The state of the responsible research and innovation programme. A case for its application in additive manufacturing

Date13 May 2019
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/JICES-12-2018-0093
Pages145-166
Published date13 May 2019
AuthorGeorge Inyila Ogoh,N. Ben Fairweather
Subject MatterInformation & knowledge management,Information management & governance,Information & communications technology
The state of the responsible
research and innovation
programme
A case for its application in additive
manufacturing
George Inyila Ogoh
De Montfort University, Leicester, UK, and
N. Ben Fairweather
Centre for Computing and Social Responsibility,
Department of Information Management, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK
Abstract
Purpose Many of the ethical issues of additive manufacturing (AM) are notwell known or understood,
and there remains a policy vacuumthat needs to be addressed. This paper aims to describe an approach that
has been applied successfully to other emerging technologies, referred to as the responsible research and
innovation (RRI) frameworkprogramme. A case is then made for the application of this approach in the AM
industrywith an illustrationof how it might be used.
Design/methodology/approach The research uses an RRI approach referred to as AREA, an
acronym for Anticipate, Reect, Engage and Act, to assess the ethical implications of AM. For the
anticipation phase,horizon scanning was done to explore the ethical issues of AM based on extant literature,
while reective analysis was carried out all through the work to reect on the data being collected and the
research process.The engage phase involved interviews withve participants from small- and medium-sized
enterprises(SMEs) involved in 3D printing.
Findings The ndings indicate thatalthough AM appears to pose a threat to intellectual propertyrights,
many in the industry do not care about this issue. As AM becomes mainstream, intellectual property will
likely becomea big problem. Also, very little is known about thehealth impacts of AM. This study shows that
AM can be hazardous.
Research limitations/implications Only users at SME level were sampled.Other researchers might
test the usefulnessof AREA at the enterprise level.
Practical implications The research demonstrates how the AREA framework may be useful in
information systems and social science research by enabling a more anticipatory and reective research
process.
Originality/value The paper responds to the need for a novel approach to identifying ethical issues of
AM.
Keywords Ethics, Additive manufacturing, Responsible research and innovation
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The emerging technology sector is beginning to witness a gradual shift in ideology from
rudimentary and sometimes obligatory ethical principles and theories to a more
sophisticated and somewhat elaborate approach to ethics called responsible research and
innovation (RRI). Policymakers, ethicists and philosopherslike Von Schomberg (2013) have
Responsible
research
145
Received1 December 2018
Revised2 February 2019
5 February2019
Accepted7 February 2019
Journalof Information,
Communicationand Ethics in
Society
Vol.17 No. 2, 2019
pp. 145-166
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1477-996X
DOI 10.1108/JICES-12-2018-0093
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1477-996X.htm
come to the conclusion that an ethical position that focusses on the intentions and/or
consequences of the individualsactions is no longer appropriate for our time.
Thus, rather thansimply encourage moral positions that revolve aroundpersonal reward
and/or punishment, RRI seeks to entrench ethical positions that are also based on broader
civic and group expectations. This shift in position, although not entirely new, has been
championed by the European Commission since May 2011 under the Horizon 2020 work
programme (Saille, 2015, p. 152). In the UK, a similar effort is being promoted by the
Engineering and PhysicalScience Research Council (EPSRC) (EPSRC, 2017c) whose position
is that researchers and their funders, as well as stakeholders and the public, have a role to
play.
The EPSRC is committed to ensuring that it only funds activities and research that are
aligned with the principles of RRI to create value for society in a way that is ethical and
responsible. As a mark of this commitment, RRI has been made the main instrument
through which allocation of research funding is governed (Saille, 2015, p. 159), and the
EPSRC invests over £800m each year (RRI Tools Consortium, 2016, p. 18) in innovative
science and technology research.This likely explains the proliferation in recent years of RRI
research focussing on innovative information and communications technologies (ICTs) and
their related elds (ORBIT, 2017;COMPASS, 2017;Responsible-Industry, 2017;PRISMA,
2018;NewHorrizon, 2018) where ethical and social issues are constantly emerging and are
more likely to receive funding.
As policymakers seek to induce a system enhancing ethical, responsible and
sustainable(Gurzawska, Mäkinen and Brey, 2017, p. 1762) innovation in industry, Delpy
(2015) a former CEO of the EPSRC insiststhat RRI is integral to research processes and not a
separate item and thatit is part of being a good researcherto think of the potentialimpact
of research and the potentialconsequences of research. It is worth asking then, how such an
approach might extend the expertise of the relevant scientist (e.g. social scientists) tasked
with promoting RRI? This paper takes the position that RRI as promoted by the EPSRC is
not only benecial for emerging industries like additive manufacturing (AM) by enabling
more sustainable outcomes but also for the social scientist tasked with promoting RRI by
enabling greater anticipationof ethical issues and encouraging a more reective culture. To
investigate this, the rest of the article describes the EPSRC approach to RRI, explores its
value for research of ethicalissues of AM and suggests how RRI might be used to encourage
a more ethicallyresponsible AM industry.
The AREA approach to responsible research and innovation
Under the RRI banner, the EPSRCs approach for promotingsocially desirable research and
innovation is commonly referred to as AREA (EPSRC,2017a). AREA, which is an acronym
for Anticipate, Reect, Engage and Act, suggests that in considering ethical issues of
technology, researchersand innovators should:
Anticipate: Explore possible societal and ethical impacts.
Reect:Reect on the uncertainties, areas of ignorance, dilemmas and social
transformations.
Engage: Use broad deliberation, dialogue or debate to question the societal impact.
Act: Use knowledge gained from the processes to inuence the direction of research
or innovation
However, it is important to note that the AREA approachis based on the four dimensions of
responsible innovation suggested by Owen et al. (2013, p. 38), namely, anticipation,
JICES
17,2
146

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT