[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation: A Phronetic Perspective

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Across the European research area and beyond, efforts are being mobilized to align research and innovation processes and products with societal values and needs, and to create mechanisms for inclusive priority setting and knowledge production. A central concern is how to foster a culture of “Responsible Research and Innovation” (RRI) among scientists and engineers. This paper focuses on RRI teaching at higher education institutions. On the basis of interviews and reviews of academic and policy documents, it highlights the generic aspects of teaching aimed at invoking a sense of care and societal obligation, and provides a set of exemplary cases of RRI-related teaching. It argues that the Aristotelian concept of phronesis can capture core properties of the objectives of RRI-related teaching activities. Teaching should nurture the students’ capacity in terms of practical wisdom, practical ethics, or administrative ability in order to enable them to act virtuously and responsibly in contexts which are often characterized by uncertainty, contention, and controversy.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. More information on the project at http://heirri.eu/.

  2. The dilemma game can be found here: https://www.eur.nl/fileadmin/ASSETS/ieb/integriteit/24708_integriteitsspel_interactief_2016.pdf.

References

  • Akaygun, S., Adadan, E., Sanyal, A., & Açikel, B. (2016). Nano and health: Teacher notes. Retrieved from http://www.irresistible-project.eu/index.php/en/resources/teaching-modules. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • Aristotle. (2009). The Nicomachean ethics (D. Ross, Trans., revised with an introduction and notes by Lesley Brown). Oxford: OUP. ProQuest Ebook Central.

  • Arnaldi, S., & Bianchi, L. (2016). Responsibility in science and technology: Elements of a social theory. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Birnbacher, D. (1999). The socratic method in teaching medical ethics: Potentials and limitations. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 2, 219–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broerse, J. (2016). Integrating RRI in universities: Training future students in transdisciplinary research. In Keynote session at the 1st HEIRRI conference “Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation at University”, Barcelona, Spain.

  • Burget, M., Bardone, E., & Pedaste, M. (2016). Definitions and conceptual dimensions of Responsible Research and Innovation: A literature review. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Information Science and Media Studies. (2015). ViSmedia—Visual surveillance technologies and journalism. Retrieved from http://www.uib.no/en/infomedia/94035/vismedia-%E2%80%93-visual-surveillance-technologies-and-journalism. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • European Union. (2012). Responsible Research and Innovation: Europe’s ability to respond to societal challenges. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_public_engagement/responsible-research-and-innovation-leaflet_en.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • Felt, U., Fochler, M., Müller, A., & Strassnic, M. (2009). Unruly ethics: On the difficulties of a bottom-up approach to ethics in the field of genomics. Public Understanding of Science, 18(3), 354–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Funtowicz, S., & Strand, R. (2011). Change and commitment: Beyond risk and responsibility. Journal of Risk Research, 14, 995–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, M. (1999). Science’s new social contract with society. Nature, 402, C81–C84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glerup, C., & Horst, M. (2014). Mapping ‘social responsibility’ in science. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1(1), 31–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griessler, E., & Littig, B. (2006). Neosokratische Dialoge zu ethischen Fragen der Xenotransplantation. Ein Beitrag zur Bearbeitung ethischer Probleme in partizipativer Technikfolgenabschätzung. In E. Buchinger & U. Felt (Eds.), Technik- und Wissenschaftssoziologie in Österreich. Stand und Perspektiven. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Soziologie. Sonderheft (pp. 131–157). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchings, B. (2006). Principles of enquiry-based learning. The University of Manchester, Centre for Excellence in Enquiry-Based Learning. Retrieved from http://www.ceebl.manchester.ac.uk/resources/papers/ceeblgr002.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • IRRESISTIBLE. (2014). The project bringing Responsible Research and Innovation into the classroom. A brief overview of the project. Retrieved from http://www.irresistible-project.eu/images/irr-mat/IRRESISTIBLE_folder_EN_02-2014.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • Italian Presidency of the Council of the European Union. (2014). Rome declaration on Responsible Research and Innovation in Europe. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/rome_declaration_RRI_final_21_November.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • Kjølberg, K. L., & Strand, R. (2011). Conversations about responsible nanoresearch. Nanoethics, 5, 99–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristjánsson, K. (2015). Phronesis as an ideal in professional medical ethics: Some preliminary positionings and problematics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 36, 299–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindner, R., Kuhlmann, S., & Walhout, B. (2016). Developing an orientating framework for strategic reflection: The Res-AGorA responsibility navigator. Technikfolgenabschätzung: Theorie und Praxis, 25(2), 66–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mejlgaard, N., Buljan, I., Elías, N. S., Cayetano i Giralt, M., Griessler, E., Hansen, L. S., Lang, A., Marušić, A., Revuelta de la Poza, G., Strand, R., & Wuketich, M. (2016a). Stock taking/inventorying (WP2): Deliverable 2.2 state of the art review. Retrieved from http://www.guninetwork.org/files/images/imce/heirri_wp2_d2.2.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • Mejlgaard, N., Buljan, I., Saladié, N., Altenhofer, M., Cayetano, M., Gmelch, N., Griessler, E., Gylstroff, S., Lang, A., Marušić, A., Revuelta, G., Strand. R., & Wuketich, M. (2016b). Stock taking/inventorying (WP2): Deliverable 2.3 HEIRRI database. Retrieved from http://www.guninetwork.org/files/images/imce/heirri_wp2_d2.3.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • Mejlgaard, N., & Griessler, E. (2016). Monitoring RRI in Europe: Approach and key observations. In R. Lindner, S. Kuhlmann, S. Randles, B. Bedsted, G. Gorgoni, E. Griessler, A. Loconto & N. Mejlgaard (Eds.), Navigating towards shared responsibility in research and innovation: Approach, process and results of the Res-AGorA project (pp. 115–120). Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer ISI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Natali, C. (2014). The book on wisdom. In R. Polansky (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Aristotle’s Nicomachean ethics (pp. 180–202). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nyre, L., Gynnild, A., & Guribye, F. (2015). Drones in education: Teaching students to make responsible journalism with new technology. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/heirriproject/docs/smart_drones_for_journalism._teachi. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible Research and Innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy, 39, 751–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pakaluk, M. (2005). Aristotle’s Nichomachean ethics: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Puig de la Bellacasa, M. (2011). Matters of care in technoscience: Assembling neglected things. Social Studies of Science, 41, 85–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ribeiro, B. E., Smith, R. D. J., & Millar, K. (2016). A mobilising concept? Unpacking academic representations of Responsible Research and Innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23, 81–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savery, J. R. (2015). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. In A. Walker, H. Leary, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & P. E. Ertmers (Eds.), Essential readings in problem-based learning. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapin, S., & Schaffer, S. (1985). Leviathan and the air-pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the experimental life. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelley-Egan, C., Wright, D., Benčin, R., Riha, J. S., Strle, G., Ovadia, D., Cañedo, A. P., Angeli, C., & Sotiriou, M. (2014). SATORI deliverable D2.1—Report (handbook) of participatory processes. Retrieved from http://satoriproject.eu/media/D2.1_Report-handbook-of-participatory-processes_FINAL1.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • STIPS. (2012a). STIPS: Program for education and research on science and technology in public sphere. Retrieved form http://stips.jp/english/. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • STIPS. (2012b). Science and technology in public sphere. Retrieved from http://www.stips.kyoto-u.ac.jp/stips_e. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • Sunderland, M. E., Taebi, B., Carson, C., & Kastenberg, W. (2014). Teaching global perspectives: Engineering ethics across international and academic borders. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1(2), 228–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tassone, V. C., O’Mahony, C., McKenna, E., Eppink, H. J., & Wals, A. E. J. (2017). (Re-)designing higher education curricula in times of systemic dysfunction: A Responsible Research and Innovation perspective. Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0211-4. (online first).

    Google Scholar 

  • University of Monatana. (2003). Online research ethics course. Retrieved from https://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/montana_round1/research_ethics.html#brief. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • van Donzel, M., Dijkstra, G., & Wynstra, F. (2013). Fostering professionalism and integrity in research: Final report of the taskforce scientific integrity. Retrieved from https://www.eur.nl/fileadmin/ASSETS/ieb/integriteit/Taskforce_Scientific_Integrity_EUR.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2017.

  • von Schomberg, R. (2011). Research and innovation in the information and communication technologies and security technologies fields. In R. von Schomberg (Ed.), A report from the European commission services. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, European Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickson, F., & Carew, A. L. (2014). Quality criteria and indicators for Responsible Research and Innovation: Learning from transdisciplinarity. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 1, 254–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winner, L. (1985). Do artifacts have politics? In D. Mackenzie & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The social shaping of technology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. F. (2003). Problem based learning. British Medical Journal, 326, 328–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work reported in this paper was performed in the context of the “Higher Education Institutions and Responsible Research and Innovation” (HEIRRI) project, which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under Grant Agreement No. 666004. The authors wish to acknowledge the valuable advice offered by two anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Danish Centre for Studies in Research and Research Policy, Department of Political Science, Aarhus University, Bartholins Allé 7, 8000, Aarhus C, Denmark

    Niels Mejlgaard & Malene Vinther Christensen

  2. Centre for the Study of the Sciences and the Humanities, University of Bergen, Parkveien 9, 5020, Bergen, Norway

    Roger Strand

  3. Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, 21000, Split, Croatia

    Ivan Buljan & Ana Marušić

  4. Health Sciences Education Research Group, Department of Experimental and Health Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, C/Aiguader 88, 08003, Barcelona, Spain

    Mar Carrió & Gemma Rodríguez

  5. Association of Catalan Public Universities (ACUP) and Global University Network for Innovation (GUNi), Carrer de la Vila, UAB Campus, Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), 08193, Barcelona, Spain

    Marta Cayetano i Giralt

  6. Institute for Advanced Studies, Josefstädter Straße 39, 1080, Vienna, Austria

    Erich Griessler, Alexander Lang & Milena Wuketich

  7. Studies Centre on Science, Communication and Society, Department of Experimental and Health Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, C/Aiguader 88, 08003, Barcelona, Spain

    Gema Revuelta & Núria Saladié

Authors
  1. Niels Mejlgaard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Malene Vinther Christensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Roger Strand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ivan Buljan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mar Carrió
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Marta Cayetano i Giralt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Erich Griessler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Alexander Lang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Ana Marušić
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Gema Revuelta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Gemma Rodríguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Núria Saladié
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Milena Wuketich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Niels Mejlgaard.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mejlgaard, N., Christensen, M.V., Strand, R. et al. Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation: A Phronetic Perspective. Sci Eng Ethics 25, 597–615 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0029-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0029-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation