Suchergebnisse

The quest for Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has experienced a remarkable upsurge during the past few years. While the debate on RRI, as it is primarily labelled at the EU level, is far from being completed and stabilised, the demand for concrete conceptual approaches and instruments, which can contribute to the aim of making research and innovation more "responsible", has increased significantly (Lindner/Kuhlmann 2016, p. 22). To this end, an impressive number of research projects and coordination activities have been initiated during the recent past. In this broader context of projects funded by the EU, the Res-AGorA project had the objective to develop a comprehensive governance framework for RRI (EC 2011b, p. 7f.). ; The quest for Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has experienced a remarkable upsurge during the past few years. While the debate on RRI, as it is primarily labelled at the EU level, is far from being completed and stabilised, the demand for concrete conceptual approaches and instruments, which can contribute to the aim of making research and innovation more "responsible", has increased significantly (Lindner/Kuhlmann 2016, p. 22). To this end, an impressive number of research projects and coordination activities have been initiated during the recent past. In this broader context of projects funded by the EU, the Res-AGorA project had the objective to develop a comprehensive governance framework for RRI (EC 2011b, p. 7f.).

Met deze bundel sluit het Rathenau Instituut aan bij de oproep van de HLEG. De auteurs van Leven als bouwpakket verkennen op komende ethische vragen in vier uiteenlopende gebieden: breinmachine interactie, ambient intelligence en persuasive technology, moleculaire geneeskunde en synthetische biologie, en pogen het 'nieuwe' te duiden in de uitdagingen waar NBIC-convergentie ons voor stelt. Uit alle essays blijkt dat NBIC-convergentie ons begrip van fundamentele onderscheidingen als mens of machine, levend of dood, natuurlijk of kunstmatig, ziek of gezond, doet verschuiven. En met deze verschuivingen komen nieuwe ethische vraagstukken op de politieke en publieke agenda te staan.

2011 was a pivotal year. It was the year when the originators of the first formal normative frameworks of Responsible (Research) and Innovation (RRI), lost contact with their own history. Our paper aims to recover this history. It does so in two ways. First it develops the concept of de-facto responsible research and innovation, referring to the ongoing creative and political process through which new projects encapsulating particular normative visions and prescribed actions of 'responsibility' encounter the existing de-facto institutionalised performation of it, both 'bottom-up' and historically pre-existing. History, and the a-priori existence of a wide variety of context-shaped responsibility concepts and projects are central to this process. Second, it creates a typology of de-facto responsible innovation 'narratives' comprising for each narrative, a differentiating idea, normative philosophy and discourse; a distinctive socio-technical agencement of actors and material devices; and the policies, programmes and initiatives designed by political actors as the pragmatic organising architecture to promote and support each. Our aim here is to bring some analytical order to the multiplicity of histories, visions, content and situations of research and innovation in which actor collectives participate, contest and steer responsibility claims, processes and outcomes. So-doing, we propose six 'Grand Narratives' of de-facto responsible research and innovation. The six narratives are presented as discrete 'ideal types', recognising that in their empirical form they inter-mingle and overlap. Indeed it is this dialectical unfolding process of inter-mingling and differentiation which fascinates us. We wonder whether the outcome will be the creation of an integrated meta-narrative; whether a dominant policy design will emerge; whether we will witness the maintenance of a highly variegated landscape as actors experimentally pursue local normative preferences and problem framings of responsibility; or whether a limited ...

2011 was a pivotal year. It was the year when the originators of the first formal normative frameworks of Responsible (Research) and Innovation (RRI), lost contact with their own history. Our paper aims to recover this history. It does so in two ways. First it develops the concept of de-facto responsible research and innovation, referring to the ongoing creative and political process through which new projects encapsulating particular normative visions and prescribed actions of 'responsibility' encounter the existing de-facto institutionalised performation of it, both 'bottom-up' and historically pre-existing. History, and the a-priori existence of a wide variety of context-shaped responsibility concepts and projects are central to this process. Second, it creates a typology of de-facto responsible innovation 'narratives' comprising for each narrative, a differentiating idea, normative philosophy and discourse; a distinctive socio-technical agencement of actors and material devices; and the policies, programmes and initiatives designed by political actors as the pragmatic organising architecture to promote and support each. Our aim here is to bring some analytical order to the multiplicity of histories, visions, content and situations of research and innovation in which actor collectives participate, contest and steer responsibility claims, processes and outcomes. So-doing, we propose six 'Grand Narratives' of de-facto responsible research and innovation. The six narratives are presented as discrete 'ideal types', recognising that in their empirical form they inter-mingle and overlap. Indeed it is this dialectical unfolding process of inter-mingling and differentiation which fascinates us. We wonder whether the outcome will be the creation of an integrated meta-narrative; whether a dominant policy design will emerge; whether we will witness the maintenance of a highly variegated landscape as actors experimentally pursue local normative preferences and problem framings of responsibility; or whether a limited number of organising variants (here we propose six) will remain internally coherent but normatively differentiated, and theoretically and practically separated each from the others

2011 was a pivotal year. It was the year when the originators of the first formal normative frameworks of Responsible (Research) and Innovation (RRI), lost contact with their own history. Our paper aims to recover this history. It does so in two ways. First it develops the concept of de-facto responsible research and innovation, referring to the ongoing creative and political process through which new projects encapsulating particular normative visions and prescribed actions of 'responsibility' encounter the existing de-facto institutionalised performation of it, both 'bottom-up' and historically pre-existing. History, and the a-priori existence of a wide variety of context-shaped responsibility concepts and projects are central to this process. Second, it creates a typology of de-facto responsible innovation 'narratives' comprising for each narrative, a differentiating idea, normative philosophy and discourse; a distinctive socio-technical agencement of actors and material devices; and the policies, programmes and initiatives designed by political actors as the pragmatic organising architecture to promote and support each. Our aim here is to bring some analytical order to the multiplicity of histories, visions, content and situations of research and innovation in which actor collectives participate, contest and steer responsibility claims, processes and outcomes. So-doing, we propose six 'Grand Narratives' of de-facto responsible research and innovation. The six narratives are presented as discrete 'ideal types', recognising that in their empirical form they inter-mingle and overlap. Indeed it is this dialectical unfolding process of inter-mingling and differentiation which fascinates us. We wonder whether the outcome will be the creation of an integrated meta-narrative; whether a dominant policy design will emerge; whether we will witness the maintenance of a highly variegated landscape as actors experimentally pursue local normative preferences and problem framings of responsibility; or whether a limited number of organising variants (here we propose six) will remain internally coherent but normatively differentiated, and theoretically and practically separated each from the others

Frontmatter -- Preface: Converging technologies from the nanoscale require enhanced ethics -- Forewords -- Acknowledgments -- Contents -- Introduction: Overall vision of ethics in nanotechnology developments -- Embedding ethics in nanomedicine: Europe acted promptly -- List of contributing authors -- About the editors -- Part I: Highlights of ethics in nanotechnology -- 1 Nanoethics: Giving orientation to societal reflection -- Part II: Nanotechnology and ethical reflections -- 2 Toward a revitalized vision of ethics and safety for the revolutionary nanotechnologies -- 3 Nanotechnology: Ethical guidelines for a disruptive technology -- 4 Defining the nanoethics frontier -- 5 Application of nanotechnology for dental implants -- 6 Nanomaterial characterization for nanoethics -- Part III: Health, environment and industrial aspects of nanoethics -- 7 Ethical aspects of nanomaterials in industry -- 8 Militarization of nanotechnology -- 9 Nanotechnology in food: Ethics, industry practices, and regulatory frameworks -- 10 Ethical challenge of nanomedicine -- 11 Nanofood and ethical issues -- Part IV: Nanotechnology governance: Societal and legal aspects -- 12 Nanoethics for safe work: philosophical foundations of safer nanodesign protecting workplace health -- 13 Twenty years of nanoethics: Challenges, clarifications, and achievements -- Part V: Nanotechnology philosophy: Dilemmas and ethical issues -- 14 Christian thinking and acting in nanotechnologies: Reflection based on the principles and values of the Social Teaching of the Church based on apps concerning old people -- 15 Calibrating the balance: The ethics of regulating the production and use of nanotechnology applications -- 16 Importance of social morals in nanotechnology -- 17 Revitalizing nanoethics: Nanotechnology at the center of nanoethics -- Conclusion -- Index