Responsible innovation for disruptive science and technology: The role of public trust and social expectations

As the world increasingly faces intersecting and complex environmental, social, and economic challenges, there are rising demands on emerging science and technology to produce innovative and potentially disruptive solutions. However, these solutions may also introduce different problems, uncertainties, and risks. Responsible innovation (RI) offers a way to identify and mitigate the social and ethical risks associated with new science and technology developments while delivering socially desirable and responsible outcomes. But how does the public view RI? In this paper, we argue that those undertaking disruptive science and technology research need a better understanding of the drivers of public trust in the research and innovation sector, and broader societal expectations of what constitutes socially responsible outcomes arising from their work. Few studies have explored if and how RI, trust, and social expectations are interrelated in the eyes of the public. This research investigates public perceptions of RI relevant to the development of novel and potentially disruptive science and technology, and their relationships with two key social outcomes: (1) public trust in the research and innovation sector; and (2) public expectations that innovative and potentially disruptive research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Through surveying 4080 Australians, this research identifies how these four elements of RI – (i) practices of scientists, (ii) institutional compliance with research ethics, (iii) risk management effectiveness, and (iv) governance arrangements – are associated with public trust and expectations of socially responsible outcomes. Our best fitting path model showed that these elements of RI explain a large proportion of variability in trust in scientists and research institutions undertaking disruptive science, and most of the variability in public expectations that such research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Of the four elements of RI, practices of scientists are most important for explaining trust in the research and innovation sector, and risk management effectiveness is most important for expectations of socially responsible outcomes from disruptive science and technology. • First statistical model linking public perceptions of responsible innovation, trust and social expectations. • Tested using a large and representative sample of 4080 Australians. • A suite of science practices is important for building public trust in the research and innovation sector. • Trust and risk management are crucial for expectations of socially responsible outcomes. • The model explains almost 80 % of public trust in the sector and 70 % of expectations of socially responsible outcomes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Technology in Society
Published
2024-09-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102709
Citations
21
Primary Topic
Innovation, Sustainability, Human-Machine Systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
23.77
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Responsible innovation for disruptive science and technology: The role of public trust and social expectations

Sarah V. Bentley, Elizabeth V. Hobman, Rod McCrea, Justine Lacey et al.
21 citations
Technology in Society
Innovation, Sustainability, Human-Machine Systems
23.77
article

Responsible innovation for disruptive science and technology: The role of public trust and social expectations

Sarah V. Bentley, Elizabeth V. Hobman, Rod McCrea, Justine Lacey, Rebecca Coates
article en
21 citations

Abstract

As the world increasingly faces intersecting and complex environmental, social, and economic challenges, there are rising demands on emerging science and technology to produce innovative and potentially disruptive solutions. However, these solutions may also introduce different problems, uncertainties, and risks. Responsible innovation (RI) offers a way to identify and mitigate the social and ethical risks associated with new science and technology developments while delivering socially desirable and responsible outcomes. But how does the public view RI? In this paper, we argue that those undertaking disruptive science and technology research need a better understanding of the drivers of public trust in the research and innovation sector, and broader societal expectations of what constitutes socially responsible outcomes arising from their work. Few studies have explored if and how RI, trust, and social expectations are interrelated in the eyes of the public. This research investigates public perceptions of RI relevant to the development of novel and potentially disruptive science and technology, and their relationships with two key social outcomes: (1) public trust in the research and innovation sector; and (2) public expectations that innovative and potentially disruptive research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Through surveying 4080 Australians, this research identifies how these four elements of RI – (i) practices of scientists, (ii) institutional compliance with research ethics, (iii) risk management effectiveness, and (iv) governance arrangements – are associated with public trust and expectations of socially responsible outcomes. Our best fitting path model showed that these elements of RI explain a large proportion of variability in trust in scientists and research institutions undertaking disruptive science, and most of the variability in public expectations that such research can deliver socially responsible outcomes. Of the four elements of RI, practices of scientists are most important for explaining trust in the research and innovation sector, and risk management effectiveness is most important for expectations of socially responsible outcomes from disruptive science and technology. • First statistical model linking public perceptions of responsible innovation, trust and social expectations. • Tested using a large and representative sample of 4080 Australians. • A suite of science practices is important for building public trust in the research and innovation sector. • Trust and risk management are crucial for expectations of socially responsible outcomes. • The model explains almost 80 % of public trust in the sector and 70 % of expectations of socially responsible outcomes.

Technology in SocietyVol. 79
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU), Animal, Food and Health Sciences (AU), Data61 (AU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Innovation, Sustainability, Human-Machine Systems
23.77
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.