Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.

Accepted Paper:

Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) as decentered governance: Practices of governance and practices of freedom in researchers' daily lives  
Heidrun Åm (NTNU)

Paper short abstract:

How do scientists enact RRI? We studied communities in bio- and nanotechnology in Norway required to integrate RRI in grant proposals, inquiring how they manage this. We argue that the current way of demanding RRI estranges scientists and potentially produces resistance towards enacting RRI.

Paper long abstract:

Recent developments in science governance, such as Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), represent increased pressure on scientists to internalise responsibility in research and development. In this respect, RRI fits general developments regarding decentred governance and governance-driven democratization (Warren 2009) because RRI encourages the formation of networks through interdisciplinary cooperation and pursues active citizenship through public engagement. Also, it aims to steer knowledge production in accordance with normative values.

But the question emerges how those subjected to these governance demands, namely scientists, translate them. Put differently, how do scientists interpret and enact RRI? To answer this question, we analyse a set of research communities in the bio- and nanotechnology field in Norway. Norway is an interesting case because the Research Council of Norway has been very outspoken in demanding RRI as an integral part of each research proposal within nano- and biotechnology.

Based on 37 interviews, this paper studies scientists' interpretations of and practices with respect to RRI. To be subjected to a kind of RRI regime does not result in scientists accepting and aligning with such responsibility demands. Drawing on the work of James Tully (2008), we identify what practices of freedom follow the practices of governance. We argue that the current way of doing RRI, by requiring that such practices shall be an integral element of grant proposals while the concept itself has not been clearly defined, risks to estrange scientists. In turn, we see this as stimulating resistance to a productive engagement with the concerns underlying the current RRI discourse.

Panel T076
Enacting responsibility: RRI and the re-ordering of science-society relations in practice
  Session 1 Friday 2 September, 2016, -