Responsible governance in science and technology policy: Reflections from Europe, China and India

Technology in Society

Volumn 42, Issue , 2015, Pages 81-92

  Arnaldi, Simone ^a   Quaglio, GianLuca ^b   Ladikas, Miltos ^c   O'Kane, Hannah ^b   Karapiperis, Theodoros ^b   Srinivas, Krishna Ravi ^d   Zhao, Yandong ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^b Science and Technology Options Assessments (STOA) Unit European Parliament   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL LANCASHIRE   (United Kingdom)

^d Research and Information System for Developing Countries   (India)

^e INSTITUTE OF GEOLOGY AND GEOPHYSICS   (China)

Author keywords

China; European Union; India; Responsible governance; Science and technology

Indexed keywords

EDUCATION;

CHINA; EUROPEAN UNION; INDIA; RESPONSIBLE GOVERNANCE; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY;

PUBLIC POLICY;

EUROPEAN UNION; GEOPOLITICS; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; TECHNOLOGY POLICY;

CHINA; EUROPE; INDIA;

EID: 84930960054     PISSN: 0160791X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.03.006     Document Type: Article

References (97)

1. STOA.Science and Technology Options Assessment Responsible governance of science and technology: perspectives from Europe, China and India 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/cms/home/events/workshops/responsible.
2. Jonas H. The imperative of responsibility 1984, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
3. Hellstrom T. Systemic innovation and risk: technology assessment and the challenge of responsible innovation. Technol Soc 2003, 25:369-384.
4. Decker M., Ladikas M. Bridges between science, society and policy; technology assessment - methods and impacts 2004, Springer Verlag, Berlin.
5. Owen R., Baxter D., Maynard T., Depledge M. Beyond regulation: risk pricing and responsible innovation. Environ Sci Technol 2009, 43:6902-6906.
6. PCSBI - Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues The ethics of synthetic biology and emerging technologies 2010, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://bioethics.gov/synthetic-biology-report.
7. Royal Society Geoengineering the climate: science, governance and uncertainty 2009, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://royalsociety.org/policy/publications/2009/geoengineering-climate/.
8. NNI - National Nanotechnology Initiative 2004 strategic plan 2004, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.nano.gov/node/242.
9. NRC - National Research Council A matter of size: triennial review of the national nanotechnology initiative 2006, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11752.
10. European Commission Communication from the commission of 07/06/2005 - Nanosciences and nanotechnologies: an action plan for Europe 2005-2009 2005, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52005DC0243%26rid=2.
11. European Commission Commission recommendation of 07/02/2008 on a code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies research 2008, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32008H0345%26from=EN.
12. Grunwald A. Responsible innovation: bringing together technology assessment, applied ethics, and STS research. Enterp Work Innovation Stud 2011, 7:9-31.
13. Guston D.H., Sarewitz D. Real-time technology assessment. Technol Soc 2002, 23(4):93-109.
14. Responsible research and innovation: the role of privacy in an emerging framework. Bernd Carsten Stahl, Sci Public Policy 2013, 40(6):708-716.
15. Thompson P.B. Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues (ELSI). Encyclopedia of science and technology communication 2010, 271-274. Sage Publishing, London, (a cura di). S. Horig Priest (Ed.).
16. Anticipatory governance of nanotechnology: foresight, engagement, and integration, Barben, Daniel, Fisher Erik, Selin Cynthia, Guston David H, Hackett EJ, Amsterdamska O, Lynch M, The handbook of science and technology studies: Third Edition, 979-1000, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.
17. Midstream modulation of technology: governance from within, E Fisher, RL Mahajan, C Mitcham, Bull Sci Technol Soc 26(6), 485-496.
18. Macnaghten P.M., Kearnes M.B., Wynne B. Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: what role for the social sciences?. Sci Commun 2005, 27(2):268-291.
19. Mejlgaard N., Stares S. Performed and preferred participation in science and technology across Europe: exploring an alternative idea of "democratic deficit". Public Underst Sci 2013, 22:660-673.
20. von Schomberg R. A vision of responsible research and innovation. Responsible innovation 2013, 51-73. Wiley, Chicester, UK. R. Owen, M. Heintz, J. Bessant (Eds.).
21. van den Hoven J., Jacob K., Nielsen L., Roure F., Rudze L., Stilgoe J., et al. Options for strengthening responsible research and innovation: report of the Expert Group on the State of Art in Europe on Responsible Research and Innovation 2013, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/document_library/pdf_06/options-for-strengthening_en.pdf.
22. Owen R. Responsible Research and Innovation: options for research and innovation policy in the EU 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/innovation-union/pdf/expert-groups/Responsible_Research_and_Innovation.pdf#view=fit%26pagemode=none.
23. Owen R., Stilgoe J., Macnaghten P., Fisher E., Gorman M., Guston D.H. A framework for responsible innovation. Responsible innovation 2013, 27-50. Wiley, Chichester, UK. R. Owen, M. Heintz, J. Bessant (Eds.).
24. Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), People's Republic of China Law of the People's Republic of China on science and technology progress 2008, Ministry of Science and Technology, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.most.gov.cn/fggw/fl/200801/t20080108_58302.htm.
25. DST.Department of Science and Technology Science, technology and innovation policy 2013, Government of India, New Delhi.
26. Zhao Y., Ma Y. Public trust and risk management from the perspective of food safety. Taiyuan Sci Technol 2009, 181(2):6-8.
27. Rerimassie V., Ma Y., Srinivas K.R., Ladikas M. Public perceptions of science and technology in Europe, China and India. Science & technology governance and ethics; a global perspective from Europe, India and China 2015, Springer, Dodrecht. M. Ladikas, S. Chaturvedi, Y. Zhao, D. Stemerding (Eds.).
28. Coles D., Chaturvedi S., Li Q., Ladikas M. New food technologies in Europe, India and China. Science & technology governance and ethics; a global perspective from Europe, India and China 2015, Springer, Dodrecht. M. Ladikas, S. Chaturvedi, Y. Zhao, D. Stemerding (Eds.).
29. Eurostat [accessed 02.02.15]. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/eurostat/home/.
30. World Bank World development indicators 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://data.worldbank.org.
31. UNESCO Institute for Statistics Higher education in Asia: expanding out, expanding up: the rise of graduate education and university research 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.uis.unesco.org/Library/Documents/higher-education-asia-graduate-university-research-2014-en.pdf.
32. Eurostat R & D expenditure 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/R_%26_D_expenditure.
33. European Commission Europe 2020 targets 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-2020-in-a-nutshell/targets/index_en.htm.
34. Segal A. Autonomy, security, and inequality: China, India, the United State, and the globalization of science and technology. Technol Soc 2008, 30:423-428.
35. World Bank 2011 international comparison programme summary results 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/ICPINT/Resources/270056-1183395201801/Summary-of-Results-and-Findings-of-the-2011-International-Comparison-Program.pdf.
36. Financial Times China overtakes the US: your questions answered, 30 April 2014 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://blogs.ft.com/money-supply/2014/04/30/china-overtakes-the-us-your-questions-answered/?catid=186%26SID=google.
37. SCImago Research Group SIR global 2013-rank: output: 2007-2011 2013, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.scimagoir.com/pdf/SIR%20Global%202013%20O.pdf.
38. Wan G. Thirty years reform and opening up of Chinese science and technology 2008, Science Press, Beijing, [in Chinese].
39. Narasimha R. Science, technology and the economy: an Indian perspective. Technol Soc 2008, 30:330-338.
40. Sabbati G. Library statistical spotlight: analysis of EU-India trade 2013, Library of the European Parliament, Brussels.
41. GOI.Government of India, Ministry of Finance Economic survey 2013, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
42. World Bank The little data book 2013 2013, World Bank, Washington, DC, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/13205/9780821398128.pdf?sequence=1.
43. GOI.Government of India 12th five-year plan 2012-2017. Planning commission 2012, SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd., New Delhi.
44. DST.Department of Science and Technology R&D statistics 2011-12: at a glance 2013, Government of India, New Delhi.
45. Ratchford J.T., Blanpied W.A. Paths to the future for science and technology in China, India and the United States. Technol Soc 2008, 30:211-233.
46. Datta S., Saad M. University and innovation systems: the case of India. Sci Public Policy 2011, 38:7-17.
47. Rodríguez H., Fisher E., Schuurbiers D. Integrating science and society in European Framework Programmes: trends in project-level solicitations. Res Policy 2013, 42:1126-1137.
48. Commission of the European Communities European governance: a White paper 2001, Brussels, 25.7.2001, COM(2001), 428 final.
49. EGE.European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies Opinion No. 24: ethics of modern developments in agricultural technologies: Brussels, 17 December 2008 2009, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.
50. Commission of the European Communities Science, society and the citizen in Europe 2000, Brussels, 14.11.2000, SEC(2000) 1973.
51. Busquin P. Foreword. The overall socio-economic dimension of community research in the fifth European Framework Programme: a synthesis report on the integration of the socioeconomic related research activities of the European Community (1998-2002) (EUR 20577) 2003, 6. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. Directorate-General for Research, European Commission (Ed.).
52. European Commission Science and society action plan 2002, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-society/pdf/ss_ap_en.pdf.
53. European Commission 25 recommendations on the ethical, legal and social implications of genetic testing 2004, Directorate-General for Research, European Commission, Brussels, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/conferences/2004/genetic/pdf/recommendations_en.pdf.
54. European Commission Ethics for researchers: facilitating research excellence in FP7 2013, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Commission, Brussels, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/fp7/89888/ethics-for-researchers_en.pdf.
55. Nordmann A., Rip A. Mind the gap revisited. Nat Nanotechnol 2009, 4:273-274.
56. Grunwald A. Converging technologies: Visions, increased contingencies of the conditio humana, and search for orientation. Futures 2007, 39:380-392.
57. Owen R. The UK engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council's commitment to a framework for responsible innovation. J Responsible Innovation 2014, 1(1):113-117.
58. NWO.Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research Responsible innovation programme 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.nwo.nl/en/research-and-results/programmes/responsible+innovation.
59. Stilgoe J., Lock S.J., Wilsdon J. Why should we promote public engagement with science. Public Underst Sci 2014, 23:4-15.
60. Official Journal of the European Union 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 2013.
61. Official Journal of the European Union Council decision of 3 December 2013 establishing the specific programme implementing horizon 2020-the framework programme for research and innovation (2014-2020) and repealing decisions 2006/971/EC, 2006/972/EC, 2006/973/EC, 2006/974/EC and 2006/975/EC, Part V, letter (f) 2013.
62. GEST.Global Ethics in Science and Technology Gest: global ethics in science and technology 2011-2014 2011, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.uclan.ac.uk/research/environment/projects/global_ethics_science:technology.php.
63. Epinet The epinet project 2012, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.epinet.no.
64. EST-Frame Integrated EST framework (EST-Frame) 2012, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://estframe.net/.
65. Res-AgorA Responsible Research and Innovation in a distributed anticipatory governance frame. A constructive socio-normative approach 2013, About Res-AgorA, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://res-agora.eu/about/.
66. IrsiCaixa IrsiCaixa and "la Caixa" foundation lead RRI Tools, a project performed in 30 european countries to foster a new relationship between science and European society 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.irsicaixa.es/ca/node/12262.
67. Research Councils UK Responsible innovation (Ethics) 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/xrcprogrammes/digital/impact/responsibleinnovation/.
68. Mali F., Pustovrh T., Groboljsek B., Coenen C. National ethics advisory bodies in the emerging landscape of responsible research and innovation. Nanoethics 2012, 6:167-184.
69. EPTA European Parliamentary Technology Assessment (EPTA) 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://eptanetwork.org/.
70. Zhu B. Science and technology ethics: justice and responsibility. Philos Trends 2000, 10:9-11. [in Chinese].
71. Xiao X. Thirty years of science, technology and society studies in China. Studies Dialectics Nature 2010, 26(10):69-76. [in Chinese].
72. Chinese public scientific literacy report 2011, vol. 2. Popular Science Press (in Chinese), Beijing.
73. European Commission Work programme 2007, capacities, Part 5: science. In Society (C(2007)563 of 26.02.2007) 2007, The Seventh Framework Programme, Brussels.
74. MOST.Ministry of Science and Technology of China Science and technology program for public wellbeing 2012, accessed 02.02.15 (in Chinese). http://www.kjhm.org.cn/www/STBPP/index.html.
75. Li Q., Zhao Y., Zhang W. Public participation in science and technology ethical issues in China. Ethics state-of-the-art: state of debate in the three regions 2012, 37-45. [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.uclan.ac.uk/research/environment/projects/assets/cpe_gest_D1_2.pdf, GEST (Ed.).
76. Xie L. PX event in Xiameng: the beginning of Chinese NIMBY movement. Chin Newsweek 2013, 600(6):78-79. [in Chinese].
77. Shang X. The election of "Tobacco Academician" has been widely questioned Beijing Times 12 Dec, accessed 02.02.15 (in Chinese). http://epaper.jinghua.cn/html/2011-12/12/content_740361.htm.
78. Global Times Fall of the killer academician, 27 March 2013, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/771137.shtml.
79. Ma Y., Zhang W., Zhao Y. Change of public attitudes towards science and technology ethics 2013, Internal Report of Chinese Academy of Science and Technology for Development, 41 (in Chinese).
80. Zhao Y., Deng D. Chinese science and technology Personnel's views on scientific misconduct: findings from a survey on 30,000 science and technology personnel. Sci Res Manag 2012, 8:90-97. [in Chinese].
81. CAST.Chinese Association of Science and Technology The norms of scientific ethics of science and technology personnel 2009, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.cast.org.cn/n35081/n11114910/n11574863/11578899.html.
82. Zhang L., Fang Y., Yang D., Wang L. A survey on science ethics of researchers. Bull Natl Nat Sci Found China 2013, 27(4):210-213. [in Chinese].
83. DST.Department of Science and Technology Scientific policy resolution 1958, Government of India, New Delhi.
84. DST.Department of Science and Technology Technology policy statement 1983, Government of India, New Delhi.
85. DST.Department of Science and Technology Science and technology policy 2003, Government of India, New Delhi.
86. DST.Department of Science and Technology Science for equity empowerment and development (SEED) 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.dst.gov.in/scientific-programme/s-t_ssp.htm.
87. Mashelkar R.A. Indian science, technology, and society: the changing landscape. Technol Soc 2008, 30:299-308.
88. Havlir D.V., Hammer S.M. Patents versus patients? Antiretroviral therapy in India. N Engl J Med 2005, 353:749-751.
89. Satyanarayana K., Srivastava S. Patent pooling for promoting access to antiretroviral drugs (ARVs): a strategic option for India. Open AIDS J 2010, 4:41-53.
90. Open Source Drug Discovery Open source drug discovery 2014, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.osdd.net/.
91. Freeman J., Satterfield T., Kandlikar M. Agricultural biotechnology and regulatory innovation in India. Sci Public Policy 2011, 38:319-331.
92. Hindu 'Serious gaps' in EIA of Mithivirdi nuclear plant, 11 March 2013, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/serious-gaps-in-eia-of-mithivirdi-nuclear-plant/article4496248.ece.
93. Neresini F., Bucchi M. Science and public participation. The handbook of science and technology studies 2007, 449-472. The MIT Press, Boston. 3rd ed. E.J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, J. Wajcman (Eds.).
94. GOI.Government of India Census of India 2011, [accessed 02.02.15]. http://www.censusindia.gov.in.
95. Dorbeck-Jung B., Shelley-Egan C. Meta-regulation and nanotechnologies: the Challenge of responsibilisation within the European Commission's code of conduct for responsible nanosciences and nanotechnologies research. Nanoethics 2013, 7(1):55-68.
96. van der Meulen B., Rip A. Mediation in the Dutch science system. Res Policy 1998, 27:757-769.
97. Zhang W., Zhao Y. Innovation, risk and control: three main discourses in the development of synthesis biology in China. 2014 high technology development report 2014, 320-337. Science Press, Beijing. Chinese Academy of Science (Ed.).