Sustainability

Research

Jump to: Other

27 pages, 371 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Ways towards Transformation—Conceptual Approaches and Challenges

by Leonhard Hennen, Jürgen Kopfmüller, Maria Maia, Linda Nierling and Constanze Scherz

Sustainability 2023, 15(20), 14867; https://doi.org/10.3390/su152014867 - 13 Oct 2023

Viewed by 1189

Abstract

This Special Issue brings together three fields of problem-oriented research, all addressing the current challenges of our society from different perspectives and respective research traditions, namely: technology assessment (TA), responsible research and innovation (RRI), and sustainability research. In this introductory paper, we point [...] Read more.

This Special Issue brings together three fields of problem-oriented research, all addressing the current challenges of our society from different perspectives and respective research traditions, namely: technology assessment (TA), responsible research and innovation (RRI), and sustainability research. In this introductory paper, we point out that these approaches, nevertheless, face similar challenges observing and shaping the current transitions of our society. Conceptual and methodological commonalities and differences in the three approaches comprise issues of normativity in research activities, the interference with democratic decision-making processes, methods and approaches to cope with the expectations of society as well as dealing with the uncertainty and complexity of knowledge. The article closes with a reflection on considerations and decisions of relevance as an overarching challenge for all three concepts. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

14 pages, 699 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Reflexive Sustainable Technology Labs: Combining Real-World Labs, Technology Assessment, and Responsible Research and Innovation

by Oliver Parodi, Paula Bögel, Richard Beecroft, Andreas Seebacher, Felix Wagner and Julia Hahn

Sustainability 2022, 14(22), 15094; https://doi.org/10.3390/su142215094 - 15 Nov 2022

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1646

Abstract

There is an increasing call for science to contribute more to real-world solutions for a sustainability transformation. At the same time, the scientific landscape encompasses different concepts, which are characterized as practice-oriented, addressing social challenges and wicked problems, which thus offer potential to [...] Read more.

There is an increasing call for science to contribute more to real-world solutions for a sustainability transformation. At the same time, the scientific landscape encompasses different concepts, which are characterized as practice-oriented, addressing social challenges and wicked problems, which thus offer potential to contribute to a transformation, notably: technology assessment (TA), responsible research and innovation (RRI), and real-world labs (RwLs). This article deals with the question of how these different concepts can be better integrated to contribute to a transformation. With this goal in mind, we analyze the three concepts, show their core characteristics, and identify their common key similarities. TA and RRI have rarely been connected to transformative sustainability research in general or RwLs in particular. Based on the key similarities and respective strengths of the three concepts, we suggest four ways to integrate the approaches, including the novel endeavor of a Reflexive Sustainable Technology Lab as the highest level of the concepts’ synthesis. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 1351 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Assessing the Impact of Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation and Sustainability Research: Towards a Common Methodological Approach

by Miltos Ladikas, Julia Hahn and Lei Huang

Sustainability 2022, 14(4), 2014; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14042014 - 10 Feb 2022

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1991

Abstract

The missions of Technology Assessment (TA), Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) and Sustainability Research (SR) are similar in their relationship to Science, Technology and Innovation (STI). Although adopting different terminology, the three research fields show great conceptual and methodological overlaps, as all three [...] Read more.

The missions of Technology Assessment (TA), Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) and Sustainability Research (SR) are similar in their relationship to Science, Technology and Innovation (STI). Although adopting different terminology, the three research fields show great conceptual and methodological overlaps, as all three react to societal demands and policy needs via common tools. The impact of TA, RRI and SR is linked directly, but its assessment requires new thinking in terms of common conceptual and methodological approaches. The paper provides an overview of the current discussion on societal impact assessment and identifies areas of particular interest for the three fields. It describes the current discussions on impact assessment and impact indicators in each field and undertakes a bibliometric analysis that shows clear inter-relationships in terms of thematic focus and a common emphasis on impact in all three fields. Following this analysis, the paper argues for a common impact assessment methodology for TA, RRI and SR, under the notion of resonance and based on the concepts of anticipation, reflection and inclusion. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 793 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Contested Visions for Transformation—The Visions of the Green New Deal and the Politics of Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, and Sustainability Research

by Christoph Schneider, Niko Wilke and Andreas Lösch

Sustainability 2022, 14(3), 1505; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031505 - 27 Jan 2022

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2579

Abstract

Societal transformations are contested. The goals and visions of transformations, as well as the means and strategies to achieve them, are born in political conflict and power constellations. Which transformations are seen as desirable and possible by democratic majorities changes throughout history. This [...] Read more.

Societal transformations are contested. The goals and visions of transformations, as well as the means and strategies to achieve them, are born in political conflict and power constellations. Which transformations are seen as desirable and possible by democratic majorities changes throughout history. This is the political reality where research for transformations finds itself. Technology assessment (TA), responsible research and innovation (RRI), and sustainability research (SR) are a part of such contestations. They engage in envisioning, debating, analyzing, and evaluating different visions of and options for the future. In this article we turn to visions of the future as a key aspect of societal contestation and the shaping of interfaces between research for transformations and society. Based on the approach of vision assessment developed in TA, we situate TA, RRI, and SR within visions of research and social order. We argue that in these politicized times it is increasingly necessary to understand how research relates to larger visions of society and the contested nature of transformations. We turn to one of the major contemporary visions for societal transformation: The Green New Deal (GND). This vision imagines a large-scale transformation of society and the economy towards sustainability and justice and is currently debated in major political institutions and social movements. It presents an ongoing case of the “making of the future”, which is highly relevant for TA, RRI, and SR. We show how this vision is creating new knowledge and social arrangements and how it is opening up new possibilities for transformational research. The article discusses the implications that a possible further impact of GND visions in politics may have for TA, RRI, and SR, and, relatedly, how expertise and insights from TA, RRI, and SR could significantly add to the GND debate. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 498 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The (Un)availability of Human Activities for Social Intervention: Reflecting on Social Mechanisms in Technology Assessment and Sustainable Development Research

by Christian Büscher and Ulrich Ufer

Sustainability 2022, 14(3), 1394; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031394 - 26 Jan 2022

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2212

Abstract

This article considers human activities as a central but deeply problematic aspect of sustainability. We argue that radical reduction in human activities could be an important lever to counter problems such as climate change. However, instead of pursuing a normative hypothesis that human [...] Read more.

This article considers human activities as a central but deeply problematic aspect of sustainability. We argue that radical reduction in human activities could be an important lever to counter problems such as climate change. However, instead of pursuing a normative hypothesis that human activities ought to be subjected to specific kinds of sustainability measures, we pursue the hypothesis that human activities are largely unavailable for sustainability measures, because as an aggregated global phenomenon they are subject to social mechanisms, which accelerate rather than slow down activities. While social mechanisms are human inventions that render (inter)actions unlikely likely in the first place, they have evolved towards structural and historical embeddedness, which makes them unavailable for any instrumentalized design. The question is, how can we, experts in technology assessment, recognize social mechanisms in strategies to reduce human activities and to achieve a transformative impact on systemic reproduction. Our discussion centers on technical, psychological, and communicative social mechanisms of reproduction, and experiments with ideas of how to utilize social mechanisms and the (un)availability of human activities in technology assessment and sustainable development research. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 569 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Integrated Policy Package Assessment (IPPA): A Problem-Oriented Research Approach for Sustainability Transformations

by Dirk Scheer, Maike Schmidt, Marion Dreyer, Lisa Schmieder and Annika Arnold

Sustainability 2022, 14(3), 1218; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031218 - 21 Jan 2022

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 2432

Abstract

In this paper, we present the Integrated Policy Package Assessment (IPPA) approach and relate IPPA to three substantial concepts of problem-oriented research concerned with societal transformations: technology assessment (TA), sustainability research (SR), and responsible research and innovation (RRI). The IPPA approach provides (political) [...] Read more.

In this paper, we present the Integrated Policy Package Assessment (IPPA) approach and relate IPPA to three substantial concepts of problem-oriented research concerned with societal transformations: technology assessment (TA), sustainability research (SR), and responsible research and innovation (RRI). The IPPA approach provides (political) decision-makers with transformation and orientation knowledge via a four-step process of (1) design, (2) analysis, (3) evaluation, and (4) discourse of a policy package assessment. It is illustrated with a case study of urban passenger transport. As an integrated approach, IPPA has substantial ties to TA, SR, and RRI. It connects with TA in fundamental ways, since it combines the field of TA with the field of regulatory assessment based on consequence analysis. Connectable to the field of SR, IPPA addresses deliberation processes and sustainable pathway identification based on multi-criteria assessment. In addition, akin to the area of RRI, IPPA shows cross-cutting axes with regards to social resonance assessment and stakeholder evaluation with a focus on multi-actor responsibilities. In this contribution, we link evidence-based impact assessment with transformation pathway mechanisms and corresponding policy packages, backed by stakeholder-based responsible innovation feedback loops. This enhances the ex-ante analysis of policy packages regarding their intended as well as unintended consequences. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 288 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Goodbye Expert-Based Policy Advice? Challenges in Advising Governmental Institutions in Times of Transformation

by Christoph Kehl, Steffen Albrecht, Pauline Riousset and Arnold Sauter

Sustainability 2021, 13(23), 13442; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313442 - 4 Dec 2021

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2169

Abstract

The global transformation towards sustainability has not only increased the demand for anticipatory and reflexive knowledge to support decision making, but also raises three challenges common to all forms of scientific policy advice: to appropriately consider societal norms and values (challenge of normativity), [...] Read more.

The global transformation towards sustainability has not only increased the demand for anticipatory and reflexive knowledge to support decision making, but also raises three challenges common to all forms of scientific policy advice: to appropriately consider societal norms and values (challenge of normativity), to integrate different forms of knowledge (challenge of integration) and to organize the participation of stakeholders (challenge of participation). While new forms of scientific policy advice in the field of sustainability research (SR) have emerged in response, the role of established actors such as the Office of Technology Assessment at the German Bundestag (TAB) is increasingly scrutinized. One of the fundamental characteristics of TAB’s model of scientific policy advice is a rigid boundary arrangement between politics and science that places a high value on the objectivity and authority of scientific knowledge. Based on a content analysis of digitalization-related TAB reports spanning three decades, we describe how a rather technocratic institution such as TAB has dealt with the challenges of normativity, integration, and participation, and we compare its approach with that of SR institutions. TAB has partly adapted its working mode to the new challenges, e.g., by trying out new methods to foster a stronger dialogue with stakeholders. However, TAB’s response to the challenges distinctly differs from the forms of transformative research conducted in the SR community. We argue that this is not only a necessary precondition to maintain its reputation as a trustworthy actor towards the Parliament but gives TAB and similar expert-based institutions a special role in the governance of societal transformation. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

15 pages, 266 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Value of Citizen Participation in Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, and Sustainable Development

by Nora Weinberger, Silvia Woll, Christopher Conrad Maximillian Kyba and Nona Schulte-Römer

Sustainability 2021, 13(21), 11613; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111613 - 21 Oct 2021

Cited by 9 | Viewed by 3026

Abstract

The participation of citizens in scientific research has a long tradition, and in some disciplines, especially medical research, it is even common practice. In Technology Assessment (TA), Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), and Sustainable Development (SD), the participation of citizens can be of [...] Read more.

The participation of citizens in scientific research has a long tradition, and in some disciplines, especially medical research, it is even common practice. In Technology Assessment (TA), Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), and Sustainable Development (SD), the participation of citizens can be of considerable value. In this paper, we explore this value for three concepts, based on the researcher’s insights from three participatory research projects. The first project is the citizen science project TeQfor1, which was conducted with, for, and on the type 1 diabetes community, who do not feel adequately supported by the conventional health care system. In the second project, citizens with vision impairments participated in the technological development of an audio-tactile navigation tool in the TERRAIN project. The third project (Nachtlichter) dealt with light pollution. Based on the three projects presented, we show that citizen participation makes specific contributions to TA, RRI, and SD. We also investigate the specificity of citizen engagement and motivation by differentiating between existing and emerging involvement. In conclusion, we discuss the benefits that may be added by participatory approaches for the three concepts of TA, RRI, and SD. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

11 pages, 242 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Integrative Expert: Moral, Epistemic, and Poietic Virtues in Transformation Research

by Michael Poznic and Erik Fisher

Sustainability 2021, 13(18), 10416; https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810416 - 18 Sep 2021

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 1976

Abstract

Over the past 50 years, policy makers have sought to shape new and emerging technologies in light of societal risks, public values, and ethical concerns. While much of this work has taken place during “upstream” research prioritization and “downstream” technology regulation, the actual [...] Read more.

Over the past 50 years, policy makers have sought to shape new and emerging technologies in light of societal risks, public values, and ethical concerns. While much of this work has taken place during “upstream” research prioritization and “downstream” technology regulation, the actual “midstream” work of engineers and other technical experts has increasingly been seen as a site for governing technology in society. This trend towards “socio-technical integration” is reflected in various governance frameworks such as Sustainable Development (SD), Technology Assessment (TA), and Responsible Innovation (RI) that are at the center of transformation research. Discussions around SD, TA, and RI often focus on meso- and macro-level processes and dynamics, with less attention paid to the qualities of individuals that are needed to support transformation processes. We seek to highlight the importance of micro-level practices by drawing attention to the virtues of technical experts. Drawing on empirical study results from embedding philosophical-reflective dialogues within science and engineering laboratories, we claim that poietic, as well as moral and epistemic, virtues belong to those required of technical experts who foster integrative practices in transformation research. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

12 pages, 244 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Research and Scientific Advice in the Second Modernity: Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, and Sustainability Research

by Armin Grunwald

Sustainability 2021, 13(18), 10406; https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810406 - 18 Sep 2021

Cited by 5 | Viewed by 2566

Abstract

The scientific and technological advance has been a major driving force of modernization for centuries. However, the 20th century was full of indications and diagnoses of a deep crisis of modernity. Currently, debates on limits to growth, pollution, and climate change indicate the [...] Read more.

The scientific and technological advance has been a major driving force of modernization for centuries. However, the 20th century was full of indications and diagnoses of a deep crisis of modernity. Currently, debates on limits to growth, pollution, and climate change indicate the serious and threatening lack of sustainability of the so-called ‘first modernity’. This crisis of modernity has motivated scholars to develop concepts of modernizing modernity, with the approach of a ‘reflexive modernization’ to reach a ‘second modernity’ being prominent. In this paper, Technology Assessment (TA), Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), and Sustainability Research (SR) are regarded as manifestations of this reflexive modernization in the field of problem-oriented and transformative research. The paper aims to (a) unfold the hypothesis regarding TA, RRI, and SR as scientific approaches within reflexive modernization, (b) clarify the respective meaning of ‘reflexive’ in these approaches, (c) identify commonalities as well as differences between the three approaches, and (d) draw conclusions for the relation and further development of TA, RRI, and SR. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

Other

Jump to: Research

13 pages, 281 KiB

Open AccessPerspective

Emerging Technologies and Innovation—Hopes for and Obstacles to Inclusive Societal Co-Construction

by Harald König, Martina F. Baumann and Christopher Coenen

Sustainability 2021, 13(23), 13197; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313197 - 29 Nov 2021

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 2375

Abstract

Since the late twentieth century, the concept of emerging technologies, fields designated as such and their governance have received increasing attention in academia, the media and policymaking. This also applies to the strongly interdisciplinary field of technology assessment (TA), sustainability research (SR), and [...] Read more.

Since the late twentieth century, the concept of emerging technologies, fields designated as such and their governance have received increasing attention in academia, the media and policymaking. This also applies to the strongly interdisciplinary field of technology assessment (TA), sustainability research (SR), and activities and discussions about responsible (research and) innovation (RI/RRI). A crucial question in this context is how these technologies can be developed and governed in an inclusive manner in order to foster societally beneficial and widely accepted innovations. Given the diversity of values and socio-economic interests, such inclusive societal co-construction is not easy to achieve. Discussing various fields of emerging technology (applications) and based on the results of pertinent earlier research and dialogue activities, this article analyses hopes for and obstacles to such co-construction. It concludes with a plea to integrate meta-consensus approaches in governance conceptions for emerging technologies in RI/RRI, SR and TA. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations)

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Technology Assessment, Responsible Research and Innovation, Sustainability Research: Conceptual Demands and Methodological Approaches for Societal Transformations

Share This Special Issue

Special Issue Editors

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

Published Papers (11 papers)

Research

Other

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI