s11213-018-9445-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11213-018-9445-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11213-018-9445-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11213-018-9445-z?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    2. Pandza, Krsto & Ellwood, Paul, 2013. "Strategic and ethical foundations for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1112-1125.
    3. Sophie Pellé & Bernard Reber, 2015. "Responsible Innovation in the Light of Moral Responsibility," Post-Print hal-01418017, HAL.
    4. Stilgoe, Jack & Owen, Richard & Macnaghten, Phil, 2013. "Developing a framework for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1568-1580.
    5. Sophie Pellé & Bernard Reber, 2015. "Responsible Innovation in the Light of Moral Responsibility," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01418017, HAL.
    6. Simon Joss & Arthur Brownlea, 1999. "Considering the concept of procedural justice for public policy- and decision-making in science and technology," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(5), pages 321-330, October.
    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. 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.

    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. Genus, Audley & Iskandarova, Marfuga, 2018. "Responsible innovation: its institutionalisation and a critique," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 1-9.
    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. Dalziel, Paul & Saunders, Caroline & Tait, Peter & Saunders, John & Miller, Sini & Guenther, Meike & Rutherford, Paul & Driver, Tim, 2018. "Rewarding responsible innovation when consumers are distant from producers: evidence from New Zealand," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(4).
    4. Fisher, Erik, 2019. "Governing with ambivalence: The tentative origins of socio-technical integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1138-1149.
    5. Miklós Lukovics & Beáta Udvari & Nikoletta Nádas & Erik Fisher, 2019. "Raising Awareness of Researchers-in-the-Making Toward Responsible Research and Innovation," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(4), pages 1558-1577, December.
    6. Pielow, Cornelia & Schulze-Ehlers, Birgit, 2016. "Strategic CSR in food industry SMEs: identifying individual hot spots," 26th International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA) World Forum, 2016, Aarhus, Denmark 275887, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association (IFAMA).
    7. Kate Chatfield & Konstantinos Iatridis & Bernd C. Stahl & Nearchos Paspallis, 2017. "Innovating Responsibly in ICT for Ageing: Drivers, Obstacles and Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-22, June.
    8. Tetiana Ivanova & Iryna Manaienko & Marina Shkrobot & Yuriy Tadeyev, 2021. "Theoretical Frameworks of Responsible Innovations," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 5, pages 143-157.
    9. Zhang, Stephen X. & Chen, Jiyao & He, Liangxing & Choudhury, Afreen, 2023. "Responsible Innovation: The development and validation of a scale," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    10. Lukovics, Miklós & Flipse, Steven M. & Udvari, Beáta & Fisher, Erik, 2017. "Responsible research and innovation in contrasting innovation environments: Socio-Technical Integration Research in Hungary and the Netherlands," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 172-182.
    11. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold, 2016. "Modeling the effect of responsible research and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 126-133.
    12. 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).
    13. Jiminez-Guerrero, Jose F. & Perez-Mesa, Juan C. & Burgos-Jimenez, Jeronimo de & Piedra-Munoz, Laura, 2018. "Considering the consumer in the design of a supply chain of perishables," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(4).
    14. Reichelt, Nicole & Nettle, Ruth, 2023. "Practice insights for the responsible adoption of smart farming technologies using a participatory technology assessment approach: The case of virtual herding technology in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    15. Timotijevic, Lada & Khan, Shumaisa S. & Raats, Monique & Braun, Susanne, 2019. "Research priority setting in food and health domain: European stakeholder beliefs about legitimacy criteria and processes," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 116-124.
    16. Sophie Bacq & Ruth V. Aguilera, 2022. "Stakeholder Governance for Responsible Innovation: A Theory of Value Creation, Appropriation, and Distribution," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 29-60, January.
    17. van Geenhuizen, Marina & Ye, Qing, 2014. "Responsible innovators: open networks on the way to sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 28-40.
    18. Thais Assis de Souza & Rodrigo Marçal Gandia & Bruna Habib Cavazza & André Grützmann & Isabelle Nicolaï, 2020. "A Conceptual Proposal for Responsible Innovation," Post-Print hal-03014720, HAL.
    19. Jakob Edler & Jan Fagerberg, 2017. "Innovation policy: what, why, and how," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(1), pages 2-23.
    20. Glover, Dominic & Poole, Nigel, 2019. "Principles of innovation to build nutrition-sensitive food systems in South Asia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 63-73.

    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:spr:syspar:v:31:y:2018:i:5:d:10.1007_s11213-018-9445-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.