Davis Michael, Laas Kelly
Humanities Department, Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions, Illinois Institute of Technology, 5300 S. South Shore Drive #57, Chicago, IL, 60615, USA,
Sci Eng Ethics. 2014 Dec;20(4):963-83. doi: 10.1007/s11948-013-9480-1. Epub 2013 Oct 24.
Our subject is how the experience of Americans with a certain funding criterion, "broader impacts" (and some similar criteria) may help in efforts to turn the European concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) into a useful guide to funding Europe's scientific and technical research. We believe this comparison may also be as enlightening for Americans concerned with revising research policy. We have organized our report around René Von Schomberg's definition of RRI, since it seems both to cover what the European research group to which we belong is interested in and to be the only widely accepted definition of RRI. According to Von Schomberg, RRI: "… is a transparent, interactive process by which societal actors and innovators become mutually responsive to each other with a view to the (ethical) acceptability, sustainability and societal desirability of the innovation process and its marketable products (in order to allow a proper embedding of scientific and technological advances in our society)." While RRI seeks fundamental changes in the way research is conducted, Broader Impacts is more concerned with more peripheral aspects of research: widening participation of disadvantaged groups, recruiting the next generation of scientists, increasing the speed with which results are used, and so on. Nevertheless, an examination of the broadening of funding criteria over the last four decades suggests that National Science Foundation has been moving in the direction of RRI.
我们的主题是,具有特定资助标准(“更广泛影响”以及一些类似标准)的美国经验如何有助于将欧洲的负责任研究与创新(RRI)概念转化为资助欧洲科技研究的有用指南。我们认为,这种比较对于关注修订研究政策的美国人也可能具有启发性。我们围绕勒内·冯·肖姆贝格对RRI的定义来组织我们的报告,因为它似乎既涵盖了我们所属的欧洲研究小组感兴趣的内容,也是RRI唯一被广泛接受的定义。根据冯·肖姆贝格的说法,RRI:“……是一个透明的互动过程,通过这个过程,社会行为者和创新者相互回应,以实现创新过程及其可销售产品在(伦理)可接受性、可持续性和社会合意性方面的目标(以便使科技进步在我们的社会中得到适当的融入)。”虽然RRI寻求研究方式的根本性变革,但“更广泛影响”更关注研究的更外围方面:扩大弱势群体的参与、招募下一代科学家、提高研究成果的应用速度等等。然而,对过去四十年来资助标准拓宽情况的考察表明,美国国家科学基金会一直在朝着RRI的方向发展。