Suchergebnisse

The value of reflexivity has repeatedly been mobilised in claims for Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) involvement in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) research. In short (if not in caricature), the policy narrative goes like this: Scientists, scientific practices, the governance of science and indeed modern society should become more reflective/reflexive. This can be achieved by involving SSH, which are inherently reflexive. In this paper, I will follow this narrative from the "Ethical, Legal and Social Implications" (ELSI)/ "Ethical, Legal and Social Aspects of bio-, neuro-, and nanotechnology (ELSA) policies and practices of the 1990s and 2000s, to the concept of "Responsible Research and Innovation" (RRI) and the "need to integrate" SSH with STEM to address societal challenges in Horizon 2020. Drawing upon my experience as an SSH practitioner in ELSA, RRI and societal challenges-focused interdisciplinary collaborations, I shall propose two lessons learnt. One key lesson is the need to go beyond the simple policy narrative "SSH makes science more reflexive" and the many disappointments that it invariably produces. The other key lesson is the need to go beyond simple dichotomies between SSH research and scholarship on one hand and non-SSH research on the other in order to look for meaningful collaborations. ; The work leading to the present article was performed as part of the projects MAGIC and Res Publica. MAGIC has received funding from the European Union's Horizon2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement No 689669. Res Publica has received funding from the Research Council of Norway under grant agreement 270623/O70. This work reflects the author's view only; the funding agencies are not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.