Desarrollos y límites de la innovación responsableRRI y Open Science frente al entramado ideológico del progreso institucionalizado

Referencias bibliográficas

• Beck, Ulrich (1998). La sociedad del riesgo. Hacia una nueva modernidad. Barcelona: Paidós.
• Berlin, Isaiah (1990). The Pursuit of the Ideal [1988]. En Berlin, Isaiah. The Crooked Timber of Humanity: Chapters in the History of Ideas -editado por Henry Hardy- (1-19). London: John Murray.
• Blok, Vincent y Lemmens, Pieter (2015). The Emerging Concept of Responsible Innovation. Three Reasons Why It Is Questionable and Calls for a Radical Transformation of the Concept of Innovation. En Koops, Bert-Jaap, Oosterlaken, Ilse, Romijn, Henny, Swierstra, Tsjalling y van den Hoven, Jeroen (eds). Responsible Innovation 2: Concepts, Approaches, and Applications (19- 35). Cham: Springer.
• Bogers, Marcel, Chesbrough, Henry y Moedas, Carlos (2018). Open Innovation: Research, Practices, and Policies. California Management Review, 60(2), 5-16. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0008 125617745086
• Bush, Vannevar (1945). Science, the Endless Frontier. Washington, DC: Office of Scientific Research and Development.
• Callon, Michel, Lascoumes, Pierre y Barthe, Yannick (2009). Acting in an Uncertain World: An Essay On Technical Democracy. Cambridge, MA & London: The MIT Press.
• Carson, Rachel (1962). Silent Spring. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Council of the EU (2013). Council Decision of 3 December 2013 establishing the specific programme implementing Horizon 2020 the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014- 2020) and repealing Decisions 2006/971/EC, 2006/972/EC, 2006/973/EC, 2006/974/EC and 2006/975/EC (2013/743/EU). Official Journal of the European Union (20.12.2013), L 347, 965-1041.
• Council of the EU (2014). Council Directive 2014/87/Euratom of 8 July 2014 amending Directive 2009/71/Euratom establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations. Official Journal of the European Union (25.7.2014), L 219, 42-52.
• Cranor, Carl F. (2017). Tragic Failures: How and Why We are Harmed by Toxic Chemicals. New York: Oxford University Press.
• David, Kenneth y Thompson, Paul B. (eds.) (2008). What Can Nanotechnology Learn from Biotechnology? Social and Ethical Lessons for Nanoscience from the Debate over Agrifood Biotechnology and GMOs. Amsterdam: Academic Press.
• Delogu, Bernardo (2016). Risk Analysis and Governance in EU Policy Making and Regulation: An Introductory Guide. Cham: Springer.
• Dickson, David (1984). The New Politics of Science. New York: Pantheon Books.
• Douglas, Heather (2000). Inductive Risk and Values in Science. Philosophy of Science, 67(4), 559-579. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/3 92855
• Dunlap, Thomas R. (ed.) (2008). DDT, Silent Spring, and the Rise of Environmentalism: Classic Texts. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
• EC (2002). Science and Society: Action Plan. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• EC (2013). Horizon 2020, Work Programme 2014–2015: 16. Science with and for Society, C(2013) 8631 of 10 December 2013. Brussels.
• EC (2016). Open Innovation, Open Science, Open to the World – a vision for Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
• EC (2018a). Annexes to the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on establishing the specific programme implementing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, COM(2018) 436 final (7.6.2018). Brussels.
• EC (2018b). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing Horizon Europe – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation, laying down its rules for participation and dissemination, COM(2018) 435 final (7.6.2018). Brussels.
• EC (2018c). OSPP-REC: Open Science Policy Platform Recommendations. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
• EC (2019). Orientations towards the first Strategic Plan implementing the research and innovation framework programme Horizon Europe. Brussels.
• EC (2020). Horizon 2020, Work Programme 2018-2020: 5.ii. Nanotechnologies, Advanced Materials, Biotechnology and Advanced Manufacturing and Processing, C(2020)6320 of 17 September 2020. Brussels.
• Eizagirre, Andoni, Rodríguez, Hannot e Ibarra, Andoni (2017). Politicizing responsible innovation: responsibility as inclusive governance. International Journal of Innovation Studies, 1(1), 20-36. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1440.101003
• ERA [European Research Area] Expert Group (2008). Challenging Europe’s Research: Rationales for the European Research Area (ERA),
• EUR 23326. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• European Parliament and Council of the EU (2013). Regulation (EU) No 1291/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing Horizon 2020 – the Framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2010) and repealing Decision No 1982/2006/EC. Official Journal of the European Union (20.12.2013), L 347, 104-173.
• Felt, Ulrike (rapporteur), Wynne, Brain (chairman), Callon, Michel, Gonçalves, Maria Eduarda, Jasanoff, Sheila, Jepsen, Maria, Joly, Pierre-Benoît, Konopasek, Zdenek, May, Stefan, Neubauer, Claudia, Rip, Arie, Siune, Karen, Stirling, Andy y Tallacchini, Mariachiara (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 (EUR 22700). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• Frahm, Nina, Doezema, Tess y Pfotenhauer, Sebastian (2022). Fixing Technology with Society: The Coproduction of Democratic Deficits and Responsible Innovation at the OECD and the European Commission. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 47(1), 174-216. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162243921999100
• Gaskell, George (2008). Lessons from the Bio-Decade: A Social Scientific Perspective. En David, Kenneth y Thompson, Paul B. (eds.). What Can Nanotechnology Learn from Biotechnology? Social and Ethical Lessons for Nanoscience from the Debate over Agrifood Biotechnology and GMOs (237-259). Amsterdam: Academic Press.
• Godin, Benoît (2016). Making sense of innovation: from weapon to instrument to buzzword. Quaderni, 90, 21-40. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4000/quaderni.977
• Greiving, Stefan (rapporteur) (2009). Goverscience seminar on inclusive risk governance (European Commission, EUR 23910). Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
• Grunwald, Armin (2009). Technology Assessment: Concepts and Methods. En Meijers, Anthonie (ed.). Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences (Handbook of the Philosophy of Science, Volume 9) (1103-1146). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
• Guston, David. H. y Bimber, Bruce (1998). Technology Assessment for the New Century. Working Paper #7: Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers University. New Brunswick, NJ. Recuperado de: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary ?doi=10.1.1.37.3230 [Consultado el 11 de febrero de 2022].
• Hazlett, M. (2003). From the Depression to Atomic Power (1930s1960s). En Miller, Char (ed.). The Atlas of U.S. and Canadian Environmental History (118-141). New York & London: Routledge.
• IRGC [International Risk Governance Center] (2020). Involving stakeholders in the risk governance process. Lausanne: EPFL International Risk Governance Center.
• Jasanoff, Sheila (ed.) (2004). States of Knowledge: The co-production of science and social order. London & New York: Routledge.
• Kuntz, Marcel (2017). Science and Postmodernism: From RightThinking to Soft-Despotism. Trends in Biotechnology, 35(4), 283- 285. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2017.02.006
• López Cerezo, José Antonio y Luján, José Luis (2000). Ciencia y política del riesgo. Madrid: Alianza.
• Luján, José Luis y López Cerezo, José Antonio (2004). De la promoción a la regulación. El conocimiento científico en las políticas públicas de ciencia y tecnología. En Luján, José Luis y Echeverría, Javier (eds.). Gobernar los riesgos. Ciencia y valores en la sociedad del riesgo (75-98). Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva/OEI.
• Luján, José Luis y Todt, Oliver (2015). The Role of Values in Methodological Controversies: The Case of Risk Assessment. Philosophia Scientiæ, 19(1), 45-56. doi: 10.4000/philosophiascientiae.1 031
• Lund Declaration (2009). Europe Must Focus on the Grand Challenges of our Time. En New Worlds – New Solutions. Research and Innovation as a Basis for Developing Europe in a Global Context (The Swedish EU Presidency Conference – Final report), Uno Svedin (rapporteur), Lund (Sweden), 7-8 July 2009, pp. 40-41.
• Macnaghten, Phil (2020). The Making of Responsible Innovation. Cambridge et al.: Cambridge University Press.
• Mayer, Katia (2015). From Science 2.0 to Open Science Turning rhetoric into action? STCSN E-Letter, 3(1). Recuperado de: http://stcsn.ieee.net/e-letter/stcsn-e-letter-vol-3-no-1/fromscience-2-0-to-open-science [Consultado el 29 de enero de 2021].
• Mayo, Deborah G. y Hollander, Rachelle D. (eds.) (1991). Acceptable Evidence. Science and Values in Risk Management. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Moedas, Carlos (2015). Open Innovation, Open Science, Open to the World (SPEECH/15/5243). A new start for Europe: Opening up to an ERA of Innovation Conference. 22 de junio de 2015. Brussels. Recuperado de: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/det ail/en/SPEECH_15_5243 [Consultado el 17 de agosto de 2021].
• Novitzky, Peter, Bernstein, Michael J., Blok, Vincent, Braun, Robert, Chan, Tung Tung, Lamers, Wout, Loeber, Anne, Meijer, Ingeborg, Lindner, Ralf y Griessler, Erich (2020). Improve alignment of research policy and societal values. Science, 369(6499), 39-41. doi: 10.1126/science.abb3415
• Owen, Richard, Forsberg, Ellen-Marie y Shelley-Egan, Clare (2019). RRI-Practice Policy Recommendations and Roadmaps. RRI-Practice project report. Deliverable 16.2. Recuperado de: https://www.rripractice.eu/knowledge-repository/recommendations/ [Consultado el 18 de febrero de 2022].
• Owen, Richard y Pansera, Mario (2019). Responsible Innovation and Responsible Research and Innovation. En Simon, Dagmar, Kuhlmann, Stefan, Stamm, Julia y Canzler, Weert (eds.). Handbook on Science and Public Policy (26-48). Cheltenham y Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
• Owen, Richard, Pansera, Mario, Macnaghten, Phil y Randles, Sally (2021). Organisational institutionalisation of responsible innovation. Research Policy, 50(1): 104132. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.1 04132
• Owen, Richard, Stilgoe, Jack, Macnaghten, Philip, Gorman, Mike, Fisher, Erik y Guston, Dave (2013). A Framework for Responsible Innovation. En Owen, Richard, Bessant, John y Heintz, Maggy (eds.). Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society (27-50). Chichester: Wiley.
• Perrow, Charles (1984). Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies. New York: Basic Books.
• Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M. y Juhl, Joakim (2017). Innovation and the political state: beyond the myth of technologies and markets. En Godin, Benoît y Vinck, Dominique (eds.). Critical Studies of Innovation: Alternative Approaches to the Pro-Innovation Bias (68-94). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
• Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., Juhl, Joakim y Aarden, Erik (2019). Challenging the “deficit model” of innovation: Framing policy issues under the innovation imperative. Research Policy, 48(4), 895- 904. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.015
• Renn, Ortwin (1991). Risk communication and the social amplification of risk. En Kasperson, Roger E. y Stallen, Pieter Jan M. (eds.). Communicating Risks to the Public (287-324). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
• Renn, Ortwin (2004). The Challenge of Integrating Deliberation and Expertise: Participation and Discourse in Risk Management. En McDaniels, Timothy y Small, Mitchell J. (eds.). Risk Analysis and Society: An Interdisciplinary Characterization of the Field (289-366). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Rip, Arie (1986). The Mutual Dependence of Risk Research and Political Context. Science & Technology Studies, 4(3/4), 3-15. Recuperado de: https://www.jstor.org/stable/690407.
• Rodríguez, Hannot (2018). Nanotechnology and Risk Governance in the European Union: the Constitution of Safety in Highly Promoted and Contested Innovation Areas. NanoEthics, 12(1), 5-26. doi: 10.1007/s11569-017-0296-3
• Rodríguez, Hannot, Eizagirre, Andoni e Ibarra, Andoni (2019). Dynamics of responsible innovation constitution in European Union research policy: tensions, possibilities and constraints. En von Schomberg, René y Hankins, Jonathan (eds.). International Handbook on Responsible Innovation: A Global Resource (167-180). Cheltenham y Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
• Rodríguez, Hannot, Fisher, Erik y Schuurbiers, Daan (2013). Integrating science and society in European Framework Programmes: Trends in project-level solicitations. Research Policy, 42(5), 1126-1137. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.02.006.
• Roszak, Theodore (1969). The Making of a Counter Culture: Reflections on the Technocratic Society and Its Youthful Opposition. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
• Rycroft, Taylor, Trump, Benjamin, Poinsatte-Jones, Kelsey y Linkov, Igor (2018). Nanotoxicology and nanomedicine: making development decisions in an evolving governance environment. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 20(2), 52. doi: 10.1007/s11051-018- 4160-3
• Schot, Johan (2005). Constructive Technology Assessment. En Mitcham, Carl (ed.). Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Ethics (423-426). Detroit: Macmillan Reference.
• Schot, Johan y Rip, Arie (1997). The Past and Future of Constructive Technology Assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 54(2-3), 251-268. doi: 10.1016/S0040-1625(96)00180-1
• Schot, Johan y Steinmueller, W. Edward (2018). Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change. Research Policy, 47(9), 1554-1567. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011
• Shelley-Egan, Clare, Gjefsen, Mads Dahl y Nydal, Rune (2020). Consolidating RRI and Open Science: understanding the potential for transformative change. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 16: 7. doi: 10.1186/s40504-020-00103-5
• Shrader-Frechette, Kristin Sharon (1985). Science Policy, Ethics, and Economic Methodology. Dordrecht: Reidel.
• Stirling, Andy (2008). “Opening Up” and “Closing Down”. Power, Participation and Pluralism in the Social Appraisal of Technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 33(2), 262-294. doi: 10.1177/0162243907311265
• Stirling, Andy (2016). Addressing scarcities in responsible innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 3(3), 274-281. doi: 10.1080/23299460.2016.1258946
• Sunstein, Cass R. (2002). Risk and Reason: Safety, Law, and the Environment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Tancoigne, Elise, Randles, Sally y Joly, Pierre-Benoît (2016). Evolution of a concept: a scientometric analysis of RRI. En Lindner, Ralf, Kuhlmann, Stefan, Randles, Sally, Bedsted, Bjørn, Gorgoni, Guido, Griessler, Erich, Loconto, Allison y Mejlgaard, Niels (eds.). Navigating Towards Shared Responsibility in Research and Innovation. Approach, Process and Results of the Res-AGorA Project (39-44). Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI.
• Timmermans, Job y Blok, Vincent (2021). A critical hermeneutic reflection on the paradigm-level assumptions underlying responsible innovation. Synthese, 198 (Suppl 19), 4635-4666. doi: 10.1007/s11229-018-1839-z
• Tomellini, Renzo (2003). Is nanotechnology dangerous? ‘We need to know’, says Renzo Tomellini (interview). EurActiv: EU news and policy debates across languages (17 November 2003). Recuperado de: https://www.euractiv.com/section/all/news/is-nanotechnologydangerous-we-need-to-know-says-renzo-tomellini/ [Consultado el 23 de noviembre de 2018].
• van Wezel, Annemarie P., van Lente, Harro, van de Sandt, Johannes J. M., Bouwmeester, Hans, Vandeberg, Rens L. J. y Sips, Adrienne J. A. M. (2018). Risk Analysis and Technology Assessment in Support of Technology Development: Putting Responsible Innovation in Practice in a Case Study for Nanotechnology. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 14(1), 9-16. doi: 10.1002/ieam.1989
• Vig, Norman J. y Paschen, Herbert (eds.) (2000). Parliaments and Technology: The Development of Technology Assessment in Europe. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
• von Schomberg, Lucien y Blok, Vincent (2021). The turbulent age of innovation. Synthese, 198 (suppl. 19), 4667-4683. doi: 10.1007/s11229-018-01950-8
• von Schomberg, René (2013). A Vision of Responsible Research and Innovation. En Owen, Richard, Bessant, John y Heintz, Maggy (eds.). Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society (51-74). Chichester: Wiley.
• von Schomberg, René y Hankins, Jonathan (eds.) (2019). International Handbook on Responsible Innovation: A Global Resource. Cheltenham y Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
• Zwart, Hub, Landeweerd, Laurens y van Rooij, Arjan (2014). Adapt or perish? Assessing the recent shift in the European research funding arena from ‘ELSA’ to ‘RRI’. Life Science, Society and Policy, 10: 11. doi: 10.1186/s40504-014-0011-x