The Emerging Concept of Responsible Innovation. Three Reasons Why It Is Questionable and Calls for a Radical Transformation of the Concept of Innovation

By Vincent Blok, P. Lemmens. 2015

331 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management of Technology and Innovation, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/58e525e9cda35b2d1352e7c0790852d801653276

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management of Technology and Innovation

1. L. Hoffmans
2. Emiel F. M. Wubben
3. Vincent Blok
4. L. Klerkx

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Margus Pedaste
2. Vincent Blok
3. Alexandra Olteanu
4. L. Klerkx

Citations in the corpus

• Innovation Systems for Transformations towards Sustainability? Taking the Normative Dimension Seriously (2017, neutral): “Our knowledge about future impacts of solution attempts to wicked problems is principally limited [73].”
• Lessons for Responsible Innovation in the Business Context: A Systematic Literature Review of Responsible, Social and Sustainable Innovation Practices (2017, background): “First of all, focusing on science and technological development indicates a narrow view on innovation as other types of innovation are not considered, such as social innovations [14].”
• Stakeholder engagement for responsible innovation in the private sector: critical issues and management practices (2015, background): “It can be questioned to what extent the ideal of mutual responsiveness and shared responsibility among stakeholders is feasible in commercial settings, in which the investor alone is responsible for the risk-reward assessment of risky innovations with high investment costs (Blok and Lemmens, 2015).”
• Definitions and Conceptual Dimensions of Responsible Research and Innovation: A Literature Review (2016, background): “Practical implementation of the concept ‘‘responsible innovation’’ has appeared highly problematic (Blok and Lemmens 2015).”
• Overcoming Failures of Imagination in AI Infused System Development and Deployment (2020, background): “…the effectiveness of the ‘broader impacts’ statement practice introduced by NeurIPS, it is thus useful to examine the critique within the literature on ‘responsible innova-tion’ where the very possibility of such innovation has been challenged (Blok and Lemmens, 2015; Grinbaum and Groves, 2013).”
• Digital transformation of agriculture and rural areas: A socio-cyber-physical system framework to support responsibilisation (2021, background): “Blok and Lemmens (2015) indicate that practical applicability of RRI is problematic and requires a more thorough examination of RRI, because of a mismatch between the ideal of responsibility and the realities of existing innovation processes.”