‘There is nothing nano-specific here’: a reconstruction of the different understandings of responsiveness in responsible nanotechnology innovation

Anouk Heltzel; J. W. Schuijer; W. L. Willems; F. Kupper; J. E.W. Broerse

doi:10.1080/23299460.2022.2040779

‘There is nothing nano-specific here’: a reconstruction of the different understandings of responsiveness in responsible nanotechnology innovation

Anouk Heltzel^*, J. W. Schuijer, W. L. Willems, F. Kupper, J. E.W. Broerse

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to Journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

In the past decades, controversies in science and technology have fuelled the call for a research and innovation system that is open to public scrutiny and sensitive to public needs and values. These calls have been translated into a framework for responsible research and innovation (RRI). Despite its crucial role in RRI, the dimension of responsiveness is still considered to be the least conceptualized. In this paper, we analyse the mutual search for the meaning of `responsiveness' during a multi-stakeholder dialogue on responsiveness in nanotechnology innovation. We reconstructed five frames of responsiveness: science and technology, market, expert, network, and society-driven responsiveness. We highlighted and reflected on the three main strategies for dealing with differences: avoidance, polarization, and reframing. On the basis of our findings, we argue that in order to generate a collective meaning of responsiveness with a clear direction, conversations are needed in which fundamental assumptions can be questioned.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	173-195
Number of pages	23
Journal	JOURNAL OF RESPONSIBLE INNOVATION
Volume	9
Issue number	2
Early online date	23 Mar 2022
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2022.2040779
Publication status	Published - 4 May 2022

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The European multi-stakeholder dialogue event that is central to this study was part of the NANO2ALL project, funded by the EU’s Horizon 2020 programme for research and innovation. This 3.5-year project aimed to put responsible research at the core of its methodology and aspired to contribute to a climate of dialogue and engagement in nanotechnology R&I processes (NANO2ALL ). Part of the project encompassed the organization of various dialogue events across Europe and Israel, using a three-phase dialogue approach. The European multi-stakeholder dialogue was the final event and was preceded by two rounds of dialogue in six different countries: France, Italy, Israel, Poland, Spain, and Sweden.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Funding

The European multi-stakeholder dialogue event that is central to this study was part of the NANO2ALL project, funded by the EU’s Horizon 2020 programme for research and innovation. This 3.5-year project aimed to put responsible research at the core of its methodology and aspired to contribute to a climate of dialogue and engagement in nanotechnology R&I processes (NANO2ALL ). Part of the project encompassed the organization of various dialogue events across Europe and Israel, using a three-phase dialogue approach. The European multi-stakeholder dialogue was the final event and was preceded by two rounds of dialogue in six different countries: France, Italy, Israel, Poland, Spain, and Sweden.

Funders	Funder number
EU’s Horizon 2020 programme for research and innovation
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme	685931

Keywords

framing
nanotechnology
public engagement
Responsiveness
RRI

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1080/23299460.2022.2040779

Persistent URL (handle)

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{b4629b0b55664c2e9d7f3264556aa9b4,

title = "{\textquoteleft}There is nothing nano-specific here{\textquoteright}: a reconstruction of the different understandings of responsiveness in responsible nanotechnology innovation",

abstract = "In the past decades, controversies in science and technology have fuelled the call for a research and innovation system that is open to public scrutiny and sensitive to public needs and values. These calls have been translated into a framework for responsible research and innovation (RRI). Despite its crucial role in RRI, the dimension of responsiveness is still considered to be the least conceptualized. In this paper, we analyse the mutual search for the meaning of `responsiveness' during a multi-stakeholder dialogue on responsiveness in nanotechnology innovation. We reconstructed five frames of responsiveness: science and technology, market, expert, network, and society-driven responsiveness. We highlighted and reflected on the three main strategies for dealing with differences: avoidance, polarization, and reframing. On the basis of our findings, we argue that in order to generate a collective meaning of responsiveness with a clear direction, conversations are needed in which fundamental assumptions can be questioned.",

keywords = "framing, nanotechnology, public engagement, Responsiveness, RRI",

author = "Anouk Heltzel and Schuijer, {J. W.} and Willems, {W. L.} and F. Kupper and Broerse, {J. E.W.}",

note = "Funding Information: The European multi-stakeholder dialogue event that is central to this study was part of the NANO2ALL project, funded by the EU{\textquoteright}s Horizon 2020 programme for research and innovation. This 3.5-year project aimed to put responsible research at the core of its methodology and aspired to contribute to a climate of dialogue and engagement in nanotechnology R&I processes (NANO2ALL ). Part of the project encompassed the organization of various dialogue events across Europe and Israel, using a three-phase dialogue approach. The European multi-stakeholder dialogue was the final event and was preceded by two rounds of dialogue in six different countries: France, Italy, Israel, Poland, Spain, and Sweden. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.",

year = "2022",

month = may,

day = "4",

doi = "10.1080/23299460.2022.2040779",

language = "English",

volume = "9",

pages = "173--195",

journal = "JOURNAL OF RESPONSIBLE INNOVATION",

issn = "2329-9460",

publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - ‘There is nothing nano-specific here’: a reconstruction of the different understandings of responsiveness in responsible nanotechnology innovation

AU - Heltzel, Anouk

AU - Schuijer, J. W.

AU - Willems, W. L.

AU - Kupper, F.

AU - Broerse, J. E.W.

N1 - Funding Information: The European multi-stakeholder dialogue event that is central to this study was part of the NANO2ALL project, funded by the EU’s Horizon 2020 programme for research and innovation. This 3.5-year project aimed to put responsible research at the core of its methodology and aspired to contribute to a climate of dialogue and engagement in nanotechnology R&I processes (NANO2ALL ). Part of the project encompassed the organization of various dialogue events across Europe and Israel, using a three-phase dialogue approach. The European multi-stakeholder dialogue was the final event and was preceded by two rounds of dialogue in six different countries: France, Italy, Israel, Poland, Spain, and Sweden. Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

PY - 2022/5/4

Y1 - 2022/5/4

N2 - In the past decades, controversies in science and technology have fuelled the call for a research and innovation system that is open to public scrutiny and sensitive to public needs and values. These calls have been translated into a framework for responsible research and innovation (RRI). Despite its crucial role in RRI, the dimension of responsiveness is still considered to be the least conceptualized. In this paper, we analyse the mutual search for the meaning of `responsiveness' during a multi-stakeholder dialogue on responsiveness in nanotechnology innovation. We reconstructed five frames of responsiveness: science and technology, market, expert, network, and society-driven responsiveness. We highlighted and reflected on the three main strategies for dealing with differences: avoidance, polarization, and reframing. On the basis of our findings, we argue that in order to generate a collective meaning of responsiveness with a clear direction, conversations are needed in which fundamental assumptions can be questioned.

AB - In the past decades, controversies in science and technology have fuelled the call for a research and innovation system that is open to public scrutiny and sensitive to public needs and values. These calls have been translated into a framework for responsible research and innovation (RRI). Despite its crucial role in RRI, the dimension of responsiveness is still considered to be the least conceptualized. In this paper, we analyse the mutual search for the meaning of `responsiveness' during a multi-stakeholder dialogue on responsiveness in nanotechnology innovation. We reconstructed five frames of responsiveness: science and technology, market, expert, network, and society-driven responsiveness. We highlighted and reflected on the three main strategies for dealing with differences: avoidance, polarization, and reframing. On the basis of our findings, we argue that in order to generate a collective meaning of responsiveness with a clear direction, conversations are needed in which fundamental assumptions can be questioned.

KW - framing

KW - nanotechnology

KW - public engagement

KW - Responsiveness

KW - RRI

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85127205102&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85127205102&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/23299460.2022.2040779

DO - 10.1080/23299460.2022.2040779

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85127205102

SN - 2329-9460

VL - 9

SP - 173

EP - 195

JO - JOURNAL OF RESPONSIBLE INNOVATION

JF - JOURNAL OF RESPONSIBLE INNOVATION

IS - 2

ER -

‘There is nothing nano-specific here’: a reconstruction of the different understandings of responsiveness in responsible nanotechnology innovation

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Funding

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Persistent URL (handle)

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this