Reconnecting the University to the Region of Twente : Findings from the RUNIN-Design Lab Think Tank

The RUNIN project's Design Lab Think Tank took place on 28th June 2018. Its aim was to discuss the topic of universities' engagement with society, specifically in their region. It used a world café format that brought together regional stakeholders to discuss how the University of Twente (UT) can incorporate societal questions in its core activities and, through this, create regional benefits. This report provides a description of the event, a summation of the initiatives proposed and an analysis of the discussion that was prompted by the sub-questions around the subject of universities' societal engagement

Practices of Responsible Research and Innovation: A Review

This paper presents results of a systematic literature review of RRI practices which aimed to gather insights to further both the theoretical and practical development of RRI. Analysing practices of RRI and mapping out main approaches as well as the values, dimensions or characteristics pursued with those practices, can add to understanding of the more conceptual discussions of RRI and enhance the academic debate. The results, based on a corpus of 52 articles, show that practices already reflect the rich variety of values, dimensions and characteristics provided in the main definitions in use, although not all are addressed yet. In fact, articles dealing with uptake of RRI practices may be improved by including more methodological information. RRI practices may further the conceptual debate by including more reflection, and these may foster mutual responsiveness between theory and practice by early anticipating impacts

RRI in China and South Africa: Cultural Adaptation Report: Deliverable 3.3 NUCLEUS project

Executive summary: This study presents findings from two case studies on responsible research and innovation in China and South Africa respectively. The study focused on the following questions: How are RRI and relevant other concepts implemented in international contexts? What are barriers and successes to the future implementation? What can be recommended for the future implementation of RRI in the Nuclei? The findings are based on a multi-method approach using qualitative research methods, which include literature and interview studies. In China 30 interviews were conducted with researchers and leading management. In South Africa 13 interviews were held with researchers and science centre managers. Analysis was performed at the conceptual, governmental, institutional and individual level, based on the following themes: equality; science education and open access; stakeholder and public engagement; and ethics and broader impacts. Findings show are that RRI can be identified in many concepts, policies and practices, despite not being a commonly used term in either China or South Africa. In China, there is a strong emphasis on science communication and popularisation and social responsibility of researchers. In South Africa, equality, science education, outreach and stakeholder engagement in the form of including indigenous knowledge and people is important. Both countries are actively developing policies to further these; have installed agencies for science education, communication and popularisation; and are focusing on (even more) developing globally competitive universities. The most important recommendations are: • Work towards open and innovative research with minimum levels of regulations. • Continue efforts to raise levels of scientific literacy. • Share knowledge and research experiences with (developing) countries, for example by stimulating open access and open communication. • Play a leading role in developing social responsibility and community-oriented research. • Increase trust in science by stimulating research ethics, attention to impacts of research and open communication about all research findings. • Create and facilitate means, such as platforms, to exchange knowledge and best practices on science communication and engagement. • Use incentives to embed responsible research and innovation in universities and research institutes. • Recognize and facilitate role models. • Acknowledge the efforts of researchers regarding science popularization, science education and engagement. • Raise awareness and train researchers in research ethics. • Stimulate equal access to universities

A Q methodology study on divergent perspectives on CRISPR-Cas9 in the Netherlands

Background: CRISPR-Cas9, a technology enabling modification of the human genome, is developing rapidly. There have been calls for public debate to discuss its ethics, societal implications, and governance. So far, however, little is known about public attitudes on CRISPR-Cas9. This study contributes to a better understanding of public perspectives by exploring the various holistic perspectives Dutch citizens have on CRISPR-Cas9. Methods: This study used Q methodology to identify different perspectives of Dutch citizens (N = 30) on the use of CRISPR-Cas9. The Q-sort method aims at segmenting audiences based on the structural characteristics of their perspectives. Participants individually ranked 32 statements about CRISPR-Cas9 and discussed their rankings in small groups. By-person factor analysis was performed using PQMethod. Participants’ contributions to the discussions were used to further make sense of the audience segments identified. Results: Five perspectives on CRISPR-Cas9 were identified: (1) pragmatic optimism (2) concerned scepticism; (3) normative optimism; (4) enthusiastic support; and (5) benevolent generalism. Each perspective represents a unique position motivated by different ranking rationales. Sorting rationales included improving health, preventing negative impacts on society, and fear of a slippery slope. Overall, there is broad, but not universal support for medical uses of CRISPR-Cas9. Conclusions: Research on CRISPR-Cas9 should prioritise the broadly supported applications of the technology. Research and public debates on CRISPR-Cas9, its uses, its broader implications, and the governance of CRISPR-Cas9 are recommended. A discourse that includes all perspectives can contribute to the embedding of future uses of CRISPR-Cas9 in society. This study shows that Q methodology followed by group discussions enables citizens to contribute meaningfully to discourses about research