Responsible research and innovation in contrasting innovation environments: Socio-Technical Integration Research in Hungary and the Netherlands

Recently, the notion of responsible research and innovation (RRI) has been gaining momentum in policy and practice. The main claim of RRI is that social, ethical and environmental aspects should be taken into consideration in scientific research and innovation activities. Socio-Technical Integration Research (STIR) is one of the first tools emerging from RRI research that is designed to help research, development and innovation actors practically implement key aspects of RRI in their daily work. Since its inception in 2006, results from multiple international studies have demonstrated the possibility and utility of STIR, albeit in developed countries. In 2015, a STIR pilot study was conducted in the developing region of Szeged, Hungary. Its results are similar, but far from those achieved in developed countries. In this paper we explore what, if any, role the innovation environment plays in the outcomes of the implementation of RRI practices such as STIR. We analyze STIR results and effectiveness in the wider context of the national innovation environments of Hungary and the Netherlands. Our findings suggest that the innovation environment can affect the success and effectiveness of approaches such as STIR. As a policy recommendation, we therefore recommend that RRI approaches such as STIR be adapted to the innovation environment of the country concerned.

[1]  David Baxter,et al.  Beyond regulation: risk pricing and responsible innovation. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[2]  Pia Piroschka Otte,et al.  Developing technology: The quest for a new theoretical framework for understanding the role of technology in human development , 2014 .

[3]  Ravi Jain,et al.  Rethinking industrial research, development and innovation in the 21st century , 2014 .

[4]  J. Winiecki.  Soviet-type economies' strategy for catching-up through technology im ports—an anatomy of failure☆ , 1987 .

[5]  Innovation in crisis: Hungary before and after the watershed of 1989☆ , 1994 .

[6]  A. H. Kiran.  Does responsible innovation presuppose design instrumentalism? Examining the case of Telecare at home in the Netherlands. , 2012 .

[7]  P. Osseweijer,et al.  Improving industrial R&D practices with social and ethical aspects: Aligning key performance indicators with social and ethical aspects in food technology R&D , 2014 .

[8]  Michael E. Gorman,et al.  Mapping the integrative field: taking stock of socio-technical collaborations , 2015 .

[9]  Krsto Pandza,et al.  Strategic and ethical foundations for responsible innovation , 2013 .

[10]  F. Zouaghi,et al.  Has the global financial crisis had different effects on innovation performance in the agri-food sector by comparison to the rest of the economy? , 2016 .

[11]  J. Broerse,et al.  Exploring responsible innovation : Dutch public perceptions of the future of medical neuroimaging technology , 2016 .

[12]  J. Stilgoe,et al.  Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society , 2012, Emerging Technologies: Ethics, Law and Governance.

[13]  Steven M. Flipse,et al.  Midstream Modulation in Biotechnology Industry: Redefining What is ‘Part of the Job’ of Researchers in Industry , 2013, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[14]  Bharadwaj Rao,et al.  The societal impact of commercial drones , 2016 .

[15]  Lukovics Miklós,et al.  Responsible Innovation and R&D&I Controlling , 2014 .

[16]  M. Cho,et al.  Barriers to Considering Ethical and Societal Implications of Research: Perceptions of Life Scientists , 2012, AJOB primary research.

[17]  Xavier Pavie,et al.  Addressing the Wicked Problem of Responsible Innovation through Design Thinking , 2014 .

[18]  A. Rip,et al.  The past and future of constructive technology assessment , 1997 .

[19]  Daan Schuurbiers,et al.  What happens in the Lab: Applying Midstream Modulation to Enhance Critical Reflection in the Laboratory , 2011, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[20]  R. V. Schomberg.  Prospects for Technology Assessment in a Framework of Responsible Research and Innovation , 2011 .

[21]  R. C. López,et al.  The GMO Regulation in the EU and the Commercial Conflict with the United States , 2002 .

[22]  J. Gébert,et al.  The outlines of innovation policy in the capability approach , 2014 .

[23]  Shawn C. Kimmel,et al.  Roadblocks to responsible innovation: Exploring technology assessment and adoption in U.S. public highway construction ☆ , 2016 .

[24]  Miklós Lukovics,et al.  A felelősségteljes innovációról , 2015 .

[25]  David H. Guston,et al.  Real-time technology assessment , 2020, Emerging Technologies: Ethics, Law and Governance.

[26]  Nigel Roome,et al.  Understanding Responsible Innovation in Small Producers’ Clusters in Vietnam through Actor-Network Theory , 2015 .

[27]  Sven Wydra,et al.  Challenges for technology diffusion policy to achieve socio-economic goals , 2015 .

[28]  Adalberto Mantovani Martiniano de Azevedo,et al.  Responsible innovation across borders: tensions, paradoxes and possibilities , 2014 .

[29]  C. Mitcham,et al.  Midstream Modulation of Technology: Governance From Within , 2006 .

[30]  Erhan Atay,et al.  Global Competitiveness in the EU Through Green Innovation Technologies and Knowledge Production , 2015 .

[31]  Marcie Ingham,et al.  The societal system and responsible innovations: Freeing sustainable development from a deadlock , 2011 .

[32]  Ellen-Marie Forsberg,et al.  Assessment of science and technologies: Advising for and with responsibility , 2015 .

[33]  A. Olper,et al.  GMO Regulations, International Trade and the Imperialism of Standards , 2010 .

[34]  Yi Liu,et al.  Responsible innovation in port development: the Rotterdam Maasvlakte 2 and the Dalian Dayao Bay extension projects. , 2015, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[35]  J. Stilgoe,et al.  Developing a framework for responsible innovation* , 2013, The Ethics of Nanotechnology, Geoengineering and Clean Energy.

[36]  T. Ben,et al.  Trust relationships within R&D networks: A case study from the biotechnological industry , 2012 .

[37]  Arie Rip,et al.  Bridging the Gap Between Innovation and ELSA: The TA Program in the Dutch Nano-R&D Program NanoNed , 2013, NanoEthics.

[38]  Ryan Gunderson.  The sociology of technology before the turn to technology , 2016 .

[39]  Charles Edquist,et al.  Systems of Innovation Approaches - Their Emergence and Characteristics , 2013 .

[40]  Ha Henny Romijn,et al.  Limits to responsible innovation , 2016 .

[41]  M. Coccia.  Socio-cultural origins of the patterns of technological innovation: What is the likely interaction among religious culture, religious plurality and innovation? Towards a theory of socio-cultural drivers of the patterns of technological innovation , 2014 .

[42]  Erik Fisher,et al.  Socio-technical integration research in an Eastern European setting: Distinct features, challenges and opportunities , 2017 .

[43]  Yandong Zhao,et al.  Responsible governance in science and technology policy: Reflections from Europe, China and India , 2015 .

[44]  A. Maslow.  Motivation and Personality , 1954 .

[45]  Qian Wang,et al.  Reflecting on the philosophy of technology in China in the form of five questions , 2015 .

[46]  David H Guston,et al.  Understanding ‘anticipatory governance’ , 2014, Social Studies of Science.

[47]  Adrian Bogdan Ciocanel,et al.  Innovation and Competitiveness in European Context , 2015 .

[48]  J. Hoven.  Value Sensitive Design and Responsible Innovation , 2013 .

[49]  G. Dosi,et al.  Technology and Costs in International Competitiveness: From Countries and Sectors to Firms , 2014 .

[50]  Pak-Hang Wong.  Responsible innovation for decent nonliberal peoples: a dilemma? , 2016 .

[51]  P. Aerni.  Stakeholder attitudes towards the risks and benefits of genetically modified crops in South Africa , 2005 .

[52]  A. Viseu.  Caring for nanotechnology? Being an integrated social scientist , 2015, Social studies of science.

[53]  E. Unterfrauner,et al.  Interactive reflection trainings on RRI for multiple stakeholder groups , 2017 .