Two tribes or more? The historical emergence of discourse coalitions of responsible research and innovation (rri) and Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)

IF 3.9 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Sally Randles, Elise Tancoigne, Pierre-Benoît Joly
{"title":"Two tribes or more? The historical emergence of discourse coalitions of responsible research and innovation (rri) and Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)","authors":"Sally Randles, Elise Tancoigne, Pierre-Benoît Joly","doi":"10.1080/23299460.2022.2061306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>ABSTRACT</b></p><p>Tracing the historical emergence of academic/policy discourses shines a light on processes of early institutionalisation, informs narratives of contemporary self-identity and provides a resource from which to imagine alternative futures. Contributing to this ambition our paper uses scientometric methods to undertake two socio-semantic analyses. First, we identify the <i>de-facto</i> origins and contemporary clustering of scientists’ discursive spaces of ‘responsibility’. This ‘rri corpus’ reveals seven distinct clusters – or discourse coalitions of responsibility – but shows limited cross-fertilisation between the clusters. Second we trace the emergence of European policy on ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’ (RRI). The ‘RRI corpus’ shows policy to have been dominated by a small number of actors. Some cross-over between rri and RRI provides evidence of discourse coalition building, but only a small group of actors occupy these strategic bridges. The paper offers a contribution to wider debates and strategic reflections on the past, present and futures of responsible innovation.</p>","PeriodicalId":46727,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Responsible Innovation","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Responsible Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2022.2061306","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Tracing the historical emergence of academic/policy discourses shines a light on processes of early institutionalisation, informs narratives of contemporary self-identity and provides a resource from which to imagine alternative futures. Contributing to this ambition our paper uses scientometric methods to undertake two socio-semantic analyses. First, we identify the de-facto origins and contemporary clustering of scientists’ discursive spaces of ‘responsibility’. This ‘rri corpus’ reveals seven distinct clusters – or discourse coalitions of responsibility – but shows limited cross-fertilisation between the clusters. Second we trace the emergence of European policy on ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’ (RRI). The ‘RRI corpus’ shows policy to have been dominated by a small number of actors. Some cross-over between rri and RRI provides evidence of discourse coalition building, but only a small group of actors occupy these strategic bridges. The paper offers a contribution to wider debates and strategic reflections on the past, present and futures of responsible innovation.

两个部落还是更多?责任研究与创新(responsible research and innovation, rri)和责任研究与创新(responsible research and innovation, rri)话语联盟的历史出现
摘要追踪学术/政策话语的历史出现,有助于揭示早期制度化的过程,为当代自我认同的叙述提供信息,并为想象另一种未来提供资源。为了实现这一目标,我们的论文使用科学计量学方法进行了两项社会语义分析。首先,我们确定了科学家“责任”话语空间的事实起源和当代集群。这个“rri语料库”揭示了七个不同的集群——或责任的话语联盟——但显示集群之间的交叉受精有限。其次,我们追溯了欧洲“负责任的研究与创新”(RRI)政策的出现。“RRI语料库”显示,政策一直由少数参与者主导。rri和rri之间的一些交叉提供了话语联盟建立的证据,但只有一小部分行动者占据了这些战略桥梁。本文对负责任创新的过去、现在和未来进行了更广泛的辩论和战略反思。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
20.50%
发文量
26
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Responsible Innovation (JRI) provides a forum for discussions of the normative assessment and governance of knowledge-based innovation. JRI offers humanists, social scientists, policy analysts and legal scholars, and natural scientists and engineers an opportunity to articulate, strengthen, and critique the relations among approaches to responsible innovation, thus giving further shape to a newly emerging community of research and practice. These approaches include ethics, technology assessment, governance, sustainability, socio-technical integration, and others. JRI intends responsible innovation to be inclusive of such terms as responsible development and sustainable development, and the journal invites comparisons and contrasts among such concepts. While issues of risk and environmental health and safety are relevant, JRI especially encourages attention to the assessment of the broader and more subtle human and social dimensions of innovation—including moral, cultural, political, and religious dimensions, social risk, and sustainability addressed in a systemic fashion.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信