Responsible Research and Innovation Transfer: The Perspective of Universities

• Autorzy: Karol Śledzik , Renata Płoska , Mariusz Chmielewski , Joanna Pioch
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: The aim of this paper is to answer the research question: Which issues play crucial roles in universities' responsible research and the innovation transfer process? The tool used to achieve the aim of the study was analysis of the specific role of the concept of responsible research and innovation transfer from universities to the economy.
THE RESEARCH PROBLEMS AND METHODS: The research results can generate innovations that can be transferred to the economy. Considering all stakeholders of innovations transferred from universities to the economy, the criteria of evaluating innovations in terms of responsibility should be studied. The research method is based on literature analysis.
THE PROCESS OF ARGUMENTATION: The article begins with a literature review in the area of research and responsible innovation. Then, an attempt is made to synthetically analyze the dimensions of responsible innovation in order to formulate a basis for further inference. In the next part of the study, we used six dimensions of responsibility to explore the process of innovation transfer from universities to the economy.
RESEARCH RESULTS: The article shows that on the basis of the assumptions of the concept of responsible research and technology transfer, it is possible to create a framework that is the basis for evaluating the activity of a university in relation to the economic environment. Moreover, the Quadruple Helix framework of innovation is the most relevant tool to analyze actors and their interactions in an innovation ecosystem.
CONCLUSIONS, INNOVATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Responsible innovation dimensions such as inclusion, anticipation, responsiveness, reflexivity, sustainability, care could be considered as a basis for evaluating universities' technology transfer process. (original abstract)

CEL BADAWCZY: Celem badawczym niniejszego opracowania jest analiza szczególnej roli koncepcji odpowiedzialnych badań naukowych oraz transferu innowacji z uczelni do gospodarki.
PROBLEMY I METODY BADAWCZE: Badania naukowe prowadzone na uczelniach wyższych mogą skutkować generowaniem innowacji, które mogą być transferowane do gospodarki. Mając na uwadze wszystkich interesariuszy innowacji transferowanych z uczelni do gospodarki, należy rozważyć kryteria oceny innowacji pod kątem odpowiedzialności. Metoda badawcza opiera się na analizie tekstu i refleksji nad kluczowymi zagadnieniami związanymi z ideą odpowiedzialnych badań i odpowiedzialnych innowacji.
PROCES ARGUMENTACJI: Artykuł rozpoczyna się od przeglądu literatury w obszarze odpowiedzialności badań i innowacji. Następnie podjęto próbę syntetycznej analizy wymiarów odpowiedzialnej innowacji w celu sformułowania podstaw do dalszego wnioskowania. W kolejnej części opracowania wskazano przesłanki uznania prowadzonych badań i innowacji transferowanych z uczelni do gospodarki za odpowiedzialne w takich wymiarach, jak: inkluzywność, antycypacja, responsywność, refleksyjność, zrównoważony rozwój, wymiar opiekuńczy.
WYNIKI ANALIZY NAUKOWEJ: W artykule udowodniono, że na podstawie teorii innowacji oraz założeń koncepcji odpowiedzialnych badań i transferu technologii możliwe jest stworzenie ram będących podstawą oceny działalności uczelni w relacji z otoczeniem gospodarczym.
WNIOSKI, INNOWACJE, REKOMENDACJE: We wnioskach autorzy wskazują, że założenia koncepcji odpowiedzialnych badań i innowacji, a także idei transferu technologii jako elementu działalności uczelni, mogą skutkować stworzeniem rekomendacji dla oceny efektów pracy naukowej uczelni.(abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Technology transfer (TT); Scientific research; University-Business Cooperation (UBC); Innovation processes

PL

Transfer technologii; Badania naukowe; Współpraca uczelni z przedsiębiorstwami; Procesy innowacyjne

• Czasopismo: Horyzonty Polityki
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: 14
• Numer: nr 49 A Multidisciplinary Perspective on the Knowledge Economy and Society
• Strony: 35--52

Twórcy

autor

Karol Śledzik

• University of Gdansk

autor

Renata Płoska

• University of Gdansk

autor

Mariusz Chmielewski

• University of Gdansk

autor

Joanna Pioch

• Sopot Academy of Applied Sciences

Bibliografia

• Barben, D., Fisher, E., Selin, C., & Guston, D.H. (2008). Anticipatory Governance of nanotechnology: foresight, engagement, and inte-gration. In E.J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, & J. Wajcman (Eds.). The handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 979-1000). The MIT Press. Source: https://www.cynthiaselin.com/uploads/4/6/5/7/4657243/barben_anticipatory_governance_2008.pdf (accessed on 14th May 2023).
• Boyd, E., Nykvist, B., Borgström, S., & Stacewicz, I.A. (2015). Antici-patory governance for social-ecological resilience. Ambio, 44(1), 149-161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0604-x
• Bozeman, B., Rimes, H., & Youtie, J. (2015). The evolving state-of-the-art in technology transfer research: Revisiting the contingent effectiveness model. Research Policy, 44(1), 34-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.06.008
• Burget, M., Bardone, E., & Pedaste, M. (2017). Definitions and conceptual dimensions of responsible research and innovation: A literature review. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9782-1
• Carayannis, E.G., & Campbell, D.F. (2009). 'Mode 3' and 'Quadruple Helix': toward a 21st century fractal innovation ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3-4), 201-234. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2009.023374
• Cuhls, K.E. (2020). Horizon Scanning in Foresight - Why Horizon Scanning is only a part of the game. Futures & Foresight Science 2(1), p.e23. https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.23
• Davis, L., & North, D. (1970). Institutional change and American economic growth: A first step towards a theory of institutional innovation. The Journal of Economic History 30(1), 131-149.
• Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1998). The endless transition: a "triple helix" of university-industry-government relations: Introduction. Minerva, 36, 203-208. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017159001649
• European Commission (EC). (2013). Options for strengthening responsible research and innovation. http://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_public_engagement/options-for-strengthening_en.pdf (accessed on 14 May 2023).
• Felt, U., Fochler, M., Richter, A., Schroeder, R., & Sigl, L. (2018). How to weave societal responsibility into the fabric of universities. Reflections - Blog of the STS Department at the University of Vienna. https://blog.sts.univie.ac.at/2018/09/06/how-to-weave-societal-responsibility-into-the-fabric-of-universities/ (accessed on 3rd April 2019).
• Fisher, E. (2005). Lessons learned from the Ethical, Legal and Social Implications program (ELSI): Planning societal implications research for the National Nanotechnology Program. Technology in Society, 27(3), 321-328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2005.04.006
• Flipse, S., Sanden, M., & Osseweijer, P. (2013). The why and how of enabling the integration of social and ethical aspects in research and development. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(3), 703-725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-012-9423-2
• Fraaije, A., & Flipse, S.M. (2020). Synthesizing an Implementation Framework for Responsible Research and Innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 7(1), 113-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2019.1676685
• Fuerth, L.S. (2009). Foresight and anticipatory governance. Foresight, 11(4), 14-32. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680910982412
• García-Vega, M., & Vicente-Chirivella Ó. (2020). Do university technology transfers increase firms' innovation? European Economic Review 123(103388). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2020.103388
• Georghiou, L. (Ed.). (2008). The handbook of technology foresight: concepts and practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Glerup, C., & Horst, M. (2014). Mapping "social responsibility" in science. Journal of Responsible Innovation 1(1), 31-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.882077
• González-Esteban, E., Feenstra, R.A., & Camarin-ha-Matos, L.M. (Eds.). (2023). Ethics and Responsible Research and Innovation in Practice: The ETHNA System Project. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33177-0
• Grin, J., & Grunwald, A. (Eds.) (2000). Vision assessment: shaping technology in 21st century society: towards a repertoire for technology assessment. Berlin: Springer.
• Groves, C. (2009). Future ethics: Risk, care and non-reciprocal responsibility. Journal of Global Ethics, 5(1), 17-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449620902765286
• Guston, D.H., & Sarewitz, D. (2002). Realtime technology assessment. Technology in Society, 24(1-2), 93-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-791X(01)00047-1
• Gwizdała, J., & Śledzik, K. (2017). Responsible research and innovation in the context of university technology transfer. Folia Oeco-nomica Acta Universitas Lodzensis, 2(328), 55-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.18778/0208-6018.328.04
• Hayter, C.S. (2016). A social responsibility view of the "pa-tent-centric linear model" of University Technology Transfer. Duquesne Law Review 54(1), 7-52.
• Hullmann, A. (2008). European activities in the field of ethical, legal and social aspects (ELSA) and governance of nanotechnology. DG Research. Brussels: European Commission.
• Jonas, H. (1984). The imperative of responsibility: In search of an ethics for the technological age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Karinen, R., Guston, D.H. (2010). Towards anticipatory governance. The experience with nanotechnology. In M. Kaiser (Ed.), Governing future technologies. Nanotechnology and the rise of an assessment regime (pp. 217-232). New York: Springer.
• Koch, S. (2020). Responsible research, inequality in science and epistemic injustice: an attempt to open up thinking about inclusiveness in the context of RI/RRI. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 7(3), 672-679. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2020.1780094
• Kocowska-Siekierka, E. (2022). Elastyczny model transferu technologii - niwelowanie barier organizacyjnych i prawnych komercjalizacji wiedzy na uczelniach. Acta Universitatis Wratislaviensis 4101. Prawo 334, 397-408. https://doi.org/10.19195/0524-4544.334.33
• Laroche, G. (2011). Presentation at the responsible innovation workshop. London: French Embassy. www.ambafrance-uk.org/IMG/pdf/Gilles_LAROCHE.pdf (ac-cessed on 14th May 2023).
• Levidow, L., & Neubauer, C. (2014). EU research agendas: Embedding what future? Science as Culture, 23(3), 397-412. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2014.926149
• Macnaghten, P., & Chilvers, J. (2014). The future of science governance: Publics, policies, practices. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32(3), 530-548. https://doi.org/10.1068/c1245j
• Madl, L., & Radebner, T. (2021). Technology transfer for social benefit: Ten principles to guide the process. Cogent Social Sciences 7(1), 1947560. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2021.1947560
• Marinho, A., Silva, R.G., & Santos, G. (2020). Why Most University-Industry Partnerships Fail to Endure and How to Create Value and Gain Competitive Advantage through Collaboration - A Systematic Review. Quality Innovation Prosperity, 24(2), 34-50. https://doi.org/10.12776/qip.v24i2.1389
• Mejlgaard, N., Bloch, C., Degn, L., Nielsen, M.W., & Ravn, T. (2012). Locating science in society across Europe: Clusters and consequences. Science and Public Policy, 39(6), 741-750. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs092
• Moan, M.H., Ursin, L., & de Grandis, G. (2023). Institutional Governance of Responsible Research and Innovation. In E. González-Esteban, R.A. Feenstra, L.M. Camarinha-Matos, Ethics and Responsible Research and Innovation in Practice (pp. 3-18). Lecture Notes in Computer Science 13875. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-33177-0_1
• Moan, M.H., Ursin, L., González-Esteban, E., Sanahuja-Sanahuja, R., Feenstra, R., Calvo, P., García-Campá, S., & Rodríguez, M. (2022). ETHNA System: Literature review and state of the art description Mapping examples of good governance of research and innovation (R&I) related to responsible research and innovation (RRI), in Higher Education. Funding and Research Organisations (HEFRs) in Eu-rope. www.ethasystem.eu (accessed on 10th Jun. 2023).
• Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible Research and Innovation: From Science in Society to Science for Society, with Society. Science and Public Policy, 39(6), 751-760. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs093
• Owen, R., & Pansera, M. (2019). Responsible innovation and responsible research and innovation. In D. Simon, S. Kuhlmann, J. Stamm, & W. Canzler (Eds.). Handbook on science and public policy (pp. 26-48). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784715946
• Pandey, P., Valkenburg, G., Mamidipudi, A., & Bijker, W. (2020). Responsible research and innovation in the global south: Agriculture, renewable energy and the pursuit of symmetry. Science, Technology and Society, 25(2), 215-222. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971721820902961
• Parker, M., Acland, A., Armstrong, H.J., Bellingham, J.R., Bland, J., Bodmer, H.C. et al. (2014). Identifying the Science and Technology Dimensions of Emerging Public Policy Issues through Horizon Scanning. PLOS One, 9(5): e96480. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0096480
• Păunescu, C., Lepik, K.L., & Spencer, N. (Eds.). (2022). Social Innovation in Higher Education: Landscape, Practices, and Opportunities. Berlin: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-84044-0
• Pellizzoni, L. (2004). Responsibility and environmental governance. Environmental Politics, 13(3), 541-565. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 0964401042000229034
• Resnik, D.B. (1998). The ethics of science: An introduction. London: Routledge.
• Robinson, D.K. (2009). Co-evolutionary scenarios: An application to prospecting futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(9), 1222-1239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2009.07.015
• Roco, M.C., Harthorn, B., Guston, D., & Shapira, P. (2011). Innovative and responsible governance of nanotechnology for societal development. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 13(9), 3557-3590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-011-0454-4
• Schaper-Rinkel, P. (2013). The role of future-oriented technology analysis in the governance of emerging technologies: The example of nanotechnology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(3), 444-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.10.007
• Selin, C. (2011). Negotiating plausibility: intervening in the future of nanotechnology. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17, 723-737. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9315-x
• Stahl, B.C. (2013). Responsible research and innovation: The role of privacy in an emerging framework. Science and Public Policy, 40(6), 708-716. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/sct067
• Stahl, B.C., McBride, N., Wakunuma, K., & Flick, C. (2014b). The empathic care robot: A prototype of responsible research and innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 84, 74-85. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.techfore.2013.08.001
• Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568-1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008
• Stirling, A. (2008). "Opening up" and "closing down" power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 33(2), 262-294. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0162243907311265
• Terán-Bustamante, A., Martínez-Velasco, A., & López-Fernández, A.M. (2021). University-Industry Collaboration: A Sustainable Technology Transfer Model. Administrative Sciences, 11(142). https://doi.org/ 10.3390/admsci11040142
• Tweheyo, G., Abaho, E., & Verma, A.M. (2022). The Commercialisation of University Research Outputs: A Review of Literature. Texila International Journal of Management, 8(2), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.21522/TIJMG.2015.08.02.Art012
• Wennekers, S., & Thurik, R. (1999). Linking entrepreneurship and economic growth. Small Business Economics, 13, 27-56. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008063200484
• Wilsdon, J. (2005). Paddling upstream: New currents in European technology assessment. In M. Rodemeyer, D. Sarewitz, & J. Wilsdon (Eds.), The future of technology assessment (pp. 22-29). Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
• Wilsdon, J., & Willis, R. (2004). See-Through Science. London: Demos.
• Valkenburg, G., Mamidipudi, A., Pandey, P., & Bijker, E.E. (2020). Responsible Innovation as Empowering Ways of Knowing. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 7(1), 6-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2019.1647087
• Vélez-Rolón, A.M., Méndez-Pinzón, M., & Acevedo, O.L. (2020). Open Innovation Community for University-Industry Knowledge Transfer: A Colombian Case. Journal of Open Innova-tion: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6040181
• von Schomberg, R. (2013). A vision of responsible research and in-novation. In R. Owen, J. Bessant, & M. Heintz (Eds.), Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society (pp. 51-74). London: Wiley.
• Ong, Y.K., Double, K.L., Bero, L., & Diong, J. (2023). Responsible re-search practices could be more strongly endorsed by Australian University codes of research conduct. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 8(5). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-023-00129-1
• Zhuang, T., Zhou, Z., & Li, G. (2021). Universi-ty-industry-government triple helix relationship and regional in-novation efficiency in China. Growth and Change, 52(1), 349-370. https://doi.org/10.1111/grow.12461

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.35765/HP. 2506