Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Practices of Responsible Research and Innovation: A Review

  • Review
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents results of a systematic literature review of RRI practices which aimed to gather insights to further both the theoretical and practical development of RRI. Analysing practices of RRI and mapping out main approaches as well as the values, dimensions or characteristics pursued with those practices, can add to understanding of the more conceptual discussions of RRI and enhance the academic debate. The results, based on a corpus of 52 articles, show that practices already reflect the rich variety of values, dimensions and characteristics provided in the main definitions in use, although not all are addressed yet. In fact, articles dealing with uptake of RRI practices may be improved by including more methodological information. RRI practices may further the conceptual debate by including more reflection, and these may foster mutual responsiveness between theory and practice by early anticipating impacts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Asveld, L., Ganzevles, J., & Osseweijer, P. (2015). Trustworthiness and responsible research and innovation: The case of the bio-economy. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics,28(3), 571–588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-015-9542-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benford, S., Greenhalgh, C., Anderson, B., Jacobs, R., Golembewski, M., Jirotka, M., et al. (2015). The ethical implications of HCI’s turn to the cultural. ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction,22(5), 24. https://doi.org/10.1145/2775107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Betten, A. W., Roelofsen, A., & Broerse, J. E. W. (2013). Interactive learning and action: Realizing the promise of synthetic biology for global health. Systems and Synthetic Biology,7(3), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11693-013-9113-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brey, P. A. E. (2012). Anticipating ethical issues in emerging IT. Ethics and Information Technology,14(4), 305–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-012-9293-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruijnis, M. R. N., Blok, V., Stassen, E. N., & Gremmen, H. G. J. (2015). Moral “Lock-In” in responsible innovation: The ethical and social aspects of killing day-old chicks and its alternatives. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics,28(5), 939–960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-015-9566-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burget, M., Bardone, E., & Pedaste, M. (2017). Definitions and conceptual dimensions of responsible research and innovation: A literature review. Science and Engineering Ethics,23(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9782-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, S. R., & Horst, M. (2015). Crafting the group: Care in research management. Social Studies of Science,45(3), 371–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312715585820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Bakker, E., De Lauwere, C., Hoes, A.-C., & Beekman, V. (2014). Responsible research and innovation in miniature: Information asymmetries hindering a more inclusive ‘nanofood’ development. Science and Public Policy,41(3), 294–305. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, I. M., Kupper, F., Arentshorst, M., & Broerse, J. (2015). Responsible reporting: Neuroimaging news in the age of responsible research and innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9684-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Saille, S. (2015a). Dis-inviting the Unruly Public. Science as Culture,24(1), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2014.986323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Saille, S. (2015b). Innovating innovation policy: the emergence of ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’. Journal of Responsible Innovation,2(2), 152–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2015.1045280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra, A. M., Schuijff, M., Yin, L., & Mkansi, S. (2017). RRI in China and South Africa: Cultural adaptation report (Deliverable 3.3 NUCLEUS project). Retrieved April 8, 2019, from https://issuu.com/nucleusrri/docs/d3.3_nucleus_cultural_adaptation_re.

  • Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2013). Options for strengthening responsible research and innovation. Report of the Expert Group on the State of Art in Europe on Responsible Research and Innovation. Retrieved April 8, 2019, from https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1e6ada76-a9f7-48f0-aa86-4fb9b16dd10c/language-en.

  • Douglas, C. M. W., & Stemerding, D. (2013). Governing synthetic biology for global health through responsible research and innovation. Systems and Synthetic Biology,7(3), 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11693-013-9119-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden, G., Jirotka, M., & Stahl, B. (2013). Responsible research and innovation critical reflection into the potential social consequences of ICT. In R. Wieringa, S. Nurcan, C. Rolland, & J. L. Cavarero (Eds.), Seventh International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS). IEEE.

  • Ellwood, P., Pandza, K., & Fisher, E. (2013). Organizational capability life cycles for responsible innovation. In N. Savage, M. Gorman, & A. Street (Eds.), Emerging technologies: Socio-behavioral life cycle approaches (pp. 117–138). Baca Raton: CRC Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2018). The EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. Science with and for Society. Retrieved April 8, 2019, from https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/responsible-research-innovation.

  • Fisher, E., & Rip, A. (2013). Responsible innovation: Multi-level dynamics and soft intervention practices. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation. Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 165–184). London: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Flipse, S. M., Van der Sanden, M. C. A., & Osseweijer, P. (2013a). Midstream modulation in biotechnology industry: Redefining what is ‘part of the job’ of researchers in industry. Science and Engineering Ethics,19(3), 1141–1164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-012-9411-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flipse, S. M., Van der Sanden, M. C. A., & Osseweijer, P. (2013b). The why and how of enabling the integration of social and ethical aspects in research and development. Science and Engineering Ethics,19(3), 703–725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-012-9423-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flipse, S. M., Van der Sanden, M. C. A., & Osseweijer, P. (2014a). Setting up spaces for collaboration in industry between researchers from the natural and social sciences. Science and Engineering Ethics,20(1), 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flipse, S. M., Van der Sanden, M. C. A., Radstake, M., De Winde, J. H., & Osseweijer, P. (2014b). The DNA of socially responsible innovation: Social and natural scientists need to establish mutual understanding and a common language to efficiently work together. EMBO Reports,15(2), 134–137. https://doi.org/10.1002/embr.201337949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsberg, E. M., Quaglio, G., O’Kane, H., Karapiperis, T., Van Woensel, L., & Arnaldi, S. (2015). Assessment of science and technologies: Advising for and with responsibility. Technology in Society,42, 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2014.12.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gemen, R., Breda, J., Coutinho, D., Fernández Celemín, L., Khan, S., Kugelberg, S., et al. (2015). Stakeholder engagement in food and health innovation research programming—Key learnings and policy recommendations from the INPROFOOD project. Nutrition Bulletin,40(1), 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/nbu.12127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gianni, R., Ikonen, V., Goujon, P., & Pearson, J. (2014). Panel—Responsible innovation in research: A reflexive governance to scientific development. Paper presented at the 2014 IEEE international symposium on ethics in science, technology and engineering, ETHICS 2014.

  • Grinbaum, A. (2013). The old-new meaning of researcher’s responsibility. Etica e Politica,15(1), 236–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grinbaum, A., & Groves, C. (2013). What is “Responsible” about responsible innovation? Understanding the ethical issues. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation. Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 119–142). London: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ikonen, V., Kaasinen, E., Heikkilä, P., & Niemelä, M. (2015). Human-driven design of microand nanotechnology based future sensor systems. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society,13(2), 110–129. https://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-10-2013-0039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • König, H., Dorado-Morales, P., & Porcar, M. (2015). Responsibility and intellectual property in synthetic biology: A proposal for using Responsible Research and Innovation as a basic framework for intellectual property decisions in synthetic biology. EMBO Reports,16(9), 1055–1059. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201541048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krabbenborg, L., & Mulder, H. A. J. (2015). Upstream public engagement in nanotechnology: Constraints and opportunities. Science Communication,37(4), 452–484. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547015588601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landeweerd, L., Townend, D., Mesman, J., & Van Hoyweghen, I. (2015). Reflections on different governance styles in regulating science: a contribution to ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’. Life Sciences, Society and Policy,11, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-015-0026-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • L’Astorina, A., Tomasoni, I., Basoni, A., & Carrara, P. (2015). Beyond the dissemination of Earth Observation research: Stakeholders’ and users’ involvement in project co-design. Journal of Science Communication,14(3), C03.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, R. G. (2012). Look at mother nature on the run in the 21st century: Responsibility, research and innovation. Transnational Environmental Law,1(1), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102511000136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, R. G., & Petts, J. (2013). Adaptive governance for responsible innovation. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation. Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 143–164). London: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • MacIntyre, A. (2007). After virtue. A study in moral theory (3rd ed.). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malsch, I. (2013). Responsible innovation in practice-concepts and tools. Philosophia Reformata,78(1), 47–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malsch, I. (2015). Communitarian and subsidiarity perspectives on responsible innovation at a global level. NanoEthics,9(2), 137–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-015-0234-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malsch, I., Subramanian, V., Semenzin, E., Hristozov, D., Marcomini, A., Mullins, M., et al. (2015). Empowering citizens in international governance of nanotechnologies. Journal of Nanoparticle Research,17(5), 215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-015-3019-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McBride, N. & Stahl, B. (2014). Developing responsible research and innovation for robotics. In 2014 IEEE international symposium on ethics in science, technology and engineering.

  • NUCLEUS Annual Conference Report. (2017). Retrieved April 8, 2019, from http://www.nucleus-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/D6.3-NUCLEUS-Annual-Conference-Report-2017.pdf.

  • Owen, R., & Goldberg, N. (2010). Responsible innovation: A pilot study with the U.K. engineering and physical sciences research council. Risk Analysis,30(11), 1699–1707. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01517.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parkhill, K., Pidgeon, N., Corner, A., & Vaughan, N. (2013). Deliberation and responsible innovation: A geoengineering case study. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation. Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 219–240). London: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences. A practical guide. Malden: Blackwell.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ravesteijn, W., He, J., & Chen, C. (2014). Responsible innovation and stakeholder management in infrastructures: The Nansha Port Railway Project. Ocean and Coastal Management,100, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.07.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reijers, W., Wright, D., Brey, P., Weber, K., Rodrigues, R., O’Sullivan, D., et al. (2018). Methods for practising ethics in research and innovation: A literature review, critical analysis and recommendations. Science and Engineering Ethics,24(5), 1437–1481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9961-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rip, A. (2014). The past and future of RRI. Life Sciences, Society and Policy,10(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-014-0017-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D. K. R. (2009). Co-evolutionary scenarios: An application to prospecting futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,76(9), 1222–1239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2009.07.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering. (2004). Nanoscience and nanotechnologies: Opportunities and uncertainties. London: Royal Society. https://royalsociety.org/~/media/royal_society_content/policy/publications/2004/9693.pdf.

  • Ruggiu, D. (2015). Anchoring European Governance: Two versions of responsible research and innovation and EU fundamental rights as ‘normative anchor points’. NanoEthics,9(3), 217–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-015-0240-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuurbiers, D. (2011). What happens in the Lab: Applying midstream modulation to enhance critical reflection in the laboratory. Science and Engineering Ethics,17(4), 769–788. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9317-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Setiawan, A. D., & Singh, R. (2015). Responsible innovation in practice: The adoption of solar PV in telecom towers in Indonesia. In Responsible innovation 2: Concepts, approaches, and applications (pp. 225–244).

  • Shelley-Egan, C., Bowman, D. M., & Robinson, D. K. R. (2018). Devices of responsibility: Over a decade of responsible research and innovation initiatives for nanotechnologies. Science and Engineering Ethics,24(6), 1719–1746. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-9978-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shortall, O. K., Raman, S., & Millar, K. (2015). Are plants the new oil? Responsible innovation, biorefining and multipurpose agriculture. Energy Policy,86, 360–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.07.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simaková, E., & Coenen, C. (2013). Visions, hype, and expectations: A place for responsibility. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation. Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 241–268). London: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Spruit, S. L., Hoople, G. D., & Rolfe, D. A. (2015). Just a cog in the machine? The individual responsibility of researchers in nanotechnology is a duty to collectivize. Science and Engineering Ethics,22(3), 871–887. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9718-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, B. C., Eden, G., Flick, C., Jirotka, M., Nguyen, Q. A., & Timmermans, J. (2015). The observatory for responsible research and innovation in ICT: Identifying problems and sharing good practice. In B. J. Koops, I. Oosterlaken, H. Romijn, T. Swierstra, & J. van den Hoven (Eds.), Responsible innovation 2: Concepts, approaches, and applications (pp. 105–120). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, B. C., McBride, N., Wakunuma, K., & Flick, C. (2014). The empathic care robot: A prototype of responsible research and innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,84, 74–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.08.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy,42(9), 1568–1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, K., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Responsible innovation—Opening up dialogue and debate. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation: Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 85–107). London: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Timmermans, J., Zhao, Y., & Van der Hoven, J. (2011). Ethics and nanopharmacy: Value sensitive design of new drugs. NanoEthics,5(3), 269–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Hoven, J. (2013). Value sensitive design and responsible innovation. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation. Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 75–84). London: John Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Meij, M. G. (2015). Reflections on the impact of (playful) deliberation processes in contexts of responsible research and innovation. Journal of Science Communication,14(3), C04.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Schomberg, R. (2013a). A vision of responsible research and innovation. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible innovation. Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 51–74). London: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Von Schomberg, R. (2013b). The quest for the ‘right’ impacts of science and technology. A framework for responsible research and innovation. In J. Van den Hoven, N. Doorn, T. Swierstra, B.-J. Koops, & H. Romijn (Eds.), Responsible innovation 1. Innovative solutions for global issues (pp. 33–50). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickson, F., & Forsberg, E.-M. (2015). Standardising responsibility? The significance of interstitial spaces. Science and Engineering Ethics,21(5), 1159–1180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9602-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wodzisz, R. (2015). Case study of R-1234yf refrigerant: Implications for the framework for responsible innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics,21(6), 1413–1433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9612-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, D., Gellert, R., Gutwirth, S., & Friedewald, M. (2011). Minimizing technology risks with PIAs, precaution, and participation. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine,30(4), 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1109/MTS.2011.943460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful for the help of Drs. Peter Noort from the University Library of the University of Twente, for the support of Prof. Dr. Menno de Jong of the University of Twente when preparing and conducting the review study, and for the helpful comments made by the reviewers on earlier versions of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Twente, P.O. Box 217, 7500 AE, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Mirjam Schuijff & Anne M. Dijkstra

Authors
  1. Mirjam Schuijff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anne M. Dijkstra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anne M. Dijkstra.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

This study was funded by the European Commission’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme as part of the NUCLEUS project (Grant Number 664932). NUCLEUS is a 4-year project, running from 2015 to 2019, bringing RRI in practice in universities and research institutes.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schuijff, M., Dijkstra, A.M. Practices of Responsible Research and Innovation: A Review. Sci Eng Ethics 26, 533–574 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00167-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00167-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation