Taking knowledge production seriously in responsible research and innovation

References

• Aicardi, C., M. Reinsborough, and N. Rose. 2018. “The Integrated Ethics and Society Programme of the Human Brain Project: Reflecting on an Ongoing Experience.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 5 (1): 13–37.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Argyris, C., and D. A. Schön. 1978. Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
   Google Scholar
• Berndt, A., and E. Dayman. 2018. ERA CoBioTech Strategic Agenda - A Vision for Biotechnology in Europe. Swindon: European Research Area Network Cofund for Biotechnologies.
   Google Scholar
• Bickerstaff, Karen, Irene Lorenzoni, Mavis Jones, and Nick Pidgeon. 2010. “Locating Scientific Citizenship: The Institutional Contexts and Cultures of Public Engagement.” Science, Technology & Human Values 35 (4): 474–500.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doezema, Tess, David Ludwig, Phil Macnaghten, Clare Shelley-Egan, and Ellen-Marie Forsberg. 2019. “Translation, Transduction, and Transformation: Expanding Practices of Responsibility Across Borders.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 6 (3): 323–331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egeland, C., E.-M. Forsberg, and T. Maximova-Mentzoni. 2019. “RRI: Implementation as Learning.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 6 (3): 375–380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2016. Grant Agreement Number: 722361 — Cofund on Biotechnologies (CoBioTech). Brussels: European Commission Directorate-General Research & Innovation.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2019. Orientations Towards the First Strategic Plan for Horizon Europe. Brussels: DG Research and Innovation.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, S.W. and E.K. Frow. (2016) Taking Care in Synthetic Biology. In Absence in Science, Security and Policy: From Research Agendas to Global Strategy, edited by B. Balmer and B. Rappert, 132–153. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Felt, U., et al. 2017. “‘Response-Able Practices’ or ‘new Bureaucracies of Virtue’: The Challenges of Making RRI Work in Academic Environments.” In Responsible Innovation 3, edited by L. Asveld, 48–68. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Felt, U., B. Wynne, M. Callon, M. E. Goncalves, S. Jasanoff, M. Jepsen, P-B. Joly, Z. Konopasek, S. May, C. Neubauer, A. Rip, K. Siune, and A. C. Stirling. 2007. Taking European knowledge society seriously: Report of the expert group on science and governance to the Science, Economy and Society Directorate, Directorate-General for Research, European Commission. Luxembourg: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Fitzgerald, Des, Melissa M Littlefield, Kasper J Knudsen, James Tonks, and Martin J Dietz. 2014. “Ambivalence, Equivocation and the Politics of Experimental Knowledge: A Transdisciplinary Neuroscience Encounter.” Social Studies of Science 44 (5): 701–721.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flink, T., and D. Kaldewey. 2018. “The New Production of Legitimacy: STI Policy Discourses Beyond the Contract Metaphor.” Research Policy 47 (1): 14–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guston, D. H. 2015. “Responsible Innovation: Who Could be Against That?” Journal of Responsible Innovation 2 (1): 1–4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hilgartner, S., B. Prainsack, and J. B. Hurlbut. 2016. “Ethics as Governance in Genomics and Beyond.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (4th ed.), edited by U. Felt, R. Fouché, C. A. Miller, and L. Smith-Doerr, 1043–1091. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Joly, P.-B. 2015. “Governing Emerging Technologies? The Need to Think Outside the (Black) Box.” In Science and Democracy: Making Knowledge and Making Power in the Biosciences and Beyond, edited by S. Hilgartner, C. A. Miller, and R. Hagendijk, 133–155. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Macnaghten, P. 2016. The Metis of Responsible Innovation. Inaugural Lecture upon Taking the Post of Personal Professor in Technology and International Development at the Knowledge, Technology and Innovation Chair Group at Wageningen University on 12 May 2016. Wageningen: Wageningen University.
   Google Scholar
• Macnaghten, P. 2020. The Making of Responsible Innovation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Macq, H., É Tancoigne, and B. J. Strasser. 2020. “From Deliberation to Production: Public Participation in Science and Technology Policies of the European Commission (1998–2019).” Minerva 58: 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marres, N. 2007. “The Issues Deserve More Credit: Pragmatist Contributions to the Study of Public Involvement in Controversy.” Social Studies of Science 37 (5): 759–780.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marris, C., and J. Calvert. 2020. “Science and Technology Studies in Policy: The UK Synthetic Biology Roadmap.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 45 (1): 34–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen, R. 2014. “The UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council’s Commitment to a Framework for Responsible Innovation.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 1 (1): 113–117.
   Google Scholar
• Rabinow, P., and G. Bennett. 2012. Designing Human Practices: An Experiment with Synthetic Biology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, S. 2004. “The Novelty Trap: Why Does Institutional Learning About New Technologies Seem so Difficult?” Industry and Higher Education, 18 (6): 349–355.
   Google Scholar
• Ribeiro, B. E., R. D. Smith, and K. Millar. 2017. “A Mobilising Concept? Unpacking Academic Representations of Responsible Research and Innovation.” Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (1): 81–103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothstein, H. 2013. “Domesticating Participation: Participation and the Institutional Rationalities of Science-based Policy-making in the UK Food Standards Agency.” Journal of Risk Research 16 (6): 771–790.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, R. D. J., et al. 2019. An Agenda for Responsible Research and Innovation in ERA CoBioTech. Swindon: Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council.
   Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, J. 2018. “Machine Learning, Social Learning and the Governance of Self-driving Cars.” Social Studies of Science 48 (1): 25–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, J., R. Owen, and P. Macnaghten. 2013. “Developing a Framework for Responsible Innovation.” Research Policy 42 (9): 1568–1580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsing, A. L. 2015. The Mushroom at the End of the World: On the Possibility of Life in Capitalist Ruins. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Viseu, A. 2015. “Caring for Nanotechnology? Being an Integrated Social Scientist.” Social Studies of Science 45 (5): 642–664.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilsdon, J., B. Wynne, and J. Stilgoe. 2005. The Public Value of Science: Or How to Ensure That Science Really Matters. London: Demos.
   Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. 2007. “Dazzled by the Mirage of Influence?: STS-SSK in Multivalent Registers of Relevance.” Science, Technology & Human Values 32 (4): 491–503.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. 2011. “Lab Work Goes Social, and Vice Versa: Strategising Public Engagement Processes.” Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (4): 791–800.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, J. Y. 2013. “The Art of Trans-Boundary Governance: The Case of Synthetic Biology.” Systems and Synthetic Biology 7 (3): 107–114.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar