{"title":"从贸易区的角度看 EPSRC 的负责任创新政策。","authors":"Joseph Murphy, Sarah Parry, John Walls","doi":"10.1007/s11024-016-9294-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Responsible innovation (RI) is gathering momentum as an academic and policy debate linking science and society. Advocates of RI in research policy argue that scientific research should be opened up at an early stage so that many actors and issues can steer innovation trajectories. If this is done, they suggest, new technologies will be more responsible in different ways, better aligned with what society wants, and mistakes of the past will be avoided. This paper analyses the dynamics of RI in policy and practice and makes recommendations for future development. More specifically, we draw on the theory of 'trading zones' developed by Peter Galison and use it to analyse two related processes: (i) the development and inclusion of RI in research policy at the UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC); (ii) the implementation of RI in relation to the Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (SPICE) project. Our analysis reveals an RI trading zone comprised of three quasi-autonomous traditions of the research domain - applied science, social science and research policy. It also shows how language and expertise are linking and coordinating these traditions in ways shaped by local conditions and the wider context of research. Building on such insights, we argue that a sensible goal for RI policy and practice at this stage is better local coordination of those involved and we suggest ways how this might be achieved.</p>","PeriodicalId":47427,"journal":{"name":"Minerva","volume":"54 ","pages":"151-174"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4877420/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The EPSRC's Policy of Responsible Innovation from a Trading Zones Perspective.\",\"authors\":\"Joseph Murphy, Sarah Parry, John Walls\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11024-016-9294-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Responsible innovation (RI) is gathering momentum as an academic and policy debate linking science and society. Advocates of RI in research policy argue that scientific research should be opened up at an early stage so that many actors and issues can steer innovation trajectories. If this is done, they suggest, new technologies will be more responsible in different ways, better aligned with what society wants, and mistakes of the past will be avoided. This paper analyses the dynamics of RI in policy and practice and makes recommendations for future development. More specifically, we draw on the theory of 'trading zones' developed by Peter Galison and use it to analyse two related processes: (i) the development and inclusion of RI in research policy at the UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC); (ii) the implementation of RI in relation to the Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (SPICE) project. Our analysis reveals an RI trading zone comprised of three quasi-autonomous traditions of the research domain - applied science, social science and research policy. It also shows how language and expertise are linking and coordinating these traditions in ways shaped by local conditions and the wider context of research. Building on such insights, we argue that a sensible goal for RI policy and practice at this stage is better local coordination of those involved and we suggest ways how this might be achieved.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47427,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva\",\"volume\":\"54 \",\"pages\":\"151-174\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4877420/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-016-9294-9\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2016/3/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-016-9294-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/3/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
负责任的创新(RI)作为一场将科学与社会联系起来的学术和政策辩论,其势头日益强劲。研究政策中的责任创新的倡导者认为,应在早期阶段开放科学研究,以便许多参与者和问题能够引导创新轨迹。他们认为,如果能做到这一点,新技术就能以不同的方式承担更多责任,更好地满足社会需求,并避免过去的错误。本文分析了政策和实践中的 RI 动态,并对未来发展提出了建议。更具体地说,我们借鉴了彼得-加利森(Peter Galison)提出的 "交易区 "理论,并利用该理论分析了两个相关过程:(i) 英国工程与物理科学研究理事会(EPSRC)制定并将 RI 纳入研究政策的过程;(ii) RI 与平流层粒子喷入气候工程(SPICE)项目相关的实施过程。我们的分析揭示了一个由应用科学、社会科学和研究政策这三个研究领域的准自主传统组成的 RI 交易区。我们的分析还显示了语言和专业知识是如何在当地条件和更广泛的研究背景下将这些传统联系和协调起来的。基于这些见解,我们认为,现阶段研究与创新政策和实践的合理目标是更好地协调相关人员,并提出了实现这一目标的方法。
The EPSRC's Policy of Responsible Innovation from a Trading Zones Perspective.
Responsible innovation (RI) is gathering momentum as an academic and policy debate linking science and society. Advocates of RI in research policy argue that scientific research should be opened up at an early stage so that many actors and issues can steer innovation trajectories. If this is done, they suggest, new technologies will be more responsible in different ways, better aligned with what society wants, and mistakes of the past will be avoided. This paper analyses the dynamics of RI in policy and practice and makes recommendations for future development. More specifically, we draw on the theory of 'trading zones' developed by Peter Galison and use it to analyse two related processes: (i) the development and inclusion of RI in research policy at the UK's Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC); (ii) the implementation of RI in relation to the Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (SPICE) project. Our analysis reveals an RI trading zone comprised of three quasi-autonomous traditions of the research domain - applied science, social science and research policy. It also shows how language and expertise are linking and coordinating these traditions in ways shaped by local conditions and the wider context of research. Building on such insights, we argue that a sensible goal for RI policy and practice at this stage is better local coordination of those involved and we suggest ways how this might be achieved.
期刊介绍:
Minerva is devoted to the study of ideas, traditions, cultures and institutions in science, higher education and research. It is concerned no less with history than with present practice, and with the local as well as the global. It speaks to the scholar, the teacher, the policy-maker and the administrator. It features articles, essay reviews and ''special'' issues on themes of topical importance. It represents no single school of thought, but welcomes diversity, within the rules of rational discourse. Its contributions are peer-reviewed. Its audience is world-wide.