CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 118Innovation, Technology, and SocietyResearch, Science, and AcademiaEducation, Technology, and Ethics

Values in responsible research and innovation: from entities to practices

Open access
Boenink, Marianne, Kudina, Olya·2020·Journal of Responsible Innovation
DOI 10.1080/23299460.2020.1806451
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This article explores the understanding of values in Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). First, it analyses how two mainstream RRI approaches, the largely substantial one by Von Schomberg and the procedural one by Stilgoe and colleagues, identify and conceptualize values. We argue that by treating values as relatively stable entities, directly available for reflection, both fall into an ‘entity trap’. As a result, the hermeneutic work required to identify values is overlooked. We therefore seek to bolster a practice-based take on values, which approaches values as the evolving results of valuing processes. We highlight how this approach views values as lived realities, interactive and dynamic, discuss methodological implications for RRI, and explore potential limitations. Overall, the strength of this approach is that it enables RRI scholars and practitioners to better acknowledge the complexities involved in valuing.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/23299460.2020.1806451

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The criteria of ethical acceptability, sustainability, and societal desirability, coined as normative anchor points, can be operationalized in alignment with the European Union declaration on human rights and include public values of safety, privacy, sustainability, quality of life, and gender equality.

    “These criteria, subsequently coined as “normative anchor points” (Boenink & Kudina, 2020) can be operationalized in alignment with the European Union declaration on human rights and include the public values of safety, privacy, sustainability, quality of life, and gender equality (Von Schomberg, 2011, p. 9-10).”

    From Navigating the perils of artificial intelligence: a focused review on ChatGPT and responsible research and innovation (2024) · cites this paper as Boenink & Kudina, 2020

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 76 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. 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 -2020) and repealing Decision No 1982/2006/EC. ' Official Journal of the European Union, L 347/104 (En) , December 11.
  2. Owen, R., J. R. Bessant, and M. Heintz, eds. 2013. Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society . Chichester: Wiley.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Boenink, M., & Kudina, O.
Affiliations
  • University of Twente (NL)
  • Delft University of Technology (NL)
Corresponding author
Boenink, Marianne
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Responsible Innovation
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2020-08-23
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
450-470
ISSN
  • 2329-9037 (ISSN-L)
  • 2329-9460
DOI
10.1080/23299460.2020.1806451
OpenAlex
W3080237179
Cited by
118
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 2
FWCI
18.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Responsible Innovation (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • University of Twente Research Information (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Repository (Delft University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Dutch Organization for Scientific Research (313 99 309)
  • European Research Council (788321)
  • Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (277-20-006)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Innovation, Technology, and Society
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Research, Science, and Academia
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Education, Technology, and Ethics
Keywords
responsible research and innovation, values, practice-oriented approach, hermeneutics, methodological implications

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review