Assessment of science and technologies: Advising for and with responsibility

Technology in Society

Volumn 42, Issue , 2015, Pages 21-27

  Forsberg, Ellen Marie ^a   Quaglio, GianLuca ^b   O'Kane, Hannah ^b   Karapiperis, Theodoros ^b   Van Woensel, Lieve ^b   Arnaldi, Simone ^c  

^a OSLO METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY   (Norway)

^b Science and Technology Option Assessment   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Assessment; Policy advice; Responsible research and innovation; Technology governance

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING;

ASSESSMENT; ASSESSMENT PRACTICES; INNOVATION SYSTEM; POLICY MAKERS; POTENTIAL NEEDS; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY;

PUBLIC POLICY;

ASSESSMENT METHOD; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; INNOVATION; POLICY APPROACH; POLICY MAKING; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; STAKEHOLDER; TECHNOLOGY POLICY;

EID: 84923030887     PISSN: 0160791X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2014.12.004     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. European Commission Communication from the commission to the european parliament, the Council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions: for a European industrial renaissance {SWD(2014) 14 final} 2014, Retrieved from:, [accessed 01.06.2014]. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52014DC0014%26from=EN.
2. Costa-Font M., Gil J.M., Traill W.B. Consumer acceptance, valuation of and attitudes towards genetically modified food: review and implications for food policy. Food Policy 2008, 33(2):99-111.
3. Commission of the European Communities Commission working document. Science, Society and the citizen in Europe 2000, Retrieved from:, [accessed 01.06.2014]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/area/science-society-en.pdf.
4. Commission of the European Communities Commission working document. Science, Society and the citizen in Europe 2000, 5. Retrieved from:, [accessed 01.06.2014]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/area/science-society-en.pdf.
5. Jasanoff S. Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science. Minerva 2003, 41:223-244.
6. Guston D.H. Retiring the social contract for science. Issues Sci Technol 2000, Retrieved from:, [accessed 06.09.2014]. http://www.issues.org/16.4/p_guston.htm.
7. Kuhlmann S., Rip A. The challenge of addressing grand challenges 2014, Retrieved from:, [accessed 04.06.2014]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/pdf/expert-groups/The_challenge_of_addressing_Grand_Challenges.pdf.
8. Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11.12.2013 establishing Horizon 2020-the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020) and repealing Decision No 1982/2006/EC. Off J Eur Union [accessed 16.05.2014].
9. European Commission Options for strengthening responsible research and innovation 2013, Retrieved from:, [accessed 15.05.2014]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/options-for-strengthening_en.pdf.
10. Owen R., Macnaghten P., Stilgoe J. Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Sci Public Policy 2012, 39(6):751-760.
11. Von Schomberg R. Prospects for technology assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation. Technikfolgen Abschatzen Lehren. Bildungspotenziale Transdisziplinarer Methoden. Vs Verlag Fur Sozialwissenschaften 2012, 39-61. M. Dusseldorp, R. Beecroft (Eds.).
12. Wickson F., Forsberg E.-M. Standardising responsibility? The significance of interstitial spaces. Sci Engn Ethics 2014, 10.1007/s11948-014-9602-4.
13. Owen R. Responsible research and innovation: options for research and innovation policy in the EU [accessed 01.11.2014]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/pdf/expert-groups/Responsible_Research_and_Innovation.pdf.
14. Stilgoe J., Owen R., Macnaghten P. Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Res Policy 2013, 42:1568-1580. 1573.
15. Forsberg E.-M., Thorstensen E., Nielsen R.Ø., de Bakker E. Assessments of emerging science and technologies: mapping the landscape. Sci Public Policy 2014, 10.1093/scipol/scu025.
16. Pellizzoni L. Responsibility and environmental governance. Environ Polit 2004, 13:541-565.
17. Richardson H. Institutionally divided moral responsibility. Responsibility 1999, 218-249. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. E. Paul, F. Miller, J. Paul (Eds.).
18. Wynne B. Public uptake of science: a case for institutional reflexivity. Public Underst Sci 1993, 2:321-337.
19. Kuhlmann S., Rip A. The challenge of addressing grand challenges 2014, [accessed 01.11.14]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/pdf/expert-groups/The_challenge_of_addressing_Grand_Challenges.pdf.
20. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Retrieved from: [accessed 16.05.2014]. http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization.shtml.
21. Scott W.R. Organizations: rational, natural, and open systems 1987, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ. 2nd ed.
22. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution Twenty-first report. Setting environmental standards 1998, [accessed 01.11.14]. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110322143804/http://www.rcep.org.uk/reports/21-standards/documents/standards-full.pdf.
23. Owen R. The UK engineering and physical sciences research Council's commitment to a framework for responsible innovation. J Responsible Innov 2014, 1(1):113-117.
24. Heads of National Food Agencies Working Group on Transparent Use of Risk Assessment in Decision Making 2012, Final report to the Heads of Agencies, 7, Retrieved from:, [accessed 01.04.2013]. http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/decision-making-docs.pdf.
25. Stirling A. "Opening up" and "closing down": power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Sci Technol Hum Values 2008, 33:262-294.
26. Tribe L.H. Policy science: analysis or ideology?. Philosophy Public Aff 1972, 2(1):66-110.
27. Collingridge D. The social control of technology 1980, Open University Press, Milton Keynes, UK.
28. Callon M. Society in the making: the study of technology as a tool for socio-logical analysis. The social construction of technological systems: new directions in the sociology and history of technology 1987, 83-103. MIT Press, London. W. Bijker, T. Hughes, T. Pinch (Eds.).
29. Decker M., Ladikas M. Bridges between science, society and policy: technology assessment - methods and impacts 2004, Springer, Berlin.