通过原产地评估解决研发初期的多重责任问题

IF 1.1 4区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Nanoethics Pub Date : 2024-06-24 DOI:10.1007/s11569-024-00456-7
Janine Gondolf
{"title":"通过原产地评估解决研发初期的多重责任问题","authors":"Janine Gondolf","doi":"10.1007/s11569-024-00456-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A wealth of literature and best practices on Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) document how it can be implemented in projects. However, each project is too specific to simply replicate existing patterns. Especially in early projects with a high degree of uncertainty, where indicators and measures cannot be applied, the so-called provenance assessment as a methodological change of perspective makes it possible to assess the procedural quality of research by means of narratives. A clear picture of the challenges for European bio-economy projects is sought by mapping the broader debate on \"RRI in practice\" in the context of biotechnology. The SUSPHIRE project is used as a case study to show how project-specific narratives integrate and signify RRI. By unpacking various concepts of \"responsibility\" that are already present in the project narrative at an early stage, I will show how this assessment differs significantly from other attempts to \"do RRI\". It is precisely in the absence of other criteria that the assessment of provenance can bring to the fore the specific form(s) of responsibility inherent in the development of projects.</p>","PeriodicalId":18802,"journal":{"name":"Nanoethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Addressing Multiple Responsibilities in the Early Stages of R&D with Provenance Assessment\",\"authors\":\"Janine Gondolf\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11569-024-00456-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>A wealth of literature and best practices on Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) document how it can be implemented in projects. However, each project is too specific to simply replicate existing patterns. Especially in early projects with a high degree of uncertainty, where indicators and measures cannot be applied, the so-called provenance assessment as a methodological change of perspective makes it possible to assess the procedural quality of research by means of narratives. A clear picture of the challenges for European bio-economy projects is sought by mapping the broader debate on \\\"RRI in practice\\\" in the context of biotechnology. The SUSPHIRE project is used as a case study to show how project-specific narratives integrate and signify RRI. By unpacking various concepts of \\\"responsibility\\\" that are already present in the project narrative at an early stage, I will show how this assessment differs significantly from other attempts to \\\"do RRI\\\". It is precisely in the absence of other criteria that the assessment of provenance can bring to the fore the specific form(s) of responsibility inherent in the development of projects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18802,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nanoethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nanoethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-024-00456-7\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nanoethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-024-00456-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于负责任的研究与创新(RRI)的大量文献和最佳实践记录了如何在项目中实施 RRI。然而,每个项目都有其特殊性,不能简单地照搬现有模式。尤其是在不确定性较高的早期项目中,指标和措施无法应用,所谓的出处评估作为一种方法论上的视角转变,使得通过叙述来评估研究的程序质量成为可能。通过对生物技术背景下 "实践中的 RRI "的广泛讨论,可以清楚地了解欧洲生物经济项目所面临的挑战。SUSPHIRE 项目作为一个案例研究,展示了特定项目的叙事是如何整合和体现 RRI 的。通过解读在项目早期阶段就已存在于项目叙述中的各种 "责任 "概念,我将说明这一评估与其他 "实践 RRI "的尝试有何显著不同。恰恰是在缺乏其他标准的情况下,对来源的评估能够凸显项目开发过程中固有的特定责任形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Addressing Multiple Responsibilities in the Early Stages of R&D with Provenance Assessment

A wealth of literature and best practices on Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) document how it can be implemented in projects. However, each project is too specific to simply replicate existing patterns. Especially in early projects with a high degree of uncertainty, where indicators and measures cannot be applied, the so-called provenance assessment as a methodological change of perspective makes it possible to assess the procedural quality of research by means of narratives. A clear picture of the challenges for European bio-economy projects is sought by mapping the broader debate on "RRI in practice" in the context of biotechnology. The SUSPHIRE project is used as a case study to show how project-specific narratives integrate and signify RRI. By unpacking various concepts of "responsibility" that are already present in the project narrative at an early stage, I will show how this assessment differs significantly from other attempts to "do RRI". It is precisely in the absence of other criteria that the assessment of provenance can bring to the fore the specific form(s) of responsibility inherent in the development of projects.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nanoethics
Nanoethics HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: NanoEthics: Ethics for Technologies that Converge at the Nanoscale will focus on the philosophically and scientifically rigorous examination of the ethical and societal considerations and the public and policy concerns inherent in nanotechnology research and development. These issues include both individual and societal problems, and include individual health, wellbeing and human enhancement, human integrity and autonomy, distribution of the costs and benefits, threats to culture and tradition and to political and economic stability. Additionally there are meta-issues including the neutrality or otherwise of technology, designing technology in a value-sensitive way, and the control of scientific research.
期刊最新文献
Addressing Multiple Responsibilities in the Early Stages of R&D with Provenance Assessment Gene Editing Cattle for Enhancing Heat Tolerance: A Welfare Review of the “PRLR-SLICK Cattle” Case Representations of (Nano)technology in Comics from the ‘NanoKOMIK’ Project Reflection on Gene Editing from the Perspective of Biopolitics Roberto Marchesini, Technophysiology, or How Technology Modifies the Self, Cambridge, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2023, 242pp
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1