Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology

http://www.managingforimpact.org/sites/default/files/case/stilgoe_owen_macnaghten_2013_developing_a_framework_for_responsible_innovation.pdf

Developing a framework for responsible innovation

The terms 'antioxidant', 'oxidative stress' and 'oxidative damage' are widely used but rarely defined. This brief review attempts to define them and to examine the ways in which oxidative stress and oxidative damage can affect cell behaviour both in vivo and in cell culture, using cancer as an example.

Biochemistry of oxidative stress

The term responsible (research and) innovation has gained increasing EU policy relevance in the last two years, in particular within the European Commission’s Science in Society programme, in the context of the Horizon 2020 Strategy. We provide a brief historical overview of the concept, and identify three distinct features that are emerging from associated discourses. The first is an emphasis on the democratic governance of the purposes of research and innovation and their orientation towards the ‘right impacts’. The second is responsiveness, emphasising the integration and institutionalisation of established approaches of anticipation, reflection and deliberation in and around research and innovation, influencing the direction of these and associated policy. The third concerns the framing of responsibility itself in the context of research and innovation as collective activities with uncertain and unpredictable consequences. Finally, we reflect on possible motivations for responsible innovation itself.

Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(13)62229-1.pdf

How to increase value and reduce waste when research priorities are set

This introductory essay looks back on the two decades since the journal Public Understanding of Science was launched. Drawing on the invited commentaries in this special issue, we can see narratives of continuity and change around the practice and politics of public engagement with science. Public engagement would seem to be a necessary but insufficient part of opening up science and its governance. Those of us who have been involved in advocating, conducting and evaluating public engagement practice could be accused of over-promising. If we, as social scientists, are going to continue a normative commitment to the idea of public engagement, we should therefore develop new lines of argument and analysis. Our support for the idea of public engagement needs qualifying, as part of a broader, more ambitious interest in the idea of publicly engaged science.

/pdf/why-should-we-promote-public-engagement-with-science-3biqlyt7hc.pdf

Why should we promote public engagement with science

“Responsible innovation,” in reality, lacks definition and clarity, both in concept and practice. This chapter begins by emphasizing that science and innovation have not only produced understanding, knowledge, and value (economic, social, or otherwise), but also questions, dilemmas, and unintended impacts. It presents a framework for responsible innovation, based on four dimensions-anticipatory, reflective, deliberative, and responsive. The chapter emphasizes that this must be able to reflect on both the products and purposes of science and innovation. It reminds of the rich history in a number of fields of study, both theoretical and applied, which make a significant and important contribution both to the framing and definition of responsible innovation, and to how this is translated through the dimensions into practice. The chapter concludes with some closing thoughts on implementation, on how the embedding of responsible innovation as a genuinely transformative and constructive approach can be supported.

/pdf/a-framework-for-responsible-innovation-1mlod5ckh8.pdf

A Framework for Responsible Innovation

Self-driving cars, a quintessentially ‘smart’ technology, are not born smart. The algorithms that control their movements are learning as the technology emerges. Self-driving cars represent a high-stakes test of the powers of machine learning, as well as a test case for social learning in technology governance. Society is learning about the technology while the technology learns about society. Understanding and governing the politics of this technology means asking ‘Who is learning, what are they learning and how are they learning?’ Focusing on the successes and failures of social learning around the much-publicized crash of a Tesla Model S in 2016, I argue that trajectories and rhetorics of machine learning in transport pose a substantial governance challenge. ‘Self-driving’ or ‘autonomous’ cars are misnamed. As with other technologies, they are shaped by assumptions about social needs, solvable problems, and economic opportunities. Governing these technologies in the public interest means improving soci...

/pdf/machine-learning-social-learning-and-the-governance-of-self-205ezv0z1y.pdf

Jack Stilgoe

Papers

Developing a framework for responsible innovation

Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society

Why should we promote public engagement with science

A Framework for Responsible Innovation

Machine learning, social learning and the governance of self-driving cars: