|
|
|
| The Spatiotemporal Dimension Clairvoyance of Responsible Innovation Research and CTIMO Knowledge Framework Construction |
| Wang Wan1,Cai Sanfa1,Yang Kun2 |
| (1.School of Economics and Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China;2.School of Management, Shanghai University of Engineering Science, Shanghai 201620, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract With the deep integration of technology and society, responsible innovation has become a hot academic issue. This study selects the journal papers related to responsible innovation from Web of Science and CNKI databases, and comprehensively uses quantitative analysis methods such as bibliometrics and multivariate statistics to visually analyze the external characteristics, hot topics and cutting-edge trends, and clarify the subject knowledge base of research in this field. Then it explores the construction of a knowledge framework for responsible innovation, providing a reference for further research in this field.#br#In terms of external characteristics, from 2009 to 2020, the volume of foreign publications, domestic publications and total domestic and foreign publications all showed an upward trend in general, but in terms of domestic and foreign comparisons, not only the number of foreign publications was significantly higher, but also earlier than domestic ones. The mainstream foreign journal Research Policy publishes fewer papers, but has the highest citation frequency, while Journal of Responsible Innovation publishes the most papers with the aim to provide a dedicated platform for comprehensively and systematically clarifying and discussing issues related to responsible innovation. The distribution of domestic mainstream journals on responsible innovation research is mainly concentrated in the disciplines of philosophy and management science. Delft University of Technology and Arizona State University started early in the field of responsible innovation and achieved fruitful results, while the University of Exeter, Arizona State University and Oxford University are at the core of the surrounding cooperation network and have a certain academic influence force. The domestic responsible innovation research institutions are mainly colleges and universities featuring agriculture, forestry, science and technology, represented by Tsinghua University and Nanjing Forestry University. Foreign responsible innovation scholars mainly play an important role in the research team represented by Stilgoe, Blok, Stahl and Fisher, etc. There are also fewer domestic scholars studying responsible innovation, mainly Mei Liang, Chen Jin, Liu Zhanxiong, et al. Responsible innovation research presents interdisciplinary characteristics, and it is an interdisciplinary subject of psychology, education, economics, politics, biology and other disciplines.#br#In terms of hot frontiers, by extracting the key words or themes that express the core contents of the literature, this study combines key word frequency and co-occurrence network analysis to explore the research development trends and hot topics in this field. The hot topics of responsible innovation research mainly focus on four aspects: responsible innovation connotation and theoretical framework construction research, responsible innovation and stakeholder participation research, responsible innovation cross-border integration research, responsible innovation methods, practice and evaluation research. At the same time, the research frontier in the field of responsible innovation is explored comprehensively based on the composite relationship method and burst detection. According to the mutation and keyword clustering of 947 co-cited documents over time, a total of 17 clusters were formed, namely innovation policy, ethics, choice environment, autonomous vehicles, RRI vision, framework, genetically modified mosquitoes, and emerging technology governance. , gene drives, ethics, law and social impact (ELSI), neuroethics, research, debate, dual use, robotics ethics, agricultural models, engaging in interdisciplinary collaborations. In recent years, mutation keywords in the field of responsible innovation include perception, biofuels, social groups, responsibility, systems, political activities, gene editing, research and experimental development, etc. Therefore, the research frontier topics in this field are mainly divided into three aspects: research on responsible innovation and ethical norms, research on responsible innovation and emerging technology governance, and research on social embeddedness and political agenda of responsible innovation.#br#In terms of knowledge framework, based on the three standards of comprehensiveness, logic and independence, following the CIMO logic proposed by relevant scholars, a responsible innovation CTIMO knowledge framework of context-theoretical connotation-interventions-mechanisms- outcomes is constructed. The CTIMO knowledge framework summarizes the research status and progress in the field of responsible innovation, especially through quantitative analysis to identify the context and theoretical connotations of this field, which helps researchers to pay more attention to contextual characteristics and theory in the following study. The connotation is embedded in the logical process of intervention, mechanism and result, which promotes the organic integration of contextual research and theory construction, and then realizes the deepening of responsible innovation research in emerging economies, emerging technologies, and interdisciplinary research. Finally, it proposes future research prospects from the institutional context, stakeholder management, and organization-level evaluation.#br#
|
|
Received: 26 September 2021
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] GODIN B. Innovation contested: the idea of innovation over the centuries [M]. New York: Routledge, 2015.[2] RIBEIRO B E, SMITH R D J, MILLAR K. A Mobilising concept? unpacking academic representations of responsible research and innovation[J]. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2017, 23(1): 81-103.[3] OWEN R, MACNAGHTEN P, STILGOE J. Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society[J]. Science and Public Policy, 2012, 39(6): 751-760.[4] STILGOE J, OWEN R, MACNAGHTEN P. Developing a framework for responsible innovation[J]. Research Policy, 2013, 42(9): 1568-1580.[5] RIP A. The clothes of the emperor： an essay on RRI in and around Brussels[J]. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2016, 3(3): 290-304.[6] MACNAGHTEN P, OWEN R, STILGOE J, et al. Responsible innovation across borders: tensions, paradoxes and possibilities[J]. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2014, 1(2): 191-199.[7] 王小伟, 姚禹. 负责任地反思负责任创新——技术哲学思路下的RRI[J]. 自然辩证法通讯, 2017, 39(6): 37-43.[8] 梅亮, 陈劲, 盛伟忠. 责任式创新——研究与创新的新兴范式[J]. 自然辩证法研究, 2014, 30(10): 83-89.[9] STAHL B C, OBACH M, YAGHMAEI E, et al. The responsible research and innovation (rri) maturity model: linking theory and practice[J]. Sustainability, 2017, 9(6): 1036.[10] SETIAWAN A D, SINGH R. Responsible innovation in practice: the adoption of solar pv in telecom towers in Indonesia[M]//KOOPS B-J, OOSTERLAKEN I, ROMIJN H, et al. Responsible innovation 2: concepts, approaches, and applications. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015: 225-243.[11] TAEBI B, CORRELJE A, CUPPEN E, et al. Responsible innovation as an endorsement of public values: the need for interdisciplinary research[J]. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2014, 1(1): 118-124.[12] LOUREIRO P M, CONCEICO C P. Emerging patterns in the academic literature on responsible research and innovation[J]. Technology in Society, 2019, 58: 1-12.[13] SCHUIJFF M, DIJKSTRA A M. Practices of responsible research and innovation: a review[J]. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2020, 26(2): 533-574.[14] THAPA R K, IAKOVLEVA T, FOSS L. Responsible research and innovation: a systematic review of the literature and its applications to regional studies[J]. EUROPEAN PLANNING STUDIES, 2019, 27(12): 2470-2490.[15] 梅亮, 陈劲, 李福嘉. 责任式创新:“内涵—理论—方法”的整合框架[J]. 科学学研究, 2018, 36(3): 521-530.[16] ZUPIC I, ATER T. Bibliometric methods in management and organization[J]. Organizational Research Methods, 2015, 18(3): 429-472.[17] 吴小节, 谭晓霞, 汪秀琼. 市场分割研究的知识结构与动态演化——基于1998-2015年CSSCI经济管理类期刊数据库的文献计量分析[J]. 管理评论, 2018, 30(12): 257-275.[18] RENAUD A, WALSH I, KALIKA M. Is SAM still alive? a bibliometric and interpretive mapping of the strategic alignment research field[J]. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 2016, 25(2): 75-103.[19] 张勤, 魏国辰. 基于多元统计分析与社会网络分析的国内知识管理学派探析[J]. 研究与发展管理, 2012, 24(3): 37-48.[20] 梅亮, 陈劲. 责任式创新:源起、归因解析与理论框架[J]. 管理世界, 2015,31(8): 39-57.[21] GUSTON D H, FISHER E, GRUNWALD A, et al. Responsible innovation: motivations for a new journal[J]. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2014, 1(1): 1-8.[22] 梅亮, 吴欣桐, 王伟楠. 科技创新的责任治理:从开放科学到开放社会[J]. 科研管理, 2019, 40(12): 1-10.[23] CHEN C, LEYDESDORFF L. Patterns of connections and movements in dual-map overlays: a new method of publication portfolio analysis[J]. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2014, 65(2): 334-351.[24] 李杰, 陈超美. CiteSpace科技文本挖掘及可视化（第二版） [M]. 北京: 首都经济贸易大学出版社, 2017.[25] BLOK V, HOFFMANS L, WUBBEN E F. Stakeholder engagement for responsible innovation in the private sector: Critical issues and management practices[J]. Journal on Chain and Network Science, 2015, 15(2): 147-164.[26] MARTINUZZI A, BLOK V, BREM A, et al. Responsible research and innovation in industry——challenges, insights and perspectives[J]. Sustainability, 2018, 10(3): 702.[27] WICKSON F, CAREW A L. Quality criteria and indicators for responsible research and innovation: learning from transdisciplinarity[J]. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2014, 1(3): 254-273.[28] 陈仕吉. 科学研究前沿探测方法综述[J]. 现代图书情报技术, 2009，30(9): 28-33.[29] 许晓阳, 郑彦宁, 赵筱媛, 等. 研究前沿识别方法的研究进展[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2014, 37(6): 139-144.[30] CHEN C. CiteSpace II: detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature[J]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 2006, 57(3): 359-377.[31] RUGGIU D. Inescapable frameworks: ethics of care, ethics of rights and the responsible research and innovation model[J]. Philosophy of Management, 2020, 19(3): 237-265.[32] MACNAGHTEN P. Responsible innovation and the reshaping of existing technological trajectories: the hard case of genetically modified crops[J]. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2016, 3(3): 282-289.[33] VASEN F. Responsible innovation in developing countries: an enlarged agenda[M]// Responsible Innovation 3. Springer, 2017: 93-109.[34] NERUR S P, RASHEED A A, NATARAJAN V. The intellectual structure of the strategic management field: an author co-citation analysis[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2008, 29(3): 319-336.[35] MEYER J M, HEATH A C, EAVES L J, et al. Using multidimensional scaling on data from pairs of relatives to explore the dimensionality of categorical multifactorial traits[J]. Genetic Epidemiology, 1992, 9(2): 87-107.[36] STREET C T, CAMERON A-F. External relationships and the small business: a review of small business alliance and network research[J]. Journal of Small Business Management, 2007, 45(2): 239-266.[37] DENYER D, TRANFIELD D, VAN AKEN J E. Developing design propositions through research synthesis[J]. Organization Studies, 2008, 29(3): 393-413.[38] FISHER E, RIP A. Responsible innovation: multi-level dynamics and soft intervention practices[M]//OWEN R, BESSANT J, HEINTZ M. Responsible innovation: managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2013: 165-183.[39] STIRLING A. "Opening Up" and "Closing Down":power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology[J]. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 2008, 33(2): 262-294.[40] ROBINSON D K R. Co-evolutionary scenarios: an application to prospecting futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology[J]. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2009, 76(9): 1222-1239. |
|
|
|
