Journal of Responsible Innovation

The Governance of Science

Responsible science is often encouraged or mandated by science governance structures. Regulatory demands on the practice of science such as laboratory biosafety equipment required for working with particular viruses, required oversight and approval for human subject research studies, and licensing and care requirements for working with animal subjects are all examples of governance structures that shape the practice of science to ensure the meeting of minimally acceptable practices. Some governance structures are legally imposed on scientists whereas other governance structures are developed by scientists in particular fields and are collectively shaped and managed by the scientists (such as conference proposal requirements that peer reviewers employ or collectively decided moratoria on particular areas of research). Whether developed internally by the scientific community or imposed on science by societal governance structures (e.g. lawmakers), governance of science requires careful assessment of the functioning and impact of governance, particularly with respect to whether it enables or impedes good scientific practice.

The governance of science is not just for responsible scientific practice but also concerns issues of scientific freedom and the reliability of science. Individual researchers are usually obligated to meet the demands of the governance structures, even if individual researchers might argue against particular governance structures or for different mandatory requirements. As such, governance structures place limits on the research activities of scientists and thus limit scientific freedom. Because of the importance of scientific freedom in general for the pursuit of scientific inquiry, and the simultaneous importance of responsible scientific practice, science governance is an area that calls for sustained scholarly attention. Governance structures also are variable across national and temporal contexts, allowing for comparative and historical analyses. Finally, responsible science has broadened its scope in the last 25 years, from a focus on narrow responsibilities (avoiding fraud, meeting regulatory requirements, communicating important results to the public) to a broader conception of responsible research (requiring some forethought from all researchers about the implications of their work and concerns about managing bias). How the governance of science should be structured to meet this broader sense of responsibility remains unclear.

This call is for papers that examine science governance structures, how they function in practice, how they differ across regional and national contexts and/or temporal contexts, whether they are meeting their aims well, and how changes in such structures might improve (or worsen) the meeting of the demands for both responsible science and scientific freedom. We are particularly interested in empirical studies of particular governance structures (such as human subject oversight boards, biosafety controls, conflict of interest management, export controls, dual use oversight mechanisms), cross-context comparisons of governance structures (how governance structures work in different countries or regions or time periods), synergies and/or tensions in the ways in which governance structures address scientific freedoms and responsibilities, grounded proposals for new or altered governance structures, and careful analyses of governance practices vs. aims. Papers could examine how responsible science is required, encouraged, or even impeded through different governance structures and how governance structures might be altered to improve their functioning.

Keywords: Research oversight, Research integrity, Scientific freedom, Biosafety, Dual use

Manuscript Submissions:

Manuscript submission is open until 26th April 2026.

All manuscripts submitted to this Article Collection will undergo desk assessment and peer-review as part of our standard editorial process. Manuscripts which do not fall within the scope of the journal will be rejected.

To submit your papers to this Article Collection, please:

1. Check "yes" for the question, "Are you submitting your paper for a specific special issue or article collection?"
2. Select the relevant Article Collection from the drop-down menu under the question, "The Governance of Science"

We are able to offer a 10% Discount to all authors, and have a limited number of 20% Discount codes only available for early submissions. It should be noted that discount codes must be entered in at the point of submission as they cannot be applied retroactively, nor can these be combined as only the higher valued discount would be applicable.

Please contact Christopher Montgomery, Commissioning Editor regarding details on obtaining your discount codes, and with any other queries for this Article Collection.

Article Collection Guest Advisors

Dr. Heather Douglas is a philosopher of science who works on the relationships among science, values, and democratic publics.  She is a Professor in the Department of Philosophy at Michigan State University and is an American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) fellow.  She is the author of Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal (2009), The Rightful Place of Science: Science, Values, and Democracy (2021), and editor of the book series Science, Values, and the Public (University of Pittsburgh Press).

Dr. M.A. Diamond-Hunter is a philosopher of science and a philosopher of race and gender, whose work broadly examines the social, ethical, political, and methodological aspects around the use of socially important concepts in the empirical sciences (including public health, biomedicine, and the social sciences writ large). M.A. Diamond-Hunter is a Teaching Associate in Philosophy of Science in the department of History and Philosophy of Science at The University of Cambridge; Associate in the Centre for Philosophy of Epidemiology, Medicine, and Public Health; and Research Associate at The University of Johannesburg. Their recent publications include chapters for The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Medicine, The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Public Health, and The Routledge Handbook of Values and Science, and the article “Populations, Individuals, and Biological Race” (in Biology and Philosophy) which was the winner of the 2024 Philosophy of Science Association’s prize in Philosophy of Science and Race – awarded to the best book, article, or chapter published in English that integrates philosophy of science with discussions of race, ethnicity, and/or racism within five years prior to the prize year.