Responsible Innovation as a source of inspiration for Technology Assessment, and vice versa: the common challenge of responsibility, representation, issue identification, and orientation

References

• Beck, U. 1992. The Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Daimer, S., M. Hufnagl, and P. Warnke. 2012. “Challenge-oriented Policy-making and Innovation Systems Theory: Reconsidering Systemic Instruments.” In Innovation System Revisited: Experiences From 40 Years of Fraunhofer ISI Research, edited by Fraunhofer ISI (ed.), 217–234. Stuttgart: Fraunhofer Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• van Est, R. 2011a. “The Broad Challenge of Public Engagement in Science.” Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4): 639–648. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9296-9
   Google Scholar
• van Est, R. 2011b. “Keeping the Dream Alive: What ELSI-Research Might Learn From Parliamentary Technology Assessment.” In The Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society Volume 2: Nanotechnology and the Challenges of Equity, Equality and Development, edited by S. Cozzens and J. Wetmore, 409–421. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.
   Google Scholar
• van Est, R. 2013. “Moral Shortcomings in the Technology Debate.” Next Nature Network, January 30. https://www.nextnature.net/2013/01/moral-shortcomings-in-the-technology-debate/.
   Google Scholar
• van Est, R., with the assistance of V. Rerimassie, I. van Keulen, and G. Dorren (translation K. Kaldenbach). 2014. Intimate Technology: The Battle for Our Body and Behaviour. Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut.
   Google Scholar
• van Est, R., and F. Brom. 2012. “Technology Assessment: Analytic and Democratic Practice.” In Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics. 2nd ed., Vol. 4, edited by R. Chadwick, 306–320. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Geels, F. W. 2002. “Technological Transitions as Evolutionary Reconfiguration Processes: A Multi-level Perspective and a Case-study.” Research Policy 31 (8–9): 1257–1274. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00062-8
   Google Scholar
• Grin, J., and A. Grunwald, eds. 2000. Vision Assessment: Shaping Technology in the 21st Century. Towards a Repertoire for Technology Assessment. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Grin, J., J. Rotmans, and J. Schot in collaboration with F. Geels and D. Loorbach. 2010. Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Grin, J., H. van de Graaf, and R. Hoppe. 1997. Technology Assessment Through Interaction: A Guide. The Hague: Rathenau Instituut.
   Google Scholar
• Grunwald, A. 2011. “Responsible Innovation: Bringing together Technology Assessment, Applied Ethics, and STS Research.” Enterprise and Work Innovation Studies 7: 9–31.
   Google Scholar
• Harper, R., T. Rodden, Y. Rogers, and A. Sellen, eds. 2008. Being Human: Human–Computer Interaction in the Year 2020. Cambridge: Microsoft.
   Google Scholar
• Joss, S., and S. Bellucci, eds. 2002. Participatory Technology Assessment: European Perspectives. London: Centre for the Study of Democracy.
   Google Scholar
• Klüver, L., R. Ø. Nielsen, and M. L. Jørgensen, eds. 2015. Policy-oriented Technology Assessment Across Europe: Expanding Capacities. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• van Lente, H., T. Swierstra, and P.-B. Joly. 2017. “Responsible Innovation as a Critique of Technology Assessment.” Journal of Responsible Innovation. doi: 10.1080/23299460.2017.1326261
   Google Scholar
• Loorbach, D. 2010. “Transition Management for Sustainable Development: A Prescriptive, Complexity-based Governance Framework.” Governance 23: 161–183. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0491.2009.01471.x
   Google Scholar
• Rip, A. 2016. “The Clothes of the Emperor. An Essay on RRI in and Around Brussels.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 3 (3): 290–304. doi: 10.1080/23299460.2016.1255701
   Google Scholar
• Rip, A., and D. K. R. Robinson. 2013. “Constructive Technology Assessment and the Method of Insertion.” In Early Engagement and New Technologies: Opening up the Laboratory, edited by N. Doorn, 37–54. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Schot, J. 2003. “The Contested Rise of a Modernist Technology Politics.” In Modernity and Technology, edited by T. J. Misa, P. Brey, and A. Feenberg, 257–278. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schot, J., and F. W. Geels. 2008. “Strategic Niche Management and Sustainable Innovation Journeys: Theory, Findings, Research Agenda, and Policy.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 20 (5): 537–554. doi: 10.1080/09537320802292651
   Google Scholar
• Schot, J., and A. Rip. 1997. “The Past and Future of Constructive Technology Assessment.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 54: 251–268. doi: 10.1016/S0040-1625(96)00180-1
   Google Scholar
• Schot, J., and W. E. Steinmueller. 2016. Framing Innovation Policy for Transformative Change: Innovation Policy 3.0. Draft Version 2. Sussex: University of Sussex, Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU).
   Google Scholar
• Stemerding, D. Forthcoming. From Technology Assessment to Responsible Research and Innovation in Synthetic Biology.
   Google Scholar
• Steward, F. 2008. Breaking the Boundaries: Transformative Innovation for the Global Good. London: NESTA.
   Google Scholar
• Stiegler, B. 1998. Technics and Time: The Fault of Prometheus. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swierstra, T., M. Boenink, B. Walhout, and R. van Est. 2009. “Converging Technologies, Shifting Boundaries.” Journal of Nanoethics 3 (3): 213–216. doi: 10.1007/s11569-009-0075-x
   Google Scholar
• Swierstra, T., and H. te Molder. 2012. “Risk and Soft Impacts.” In Handbook of Risk Theory: Epistemology, Decision Theory, Ethics, and Social Implications of Risk, edited by S. Roeser, R. Hillerbrand, P. Sandin, and M. Peterson, 1049–1066. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Van Eijndhoven, J. 1997. “Technology Assessment: Product or Process?” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 54 (2&3): 269–286. doi: 10.1016/S0040-1625(96)00210-7
   Google Scholar
• Wilsdon, J., and R. Willis. 2004. See-through Science: Why Public Engagement Needs to Move Upstream. London: Demos.
   Google Scholar
• Wong, P.-H. 2016. “Responsible Innovation for Decent Nonliberal Peoples: A Dilemma?” Journal of Responsible Innovation 3 (2): 154–168. doi: 10.1080/23299460.2016.1216709
   Google Scholar