Responsible innovation as an endorsement of public values: the need for interdisciplinary research

Journal of Responsible Innovation

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 118-124

  Taebi, B ^a   Correlje A ^a   Cuppen, E ^b   Dignum, M ^a   Pesch, U ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^b DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

institutional theory; public value; shale gas; stakeholder engagement; value sensitive design

Indexed keywords

EID: 84948082633     PISSN: 23299460     EISSN: 23299037     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/23299460.2014.882072     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Antonsen, M., and T. B., Jørgensen. 1997. “The ‘Publicness’ of Public Organizations.” Public Administration 75 (2): 337–357. doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00064
2. Boenink, M., 2013. “The Multiple Practices of Doing ‘Ethics in the Laboratory’: A Mid-level Perspective.” In Ethics on the Laboratory Floor, edited by S., Van der Burg and T., Swierstra, 57–78. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
3. Bozeman, B., 2007. Public Values and Public Interest: Counterbalancing Economic Individualism. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
4. Bozeman, B., and D., Sarewitz. 2011. “Public Value Mapping and Science Policy Evaluation.” Minerva 49 (1): 1–23. doi: 10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7
5. Correljé, A., and B., Broekhans. Forthcoming. “Flood Risk Management in the Netherlands after the 1953 Flood: A Competition Between the Public Value(s) of Water.” Journal of Flood Risk Management. doi:10.1111/jfr3.12087
6. Correljé, A., E., Cuppen, M., Dignum, U., Pesch, and B., Taebi. Forthcoming. “Responsible Innovation in Energy Projects: Values in the Design of Technologies, Institutions and Stakeholder Interactions.” In Responsible Innovation, Volume II, edited by J., Van den Hoven, E. J., Koops, H. A., Romijn, T. E., Swierstra, and I., Oosterlaken. Springer.
7. Correljé, A., and J. P. M., Groenewegen. 2009. “Public Values in the Energy Sector: Economic Perspectives.” International Journal of Public Policy 4 (5): 395–413. doi: 10.1504/IJPP.2009.025079
8. Doorn, N., and S. O., Hansson. 2011. “Should Probabilistic Design Replace Safety Factors?” Philosophy & Technology 24 (2): 151–168. doi: 10.1007/s13347-010-0003-6
9. Dunn, W. N., 2001. “Using the Method of Context Validation to Mitigate Type III Error in Environmental Policy Analysis.” In Knowledge, Power and Participation in Environmental Policy Analysis, edited by M., Hisschemöller, R., Hoppe, W. N., Dunn, and J. R., Ravetz, 417–436. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
10. Fisher, E., 2007. “Ethnographic Invention: Probing the Capacity of Laboratory Decisions.” NanoEthics 1 (2): 155–165. doi: 10.1007/s11569-007-0016-5
11. Flipse, S. M., M. C. A., van der Sanden, and P., Osseweijer. 2014. “Improving Industrial R&D Practices with Social and Ethical Aspects: Aligning Key Performance Indicators with Social and Ethical Aspects in Food Technology R&D.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change.
12. Friedman, B., P. H., Kahn, and A., Borning. 2002. Value Sensitive Design: Theory and Methods. University of Washington Technical Report 02–12–01. Seattle: University of Washington.
13. Gorman, M. E., J. F., Groves, and J., Shrager. 2004. “Societal Dimensions of Nanotechnology as a Trading Zone: Results from a Pilot Project.” In Discovering the Nanoscale, edited by D., Baird, A., Nordmann, and J., Schummer, 63–77. Amsterdam: IOS.
14. Guston, D. H., 2004. “Responsible Innovation in the Commercialised University.” In Buying In or Selling Out: The Commercialisation of the American Research University, edited by D. G., Stein, 161–174. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
15. Hellström, T., 2003. “Systemic Innovation and Risk: Technology Assessment and the Challenge of Responsible Innovation.” Technology in Society 25 (3): 369–384. doi: 10.1016/S0160-791X(03)00041-1
16. Hisschemöller, M., and E., Cuppen. Forthcoming. “Participatory Tools.” In The Tools of Policy Formulation: Actors, Capacities, Venues and Uses, edited by A., Jordan and J., Turnpenny. Edward Elgar.
17. Joss, S., and S., Bellucci. 2002. Participatory Technology Assessment: European Perspectives. London: Centre for Study of Democracy, University of Westminster.
18. Manders-Huits, N., 2011. “What Values in Design? The Challenge of Incorporating Moral Values into Design.” Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (2): 271–287. doi: 10.1007/s11948-010-9198-2
19. Meynhardt, T., 2009. “Public Value Inside: What Is Public Value Creation?” International Journal of Public Administration 32 (3–4): 192–219. doi: 10.1080/01900690902732632
20. Nissenbaum, H., 2005. “Values in Technical Design.” In Encyclopedia of Science, Technology and Society, edited by C., Mitcham, lxvi–lxx. New York: MacMillan.
21. Owen, R., and N., Goldberg. 2010. “Responsible Innovation: A Pilot Study with the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.” Risk Analysis 30 (11): 1699–1707. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01517.x
22. Pesch, U., 2005. The Predicaments of Publicness. An Inquiry into the Conceptual Ambiguity of Public Administration. Delft: Eburon.
23. Rawls, J., 1971. A Theory of Justice, Revised Edition. 1999 ed. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
24. Rip, A., 2009. “Futures of ELSA.” EMBO Reports 10 (7): 666–670. doi: 10.1038/embor.2009.149
25. Rowe, G., and L. J., Frewer. 2005. “A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms.” Science, Technology & Human Values 30 (2): 251–290. doi: 10.1177/0162243904271724
26. Schot, J. W., 1992. “Constructive Technology Assessment and Technology Dynamics: The Case of Clean Technologies.” Science, Technology & Human Values 17 (1): 36–56. doi: 10.1177/016224399201700103
27. Schuurbiers, D., 2011. “What Happens in the Lab: Applying Midstream Modulation to Enhance Critical Reflection in the Laboratory.” Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4): 769–788. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9317-8
28. Schuurbiers, D., N., Doorn, I. R., Van de Poel, and M. E., Gorman. 2014. “Mandates and Methods for Early Engagement.” In Early Engagement and New Technologies: Opening Up the Laboratory, edited by N., Doorn, D., Schuurbiers, I. R., Van de Poel, and M. E., Gorman, 3–15. Dordrecht: Springer.
29. Taebi, B., and A. C., Kadak. 2010. “Intergenerational Considerations Affecting the Future of Nuclear Power: Equity as a Framework for Assessing Fuel Cycles.” Risk Analysis 30 (9): 1341–1362. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01434.x
30. Taebi, B., and J. L., Kloosterman. Forthcoming. “Design for Values in Nuclear Technology.” In Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design, edited by J., Van den Hoven, P., Vermaas, and I., Van de Poel. Dordrecht: Springer.
31. Talbot, C., 2011. “Paradoxes and Prospects of ‘Public Value’.” Public Money & Management 31 (1): 27–34. doi: 10.1080/09540962.2011.545544
32. Van de Poel, I. R., 2009. “Values in Engineering Design.” In Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences, edited by A., Meijer, 973–1006. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
33. Van den Hoven, J., 2007. “ICT and Value Sensitive Design.” The Information Society: Innovation, Legitimacy, Ethics and Democracy In Honor of Professor Jacques Berleur sj: 67–72.
34. Van den Hoven, J., 2010. “The Use of Normative Theories in Computer Ethics.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics, edited by L., Floridi, 59–76. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35. Van den Hoven, J., 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. Brussels: European Commission.
36. Van den Hoven, J., I. R., Van den Poel, and P., Vermaas. Forthcoming. Handbook of Ethics and Values in Technological Design. Dordrecht: Springer.
37. Von Schomberg, R., 2011. Towards Responsible Research and Innovation in the Information and Communication Technologies and Security Technologies Fields. Brussels: European Commission.
38. Walker, G., 1995. “Renewable Energy and the Public.” Land Use Policy 12 (1): 49–59. doi: 10.1016/0264-8377(95)90074-C
39. Zwart, S. D., I., Van de Poel, H., Van Mil, and M., Brumsen. 2006. “A Network Approach for Distinguishing Ethical Issues in Research and Development.” Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (4): 663–684. doi: 10.1007/s11948-006-0063-2