The science-society relationship in Aotearoa: practicing responsible innovation in the New Zealand research and innovation system

References

• Abelson PH. 1970. Social responsibilities of scientists. Science. 167(3916):241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aymerich-Franch L, Fosch-Villaronga E. 2020. A self-guiding tool to conduct research with embodiment technologies responsibly. Frontiers in Robotics and AI. 7:22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berridge MV, Sissons CH, Offenberger H, Davies RB. 1995. 1994 NZAS survey of scientists’ perceptions of New Zealand science: results. New Zealand Science Review. 52(1,2):7–28.
   Google Scholar
• Brier D, Eastwood CR, Dela Rue BT, Viehland DW. 2020. Foresighting for responsible innovation using a Delphi approach: a case study of virtual fencing innovation in cattle farming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 33:549–569.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen MV, Nieminen M, Altenhofer M, Tangcoigne E, Mejlgaard N, Griessler E, Filacek A. 2020. What’s in a name? Perceptions and promotion of responsible research and innovation practices across Europe. Science and Public Policy. 47(3):360–370.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke V, Braun V. 2012. Thematic analysis. In: Cooper H, Camic PM, Long DL, Panter AT, Rindskopf D, Sher KJ, editor. APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological. Washington: American Psychological Association; p. 57–71.
   Google Scholar
• Collier-Robinson L, Rayne A, Rupene M, Thoms C, Steeves T. 2019. Embedding indigenous principles in genomic research of culturally significant species: a conservation genomics case study. New Zealand Journal of Ecology. 43(3):1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Commoner B. 1966. Science and survival. London: Victor Gollancz Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Crown Research Institutes Act. 1992. New Zealand Government. https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1992/0047/latest/DLM264292.html.
   Google Scholar
• Dalziel P, Saunders C, Tait P, Saunders J, Miller S, Guenther M, Rutherford P, Driver T. 2018. Rewarding responsible innovation when consumers are distant from producers: evidence from New Zealand. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review. 21(4):487–504.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eastwood CR, Edwards JP, Turner JA. 2021. Review: anticipating alternative trajectories for responsible agriculture 4.0 innovation in livestock systems. Animal. 15(Suppl. 1):100296.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Eastwood CR, Klerkx L, Ayre M, Dela Rue B. 2019. Managing socio-ethical challenges in the development of smart farming: from a fragmented to a comprehensive approach for responsible research and innovation. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 32(5–6):741–768.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards P, Fleming A, Kelly R. 2021. Responsible research and innovation and social licence to operate: aligning concepts for advancing marine innovation and development governance. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 49:12–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Environmental Protection Agency. 2020. Partnership in action: the EPA’s mātauranga framework. Wellington: Environmental Protection Agency Te Mana Rauhi Taiao.
   Google Scholar
• Espig M, Fielke S, Finlay-Smits SC, Jakku E, Turner JA, Robinson CJ, Hunter C, Lacey J. 2022. Responsible digital agri-food innovation in Australian and New Zealand public research organisations. Sociologia Ruralis. 62(2):389–409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher M, Small B, Roth H, Mallon M, Jerebine B. 2005. What do individuals in different science groups within a life sciences organization think about genetic engineering? Public Understanding of Science. 14:317–326.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbons M. 1999. Science's new social contract with society. Nature. 402(Suppl. 6761):C81–C84. doi:10.1038/35011576.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herington M, Coates R, Lacey J. 2019. The science-society relationship in Australia: toward responsible innovation. Survey of Scientists, Researchers and Other Professionals in the Australian Research and Innovation System. CSIRO, Australia. EP195688.
   Google Scholar
• Hikuroa D, Morgan K, Durie M, Henare M, Robst TT. 2011. Integration of indigenous knowledge and science. The International Journal of Science in Society. 2(2):105–114.
   Google Scholar
• Hudson M, Russell K, Uerata L, Milne M, Wilcox P, Port R, Smith B, Toki V, Beaton A. 2016. Te Mata Ira – faces of the gene developing a cultural foundation for biobanking and genomic research involving Māori. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples. 12(4):341–355.
   Google Scholar
• Hudson M, Thompson A, Wilcox P, Mika J, Ruru J, Battershill C, Stott M, Brooks R, Warbrick L. 2020. Te Nohonga Kaitiaki: guidelines for genomic research on Taonga species. Hamilton: Faculty of Māori and Indigenous Studies, University of Waikato.
   Google Scholar
• Jonas H. 1985. The imperative of responsibility: in search of an ethics for the technological age. Chicago: The University of Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Joy B. 2000. Why the future doesn’t need us. Wired. 8:4. Retrieved 18 March, 2009, from http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/ch3.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Lees N, Lees I. 2018. Competitive advantage through responsible innovation in the New Zealand sheep dairy industry. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review. 21(4):505–524.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lekka-Kowalik A. 2010. Why science cannot be value-free. Science and Engineering Ethics. 16:33–41. doi:10.1007/s11948-009-9128-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenk H. 1983. Notes on extended responsibility and increased technological power. In: P. T. Durbin, F. Rapp, editor. Philosophy and technology. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company; p. 195–210.
   Google Scholar
• Ludwig D, Macnaghten P. 2020. Traditional ecological knowledge in innovation governance: A framework for responsible and just innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation. 7(1):26–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luppicini R. 2008. The emerging field of technoethics. In: R. Luppicini, R. Adell, editor. Handbook of research on technoethics. Hersey: Idea Group Publishing; p. 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Macnaghten P. 2016. The metis of responsible innovation: Helping society to get better at the conversation between today and tomorrow. Inaugural lecture at Wageningen University. https://edepot.wur.nl/410400.
   Google Scholar
• McAllister TG, Naepi S, Wilson E, Hikuroa D, Walker LA. 2020. Under-represented and overlooked: Māori and Pasifika scientists in Aotearoa New Zealand’s universities and crown-research institutes. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand. 52(1):38–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MBIE (Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment). 2020. Te Pae Kahurangi: positioning crown research institutes to collectively and respectfully meet New Zealand’s current and future needs.
   Google Scholar
• MBIE (Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment). 2021a. Te Pūrongo, Rangahau Pūtaiao me te Auahatanga – 2021. the research, science and innovation report – 2021: performance of the New Zealand RSI system.
   Google Scholar
• MBIE (Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment). 2021b. Te Ara Paerangi future pathways green paper.
   Google Scholar
• MoRST (Ministry of Research, Science & Technology). 2005. Vision Mātauranga: unlocking the innovation potential of Māori knowledge, resources and people.
   Google Scholar
• Moor J. 2005. Why we need better ethics for emerging technologies. Ethics and Information Technology. 7(3):111–119. doi:10.1007/s10676-006-0008-0.
   Google Scholar
• Owen R, Pansera M. 2019. Responsible innovation and responsible research and innovation. In: Simon D, Kuhlmann S, Stamm J, Canzler W, editor. Handbook on science and public policy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; p. 26–48.
   Google Scholar
• Owen R, Stilgoe J, Macnaghten P, Gorman M, Fisher E, Guston D. 2013. A framework for responsible innovation. In: Owen R, Bessant J, Heintz M, editor. Responsible innovation: managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society. Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd; p. 27–50.
   Google Scholar
• Pimple KD. 2002. Six domains of research ethics: a heuristic framework for the responsible conduct of research. Science and Engineering Ethics. 8(2):191–205.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauika M. 2020. A guide to vision Mātauranga: lessons from Māori voices in the New Zealand science sector. Wellington: Rauika Māngai.
   Google Scholar
• Regan Á. 2021. Exploring the readiness of publicly funded researchers to practice responsible research and innovation in digital agriculture. Journal of Responsible Innovation. 8(1):28–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rotblat J. 1999. A hippocratic oath for scientists. Science. 286:1475.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russell B, Einstein A. 1955. The Russell-Einstein manifesto. Retrieved 20 March, 2002, from http://www.pugwash.org/about/manifesto.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Small B. 2011. Ethical relationships between science and society: understanding the social responsibility of scientists. PhD thesis, University of Waikato.
   Google Scholar
• Small B. 2013. Scientists and social responsibility in an age of Promethean technology: defining the domain. Fifth International Conference on Science in Society. 22–23 November, Copernicus Science Centre Warsaw, Poland.
   Google Scholar
• Small BH, Fisher MW. 2005. Measuring biotechnology employees’ ethical attitudes to a controversial transgenic cattle project: The ethical valence matrix. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 18:495–508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Small B, Jollands N. 2006. Technology and ecological economics: promethean technology, Pandorian potential. Ecological Economics. 56:343–358. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.09.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sommer J. 2001. New Zealand science policy reforms: voices from the grassroots of science. New Zealand Science Review. 58(4):122–131.
   Google Scholar
• Sommer J. 2010. 2008 survey of New Zealand scientists and technologists. New Zealand Science Review. 67(1):1–40.
   Google Scholar
• Sommer J, Sommer D. 1997. Profiles: a survey of New Zealand scientists and technologists. Wellington: Royal Society of New Zealand.
   Google Scholar
• Statistics New Zealand Tatauranga Aotearoa. 2019. New Zealand’s population reflects growing diversity. https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/new-zealands-population-reflects-growing-diversity.
   Google Scholar
• Stilgoe J, Owen R, Macnaghten P. 2013. Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy. 42(9):1568–1580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werker C. 2020. Assessing responsible research and innovation (RRI) systems in the digital age. In: E. Yaghmaei E, van de Poel I, editor. Assessment of responsible innovation: methods and practices. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge; p. 275–292.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox PL, Charity JA, Roberts MR, Tauwhare S, Tipene-Matua B, Kereama-Royal I, Hunter R, Kani HM, Moke-Delaney P. 2008. A values-based process for cross-cultural dialogue between scientists and Māori. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand. 38(3):215–227.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziman J. 1994. Prometheus bound: science in a dynamic steady state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ziman J. 1998. Why must scientists become more ethically sensitive than they used to be. Science. 282:1813–1814.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziman J. 2001. Getting scientists to think about what they are doing. Science and Engineering Ethics. 7(2):165–176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar