Abstract
Responsible research and innovation (RRI) is growing in importance, and alongside this growth is an acknowledgement that for research and innovation projects to be successful, stakeholders must be involved from the outset. When developing guidelines for practice, stakeholders will often be presented with a document to ratify rather than one to develop or revise. This gap in stakeholder engagement has been recognised and addressed by the development of the requirements tool. This tool was originally created to provide a systematic approach to the development of guidelines for the governance of RRI, but it was quickly recognised that the tool can bridge the gap and involve stakeholders from the outset, thereby increasing the likelihood of buy-in. This paper presents the second validated use of the tool that was used to inform the revision of guidelines for the introduction of a universal design for learning (UDL) at a UK University. The resulting revised guidelines for practice and their adoption by those tasked with producing them provide further evidence of the value and flexibility of the tool and its potential for its continued use in the future development or revision of guidelines.
Highlights
The concept of responsible research and innovation (RRI) as a discrete approach to research and innovation is relatively recent but has its roots in early 20th century discussions about ‘value free’ science and its dominance of social science thinking through the ideas of Max Weber
The potential dangerous and damaging nature of ethically neutral science [1,2], and its detachment from its stakeholders, has long been challenged [3,4,5] alongside concerns about ethics and the importance of involvement in the decision-making of those likely to be affected. This has led to a relatively recent acknowledgement within the science community that ‘The approach used by normal science to manage complex social and biophysical systems as if they were simple scientific exercises has brought us to our present mixture of intellectual triumph and socio-ecological peril’ [6] and so science and innovation actors can no longer avoid responsibility for their activities as being necessary for science to be considered rigorous and valid [7,8,9,10]
The opportunity to test the tool and its flexibility to apply it in a different context came about during the implementation of a University-wide project to embed universal design for learning (UDL) principles into teaching and learning practice
Summary
The concept of responsible research and innovation (RRI) as a discrete approach to research and innovation is relatively recent but has its roots in early 20th century discussions about ‘value free’ science and its dominance of social science thinking through the ideas of Max Weber. I will first present the underlying philosophy of RRI adopted by the GREAT project, notwithstanding the historical and complimentary aspects of Science and Technology Studies, Corporate Social Responsibility and the social license to operate, highlighted above It explains how understanding of the literature underpinned the approach to the development of the requirements tool and, subsequently, the guidelines for RRI. There is a discussion of the future potential to embed RRI into organisational change initiatives and how the use of the requirements tool can help in achieving UN sustainable development goals 16 and 17 [23,24] and to increase the likelihood of successful adoption of new innovations and initiatives in industry, education, and beyond, through greater and earlier stakeholder engagement. RRI requires that there is due consideration of the impact of organisational change on individuals and smaller groups, such as those within and between those organisations or teams that are at the forefront of such change [49] The introduction of new processes and procedures, can have a huge impact on those both directly and indirectly affected by them and if they are done without due diligence, involvement, and reflection [50,51]; these processes and procedures are unlikely to be fully effective, or may result in unexpected negative outcomes
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
