We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Back to the future — Sustainable innovations for ethical food production and consumption
Summary
This study presents practical experiences applying the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) framework to sustainable food production and consumption projects in Norway, examining how concepts including stakeholder engagement and anticipatory governance were operationalised in research involving emerging food technologies. The work highlights challenges in translating RRI principles into concrete research practice, including cases involving plastic packaging reduction and alternative food systems.
Over the past ten years, the concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has gained visibility, both in policy context as well as within academic discussions concerning science and technology. Research funding bodies in Norway do now include RRI as a requirement in calls for funding, especially in emerging technologies projects. However, the concept of RRI has been criticized for its unclarity in how the idea of RRI should or could be interpreted practically. Here we present our experiences of using the Research Ethics cards as an RRI approach to help researchers and research participants to enhance reflexivity regarding the effects and potential impacts of research. Our task was to apply RRI concepts to guide the development of the projects methodological approach for the study on nanoand microplastics in marine animals, e.g. salmon, to identify and reflect on the ethical aspects of their research. The methodological approach utilized in the project includes for example novel technologies such as advanced microscopy and modern gene technologies as -omics approaches. By using the Research Ethics cards in applying the RRI concepts, we found that the RRI facilitator can decide what role one wish to take, and it provides a common conceptual understanding prior to discussion. This approach allowed for open discussions and circumvented the challenge that employing RRI in technology projects become a one-way discussion and that the RRI facilitator owns the questions and the answer. Yet, common to other work on reflexivity, this methodology was not suited to address power asymmetries within the research group. We suggest that adding cards addressing the social situatedness can contribute to building awareness about potential power asymmetries in a research group. This may facilitate that all viewpoints become a part of the knowledge production and help researchers and research participants to reflect on ethical responsibilities in research and innovation projects.