首页> 外文期刊>NanoEthics >Responsible Research Is Not Good Science: Divergences Inhibiting the Enactment of RRI in Nanosafety
【24h】

Responsible Research Is Not Good Science: Divergences Inhibiting the Enactment of RRI in Nanosafety

机译:负责任的研究不是一门好科学:限制RRI在纳米安全中的制定存在分歧

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The desire to guide research and innovation in more 'responsible' directions is increasingly emphasised in national and international policies, the funding of inter- and trans-disciplinary collaborations and academic scholarship on science policy and technology governance. Much of this growth has occurred simultaneously with the development of nanoscale sciences and technologies, where emphasis on the need for responsible research and innovation (RRI) has been particularly widespread. This paper describes an empirical study exploring the potential for RRI within nanosafety research in Norway and Denmark. It identifies three different ways nanosafety scientists relate to core RRI criteria, demonstrating areas of both convergence and divergence between their views and those of academics and policymakers currently defining and working to promote RRI. The paper identifies a range of practical barriers and cultural differences that are creating such divergences and inhibiting the enactment of RRI within the particular site of research laboratories. It concludes that the identified differences and challenges demand critical reflection on both the appropriateness and applicability of RRI characteristics for enactment at the level of individual research scientists. Significant changes are therefore advocated as required if RRI, as currently imagined and promoted, is to become an integral mode of scientific culture.
机译:在国家和国际政策,跨学科和跨学科合作的资金以及有关科学政策和技术治理的学术研究中,越来越强调以更“负责任的”方向指导研究和创新的愿望。这种增长在很大程度上与纳米级科学技术的发展同时发生,在纳米科学技术领域,对负责任的研究和创新(RRI)的需求特别普遍。本文描述了一项实证研究,探讨了在挪威和丹麦的纳米安全研究中RRI的潜力。它确定了纳米安全科学家与RRI核心标准相关的三种不同方式,展示了他们的观点与当前正在定义和致力于促进RRI的学者和政策制定者的观点之间的融合和分歧。本文确定了一系列实际障碍和文化差异,这些障碍和文化差异正在造成这种分歧,并阻碍了RRI在研究实验室的特定场所内的颁布。结论是,已确定的差异和挑战需要对RRI特性在制定个人研究科学家水平上的适当性和适用性进行批判性思考。因此,如果目前正在想像和推广的RRI成为科学文化的一种整体模式,则根据需要提倡进行重大更改。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号