In proposing the inclusion of habits of RRI in CSS practices, the chapter lays out several practical steps needed for ethical, trustworthy, and responsible CSS research activities. Taking these challenges as a motivation for cultural transformation, it then argues for the end-to-end incorporation of habits of responsible research and innovation (RRI) into CSS practices, focusing on the role that contextual considerations, anticipatory reflection, impact assessment, public engagement, and justifiable and well-documented action should play across the research lifecycle. ![]() These are challenges related to (1) the treatment of research subjects, (2) the impacts of CSS research on affected individuals and communities, (3) the quality of CSS research and to its epistemological status, (4) research integrity, and (5) research equity. ![]() It begins by providing a taxonomy of the ethical challenges faced by researchers in the field of CSS. It aims to provide CSS scholars, as well as policymakers and other stakeholders who apply CSS methods, with the critical and constructive means needed to ensure that their practices are ethical, trustworthy, and responsible. This article is concerned with setting up practical guardrails within the research activities and environments of CSS. Rather than having waned, these more "humanistic" approaches have gained strength in recent years, heavily influencing geological framings of the Anthropocene epoch (Bonneuil & Fressoz, 2016 Chakrabarty, 2018 Zinn, 2016), driving the sociotechnical and ELSA/ELSI self-understandings of the study of emerging technologies (Fisher, 2005 Hullmann, 2008 Rip, 2000 Swierstra & Rip, 2007), and growing within the Academy under the auspices of interdisciplinary and sub-disciplinary fields like Science and Technology Studies (Jasanoff, 2012(Jasanoff,, 2016Sengers et al., 2005 Star, 1999), Critical Sociology (Bauman, 1976(Bauman, /2010Burawoy, 1998, Responsible Research and Innovation (Hellström, 2003 Owen et al., 2012 Von Schomberg, 2011, Environmental Humanities (Emmett & Nye, 2017 Oppermann & Iovino, 2016), Critical Data Studies (Dalton et al., 2013 Iliadis & Russo, 2016 Kitchin & Lauriault, 2014), Postcolonial and Decolonial Theory (de Sousa Santos, 2014 Grosfoguel et al., 2007 Mohamed et al., 2020), and Cultural Studies (Barker, 2003 Johnson et al., 2004), among others. ![]() Namely, it overlooks the evolution of deflationary and interpretive approaches to the study of society that have built on the linguistic, pragmatic, and post-positivist turns in the twentieth century human sciences and that now underwrite critical and constructive approaches to understanding complex social practices, power dynamics, and human agents in culturally sensitive, dialogically anchored, contextually responsive, and pluralistically informed ways (Bernstein, 1971 Groff, 2004 Sellars, 1956Sellars, /1997Taylor, 1973 Winch, 1958Winch, /2015Zammito, 2004).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |