Journal of Responsible Innovation

With the understanding of RRI as a "transparent, interactive process" (Von Schomberg, 2012), "the set of relevant feasible options regarding solving a set of moral problems" (Van den Hoven, 2013), and as a "scientific governance" (E.C., 2007) from "the governance of risk to the governance of innovation" (Stilgoe et al., 2013), countries appear to be moving in similar directions, potentially involving science and society in a "coherent framework" which "coalesces and integrates several complementary approaches" (Owen et al., 2013). While the European Commission has been promoting RRI (Sutclife, 2011; E.C., 2012; E.C. 2013; E.C. 2019a; E.C. 2019b), efforts to practice RRI are not limited to Europe. Philosophical reflection on the legitimacy of applying RRI in China was discussed as early as 2017 (Wang & Yao, 2017). The initial practical attempts to conceptualize RRI in China have predominantly focused on ethical governance and science policy (Gao et al., 2019). Accordingly, there have been efforts to explore RRI practices in a case-based approach (Yan et al., 2022). observing RRI research and practice in China, we may identify common challenges RRI faces. Like the European context, RRI has a straightforward top-down approach in China, focusing on its stakeholders as government, enterprises, science, technology, etc. Through this special issue, we propose an exploratory research agenda to advance RRI thinking at the micro-level under the umbrella term "Humanizing RRI”.

"Humanizing RRI" is a call to action aimed at reorienting the theoretical discourse and practical implementation of RRI towards a more individual-centred approach. Current discussions and practices of RRI focus predominantly on significant actors, such as governments and conglomerates. We hold that the discourse of RRI should be humanized to better attend to the needs of individual agents. The concept of humanizing RRI can be understood in two main dimensions.

Firstly, Implementing RRI in developing countries like China has faced challenges and opportunities. On the one hand, China's traditional science and technology management system, characterized by scientism, developmentalism, and a top-down management model, is just partially compatible with RRI. On the other hand, the rapid social transition in China has increased the awareness of various stakeholders——the public, scientific community, enterprises, and government——of their responsibility for innovation, creating a favourable environment for RRI development (Zhao & Liao, 2017). Although recent RRI research in China has prioritized policy and organizational aspects (Wang & Long, 2022), we propose a shift toward an individual-centred approach to RRI. Such an approach, which we refer to as "humanizing RRI", emphasizes individual innovation participants and is essential for a deeper understanding and more effective addressing of the challenges posed by the practical realities in China.

Secondly, humanizing RRI with an individual-centred approach does not necessarily imply a need for localization; instead, it should be placed within a broader context that Ulrich Beck referred to as a "cosmopolitan" world. (Beck，2013). The extensive impact of science and technology, such as AI, the metaverse, and human genome editing, has fundamentally altered society, resulting in new forms of power, inequality, and insecurity. Although we would like to envision the cosmopolitan world as a possibility of cooperation, we must acknowledge that the picture is far from optimistic, revealing the unwanted and unseen globalized social tensions underlying existing national jurisdictions. Under such circumstances, humanizing RRI could be a practical approach to transcend the present status quo to seek collaboration and solidarity from an individual level. Therefore, understanding humanizing RRI in a cosmopolitan world and implementing it under these circumstances are the main research questions to be addressed in this special issue.

Humanizing RRI can be a powerful tool for uncovering scientific and technological innovation's often overlooked dimensions. The term RRI first entered the academic visions of Chinese scholars in 2010. Two Chinese scholars, respectively, came back home from the Netherlands and the US and talked about Responsible Innovation in nanomedicine innovation (Zhao, 2010) and in a case study of engineering ethics (Zhu & Wang, 2010). Since then, RRI has gradually become a hot spot research term in Chinese academia, and there have been five kinds of research on it: RRI's introduction (Yan et al., 2013; Mei & Chen, 2014; Liu, 2015; Du et al., 2016; Xue et al., 2016), theoretical study on RRI (Liu, 2015; Mei & Chen, 2015; Zhang, 2016; Xue & Zhao, 2017; Mei et al., 2017, 2018; Gan & Liu, 2017; Wang & Yao, 2017; Xue & Yan, 2018; Liao, 2019; Zhang, 2021), policy research at RRI (Zhao & Liao, 2017; Huang et al., 2018; Tang, 2021), to look into technology innovation and risk with RRI's perspective (Xue, 2015; Zhao & Dorbeck-Jung, 2016; Li et al., 2016; Pan et al., 2016; Guo & Liu, 2019; Chen & Wang, 2019; Ma & Wang, 2020)  and case studies on RRI (Yan et al., 2015; Yu et al., 2015; Jia et al., 2017; Fan, 2017; Cong, 2018; Xu & Wang, 2021). Despite China's efforts to advance RRI with the above five aspects, meanwhile, participation and engagement of various stakeholders are understood as key to RRI. However, research exploring the context of innovators from an individual perspective is still limited, especially in the Chinese context. In China, the inclusion of RRI in the country's 13th Five-Year Plan on Scientific and Technological Innovation (2016-2020) was initially viewed by many as merely a slogan, needing more precise implementation details. Since the earthquake caused by He Jiankui's gene-edited babies, China has made significant efforts to establish ethical science and technology governance (Lei et al., 2019) by publishing new policies and amending laws, which aligns with the West at an institutional level. These changes are readily observable in research, but those less perceptible and detectable are more likely to manifest in individuals. For example, after serving three years in prison, He Jiankui returned to the research community to begin studying DMD. However, he did not reflect on his past experiences and refused to answer questions about ethical factors in future research.^[1] Instead of solely criticizing He Jiankui, can we understand his emergence from an individual researcher's perspective and why he chose to recklessly embark on new DMD research under new policies and regulations? Who are the policy implementers and participants, and how do ordinary researchers interact with them during the research process? We believe the Humanizing RRI approach could help for further analysis, unlike the term "stakeholders", which can be a vague catch-all phrase that fails to identify these societal actors, their motivations for participating, and how their contributions can be integrated into deliberative democracy (Braun, 2023), humanizing RRI takes a narrative and individual-centred approach. This approach can help us better understand how institutions think and relate to the actors behind them. In addition, the open-ended nature of RRI also creates opportunities for individuals to step forward, demonstrate their interests and values, and reveal the "new clothes of the emperor", so to speak (Rip, 2016).

Humanizing RRI allows us to follow individuals and maintain our way in translation. In the past, it tended to view change as homogeneous, following a diffusion model. However, as Latour pointed out, in a translation model, actors are not passive recipients but actively participate in re-embedding ideas. Despite the global trend towards responsible and socially embedded innovation policies, there are significant differences between countries in the global north and south. To understand these differences and similarities, we must engage in more detailed inquiries with people and actors in different contexts, looking for what Irwin et al. (2021) describe as "isomorphic difference". Humanizing RRI can help us recognize that what may appear the same on the surface can be very different when viewed in context. By engaging with diverse perspectives and experiences, we can gain a more nuanced understanding of the challenges and opportunities of RRI and develop more effective and equitable innovation policies and practices.

Humanizing RRI could be essential to solving present and future problems in a more cosmopolitan world. The cosmopolitan background of RRI emphasizes recognizing multiple voices and achieving an understanding of similarities in different cultures, as Beck (2006) argued in "rooted cosmopolitanism". Cosmopolitanism is not rooted in the world but in the individuals and the individual's actions. This approach enables us to identify shared characteristics between various countries, including liberal and non-liberal states (Wong, 2016), beyond the confines of national and political contexts. This special issue explores how RRI can be humanized from a Chinese perspective, with the aspiration of sparking similar discussions from varying cultural viewpoints. Just as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is ratified by most countries, leaving its justification open for countries to reference their traditions, humanizing RRI can serve as a common ground for further deliberation on the development of RRI.

We call for a contribution and discussion of Humanizing RRI from multiple perspectives. Contributions may, for instance, address one of the following questions:

• How can we understand the Humanizing RRI agenda from different disciplines, such as philosophy, STS, sociology, etc., and how can we better integrate empirical research with theoretical discussions on RRI?
• Has RRI in Europe undergone a shift from focusing on individuals to policy-making? If so, do early RRI studies provide theoretical resources that Humanizing RRI can draw upon?
• Does Humanizing RRI potentially address the unresolved issues in RRI today?
• How can we implement the Humanizing RRI agenda across different science and technology fields, such as AI, biology, data governance, engineering design, etc.?
• How can we understand the cosmopolitan background of Humanizing RRI, what new challenges it poses, and what new insights in understanding the concept?
• We invite more case studies to showcase the features of Humanizing RRI in a cosmopolitan world.

All manuscripts submitted to this Article Collection will undergo a full peer-review; the Guest Advisor for this collection will not be handling the manuscripts (unless they are an Editorial Board member). Please review the journal scope and author submission instructions prior to submitting a manuscript.

The deadline for submitting manuscripts is 30 June 2024.

---

Bibliographic References

Sutclife, H. 2011. A report on responsible research & innovation. https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/sites/horizon2020/fles/rri-report-hilary-sutclife_en.pdf

European Commission. 2012. Ethical and regulatory challenges to science and research policy at the global level. DOI:https://doi.org/10.2777/35203

European Commission. 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, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2777/46253

European Commission. 2019a. What is Horizon 2020? https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/what-horizon-2020

European Commission. 2019b. Horizon 2020, responsible research and innovation. https://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/responsible research-innovation

von Schomberg, R. 2012. Prospects for technology assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation. In R. Dusseldorp & M. Beecroft (Eds.), Technikfolgen abschätzen lehren: Bildungs potenziale Transdisziplinärer (pp. 39–61). VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93468-6_2

Van den 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. 75–83). Wiley. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118551424.ch4

European Commission. 2007. Taking European knowledge society seriously. Retrieved July 16, 2014, from http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/european-knowledge society_en.pdf

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

Owen, R., J. Stilgoe, P. Macnaghten, M. Gorman, E. Fisher, and D. Guston. 2013. A Framework for Responsible Innovation. In Responsible Innovation (eds R. Owen, J. Bessant and M. Heintz). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118551424.ch2

Gao, L., M. Liao & Y.D. Zhao. 2019.  Exploring complexity, variety and the necessity of RRI in a developing country: the case of China, Journal of Responsible Innovation, 6:3, 368-374.

Yan, P., Q. Wang, C. Mitcham. 2022. Taking Responsible Innovation to China: The Dalian Port Development Case. Science and Engineering Ethics, 4(12). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00357-y

Zhao, Y.D., M. Liao. 2017. “Responsible Research and Innovation in China(负责任研究与创新在中国)”, China Soft Science[中国软科学], 3, 37-46.

Wang, L. T.B. Long, The evolution of Responsible Research and Innovation in China: A systematic literature review, Journal of Responsible Innovation, Acceptance is conditional.

Beck, U., A. Blok, D. Tyfield, & J. Y. Zhang. 2013. Cosmopolitan communities of climate risk: conceptual and empirical suggestions for a new research agenda. Global Networks, 13(1), 1-21.

Zhao, Y.H. 2010. The Ethical Nature of the Responsibility of Research and Development for Nanopharmaceuticals and the Theory Bases(纳米药物研发责任的伦理性质及理论基础)." Journal of Shandong University of Science and Technology(Social Sciences)[山东科技大学学报(社会科学版)],2010,12(05):15-20. DOI:10.16452/j.cnki.sdkjsk.2010.05.002.

Zhu, Q., Q. Wang. 2010. "Engineering Ethics from the Perspective of socio-technical system Theory (社会技术系统论视角下的工程伦理学研究)." Morality and Civilization[道德与文明], No.169(06):119-124. DOI:10.13904/j.cnki.1007-1539.2010.06.019.

Yan, P., W. Zhang, Q. Wang. 2014. "Review on Theory and Practice of 'Responsible Innovation' ('负责任创新’的理论与实践述评)". Studies in Philosophy of Science and Technology[科学技术哲学研究], 31(02):84-90.

Mei, L., J. Chen. "Reflection and Reconstruction of Innovation Paradigm: The Emerging Research on Responsible Innovation(创新范式转移——责任式创新的研究兴起)." 2014. Science and Management[科学与管理], 34(03):3-11.

Liu, Z.X. 2015. "A review of responsible innovation research: Background, current situation and trends(负责任创新研究综述:背景、现状与趋势)." Science and Technology Progress and Policy[科技进步与对策], 32(11):155-160.

Du, P.C., Y. Chen, X. Du. 2016. "Knowledge map research on International Responsible Research Innovation(国际责任式创新知识图谱研究)." Science and Technology Progress and Policy[科技进步与对策], 33(13):6-13.

Xue, G.B., A. Ibarra, Y.X. Zhao. 2016. "The Development of RRI Policy of EU and Its References to China's S&T Policy(欧盟责任式创新政策演变及对中国政策的启示)." Studies in Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法研究], 32(11):55-59. DOI:10.19484/j.cnki.1000-8934.2016.11.010.

Liu, Z.X. 2015. """"Responsibility Finitude and Its Enlightenment for Responsible Innovation(责任有限及其对负责任创新的启示)."""" Studies in Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法研究], 31(10):41-45. DOI:10.19484/j.cnki.1000-8934.2015.10.009.

Mei, L., J. Chen. 2015."Responsible Innovation: Origin, Attribution Analysis, and theoretical framework(责任式创新:源起、归因解析与理论框架)." Journal of Management World[管理世界], No.263(08):39-57. DOI:10.19744/j.cnki.11-1235/f.2015.08.006.

Zhang, C.M. 2016. "The Responsible Innovation: Ethical Issues and Its Public Policy ('负责任创新’的伦理意蕴及公共政策选择策略)." Studies in Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法研究], 32(09):32-36. DOI:10.19484/j.cnki.1000-8934.2016.09.006.

Xue, G.B., Y.X. Zhao. 2017. "Paradigm Transformation of S&T Governance under the Framework of RRI('责任式创新’框架下科技治理范式重构)." Science and Technology Progress and Policy[科技进步与对策], 34(11):1-5.

Mei, L., J. Chen, F.J. Li. 2017. "Responsible Innovation: Connotations and Implications(负责任创新:内涵辨析与启示)." Studies in Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法研究], 33(02):49-53. DOI:10.19484/j.cnki.1000-8934.2017.02.009.

Mei, L., J. Chen, F.J. Li. 2018. "Responsible Innovation: An integrated framework of 'connotation-theory-approach' (责任式创新: '内涵-理论-方法’的整合框架)." Studies in Science of Science[科学学研究], 36(03):521-530. DOI:10.16192/j.cnki.1003-2053.2018.03.015.

Gan, Y.X., F. Liu. 2016. "A Discussion Both of Conceptual Frameworks and Practical Implications of Responsible Innovation from the Perspective of the Ethics of Responsibility(责任伦理视域下‘负责任创新’的概念框架与现实意义)." Axiology and Ethics[价值论与伦理学研究], (02):282–295.

Wang, X.W., Y. Yao. 2017. "Reflecting Responsible Research and Innovation： RRI in the Context of Philosophy of Technology(负责任地反思负责任创新——技术哲学思路下的RRI)." Journal of Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法通讯], 39(06):37-43.DOI:10.15994/j.1000-0763.2017.06.006.

Xue, G.B., K.R. Yan. 2018. "On the Policy of Technology Ethics from the Perspective of RRI ('负责任创新’视角下技术伦理的政策转向)." Journal of Dalian University of Technology (Social Sciences)[大连理工大学学报(社会科学版)], 39(01):9–14. DOI:10.19525/j.issn1008-407x.2018.01.002.

Liao, M. 2019. "Analysis on the Concept and Academic Contexts of Responsible (Research and) Innovation(负责任(研究与)创新的概念辨析和学理脉络)." Journal of Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法通讯], 41(11):77-86. DOI:10.15994/j.1000-0763.2019.11.012.

Zhang, C.M. 2021. "The Generation Logic and Practice Strategy of Responsible Research and Innovation(负责任研究创新的生成逻辑及其实践)." Journal of Shanghai Normal University(Philosophy & Social Sciences Edition)[上海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)], 50(03):35-43. DOI:10.13852/J.CNKI.JSHNU.2021.03.003.

Zhao, Y.D., M. Liao. 2017. "Responsible Research and Innovation in China(负责任研究与创新在中国)." China Soft Science[中国软科学], No.315(03):37-46.

Huang, L.C., X.D. Teng, H. Miao, F.F. WU, X.L. Wang. 2018. "The Evaluation of Balance between Innovation Incentives and Responsible Innovation in Innovation Policy(创新政策中创新激励与负责任创新平衡态评估研究)." China Soft Science[中国软科学], No.329(05):25-38.

Tang, L. 2022. Global Science and technology governance and Responsible Innovation: Origins, challenges, and Prospects (全球科技治理与负责任创新:缘起、挑战与前瞻)."""" Fudan Public Administration Review[复旦公共行政评论], (01):1–10.

Xue, G.B. 2015. RRI on GM Tree Technology in the Perspective of Ecological Risk(生态风险视域下林木转基因技术的‘负责任创新'). Studies in Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法研究], 31(07):32-37. DOI:10.19484/j.cnki.1000-8934.2015.07.006.

Zhao, Y.H., Barbel Dorbeck-Jung. 2016. "The Design of Nano-drug and Responsible Innovation: The Interpretation from Constructivism Perspective(纳米药物设计与负责任创新:建构论视角的解释)." Science and Technology Management Research[科技管理研究], 36(01):257-261.

Li, Y.K., Z.Y. Li, Z.Y. Liu, C.H. Chen. 2016. "Analysis on Guangzhou Nansha port development model based on responsible innovation(基于负责任创新的广州南沙港发展模式分析)." Shanxi Architecture[山西建筑], 42(14):224-226. DOI:10.13719/j.cnki.cn14-1279/tu.2016.14.122.

Pan, E.R., M.F. Yang, L.S. Qiao. 2016."Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and the Public: Ethical Blind Spots and Their Solution of 'Internet + Mass Entrepreneurship and Innovation'''' in the Perspective of Industrial Revolution(公众与创新创业——工业革命视野中‘互联网+双创’的伦理盲区及其应对)." Studies in Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法研究], 32(12):53-57. DOI:10.19484/j.cnki.1000-8934.2016.12.010.

Guo, L.S., Z.X. Liu. 2019. "On the 'Responsible Innovation' of Artificial Intelligence(人工智能的‘负责任创新')." Studies in Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法研究], 35(05):57-62. DOI:10.19484/j.cnki.1000-8934.2019.05.010.

Chen, L.N., D.Z. Wang. 2019. “Research Progress in Responsible Innovation of Brain-Computer Interface(脑机接口负责任创新研究进展)”. Journal of Engineering Studies[工程研究-跨学科视野中的工程], 11(04):390-399.

Ma, S.W., G.Y. Wang. 2020. ‘Responsible Innovation' in Synthetic Biology(合成生物学的‘负责任创新')." Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences[中国科学院院刊], 35(06):751-762. DOI:10.16418/j.issn.1000-3045.20200311001.

Yan, P., W. Liu, W. Zhang. 2015. “Research on Responsible Innovation Mode in Dalian Port(大连港负责任创新模式研究)”. Studies in Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法研究], 31(03):122-126. DOI:10.19484/j.cnki.1000-8934.2015.03.027.

Yu, J., S.B. Liu, Q. Wang. 2015. "Responsible Innovation Mode of Dalian High-tech Park(大连高新技术园区负责任创新模式研究)." Science and Technology Progress and Policy[科技进步与对策], 32(14):36-40.

Jia, H.R., Z.X. Liu, B.H. Xia. 2017. "The Study of China Wireless Valley's Responsible Innovation(中国无线谷负责任创新研究)." Studies in Dialectics of Nature[自然辩证法研究], 33(09):55-60. DOI:10.19484/j.cnki.1000-8934.2017.09.010.

Fan, C.P. 2017. "Double Closed Loops and Responsible Innovation: The Case Research in China Space Industry Quality Assurance ('双归零’与负责任创新:中国航天质量保障案例研究)." Journal of Engineering Studies[工程研究-跨学科视野中的工程], 9(05):465-473.

Cong, H.Q., P. Gu, Q. Shen. 2018. "On the Responsible Innovation in the Practice of 'Governance of Five Waters' in Hangzhou(杭州‘五水共治’负责任创新实践研究)." Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science)[东北大学学报(社会科学版)], 20(02):111-116+130. DOI:10.15936/j.cnki.1008-3758.2018.02.001.

Xu, C., N. Wang. 2021. "How is Responsible Innovation Possible? Take the Automatic Driving Automobile Laboratory of Tsinghua University as an Example(负责任创新何以可能？——以清华大学自动驾驶汽车实验室为例)". Journal of Engineering Studies[工程研究-跨学科视野中的工程], 13(01):35-44.

Lei, R.P., Zhai, X.M., Qiu, R.Z.. 2019. Reboot Ethics governance in China, May 8, Nature, https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01408-y.

Braun, R., Starkbaum, J. 2023. Stakeholders in Research and Innovation: Towards Responsible Governance. In: Blok, V. (eds) Putting Responsible Research and Innovation into Practice. Library of Ethics and Applied Philosophy, vol 40. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14710-4_12.

Rip, A. 2016. The clothes of the emperor. An essay on RRI in and around Brussels, Journal of Responsible Innovation, 3:3, 290–304. DOI: 10.1080/23299460.2016.1255701

Irwin, A., J. B. Vedel, S. Vikkelsø. 2021. Isomorphic difference: Familiarity and distinctiveness in national research and innovation policies, Research Policy, Volume 50, Issue 4, 104220, ISSN 0048-7333.

Beck, U., and N. Sznaider. 2006. Unpacking Cosmopolitanism for the Social Sciences: A Research Agenda. The British Journal of Sociology, 57 (1): 1–23.

Wong, P.H. 2016. Responsible Innovation for Decent Nonliberal Peoples: a Dilemma?. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 3(2): 154–168.

 

Instructions for AuthorsSubmit an Article