Abstract
Responsible innovation (RI) has become a powerful tenet of the European Commission discourse on science and society. And yet, the concept has remained surprisingly under-theoretically developed by RI advocates, who appear to be more interested in investigating the ‘ingredients’ or ‘pillars’ of responsibility than the normative dimension of it. In order to fill this gap, the paper below will consider ‘moral responsibility’ in the context of supply chains and innovation networks. It will firstly scrutinize the conception of responsibility developed in corporate social responsibility (CSR) approaches and what impact this conception might have on RI. Somewhat paradoxically, CSR approaches have been neglected by most RI theorists. It will then propose a conceptual mapping of the ten different meanings of responsibility that have emerged in moral philosophy, drawing on a distinction between negative and positive conceptions. Finally, it will scrutinize possible implementation of these various meanings of responsibility in supply chains and innovation networks.
Highlights
The development of technology and research in the twentieth century is rife with controversies
research and innovation (RRI) furthers different traditions, which originated in bioethics, in ethical committees focused on various technologies, and in technology assessment (TA) and participatory technological assessment (PTA) practices
Compared to PTA, designed as a pluralist attempt to build normative assessment, or to ELSI whose approaches are based on expert driven ethical evaluation, RRI theories link social and ethical desirability to the ‘responsibility’ of those involved in innovation and research processes
Summary
The development of technology and research in the twentieth century is rife with controversies. Compared to PTA, designed as a pluralist attempt to build normative assessment, or to ELSI whose approaches are based on expert driven ethical evaluation, RRI theories link social and ethical desirability to the ‘responsibility’ of those involved in innovation and research processes (scientists, innovators, policy makers, interest groups, endusers, etc.) Authors such as Guston (2004), Grunwald (2011), Stilgoe et al (2013), Owen et al (2012, 2013b) and Von Schomberg (2013), or a report from the European Commission published in 2013 (EC, 2013b), have gathered recommendations already promoted in TA approaches together and proposed several conditions for RRI to be operative: anticipation, transparency, reflexivity, public participation and responsiveness, which is only one possible meaning of responsibility. To improve RI implementation, we discuss in what contexts some of the meanings of responsibility best apply and how they help to conceptualize responsibility in supply chains and networks
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
