New Ethos of Science or Institutional Reform of Science? The prospects of institutionalizing the research values Openness, Collaboration and Responsiveness
On 30 November 2022 at 5PM, René von Schomberg will deliver an open lecture as part of the Cultures of Research series of the International Centre for Advanced Studies, Kaete Hamburger Kolleg, RWTH Aachen University. Regular readers will know his work as I have collaborated with him on several projects. You can find a post about his work here, and more about our book here.
Von Schomberg has played an important role in the development of the concept and practices arround Responsible Innovation over the last 20 years through his roles working for the European Commission. He has seen it all we might say, from the first use of the term to its presence throughout the entire funding mechanism.
Openess, collaboration and responsiveness are three of the factors that have been seen as important in a responsible system. Can these things be built into a system? How could this be done? What would an innovation system look like that was based upon these aims? And what might be the advantages?
The lecture will be online with limited physical presence also possible. I will participate from Aachen and write about the event later in the year.
Registration (both online and physical) is required at email@example.com.
This (online) Open Scholarship event will be held on 29 and 30 June 2022, with registration possible by contacting firstname.lastname@example.org. Regular followers may recall that I edited a book with one of the organizers René von Schomberg and that there is a post about his work here on the website.
The following overview has been made available by the organizers:
29 June and 30 June 2020 Käte Hamburger Kolleg (KHK), Cultures of Research, RWTH Aachen University
10:00 – 10.15 Welcome address Andoni Ibarra, René von Schomberg, Stefan Böschen.(KHK)
10.15 – 10.30 Intro to the first day: René von Schomberg
10:30 – 11.15 Opening up science: a means for responsibility? Clare Shelley-Egan, Technical University of Denmark (DTU) 11.15 – 11. 30 Discussion
11.30 – 12.15 Missions? Quite Possibly! The legacies of rri and RRI in tackling global and local societal challenges, Douglas Robinson (Université Gustave Eiffel, France and CNRS) 12.15 – 12.30 Discussion followed by lunch
14.00 – 14.45 Interpretive multiplicity in Anticipatory Governance. Evidence from 12 countries, Mario Pansera (Universidade de Vigo) 14.45 – 15:00 Discussion
15.00- 15.45 Quadruple Helix Collaborations, the ethics of stakeholder engagement, and the future of responsible innovation, Vincent Blok (Wageningen University) 15.45- 16.00 Discussion
16.15 – 17:00 Roundtable Discussion: lead question, whether open scholarship can make science more reliable, efficient, responsive, inclusive in the incorporation of a broader range of scientific knowledge producers beyond the academic context and facilitte globally organised mission oriented research.
17:00 – 19.00 Key Note: Transition to Open Science, Why and How, Frank Miedema (Vice Rector for Research at Utrecht University and chair of the Utrecht University Open Science Programme)
Second Day (30 June): Anticipatory Governance
10:00 – 10:15 Andoni Ibarra: Introduction to the second day
10.15 – 11.00 The missing component of anticipatory governance, Roberto Poli (University of Trento) 11.00 – 11.15 Discussion
11.15-12.00 Framing RRI in health research domain: the case of MULTI-ACT participatory and anticipatory governance model, Paola Zaratin (Director of Scientific Research, Italian MS Society – Italian MS Foundation, Genoa, Italy) 12.15 – 12.30 Discussion followed by lunch
14.00 – 14.45 Foresight on additive manufacturing in order to support RRI, Marianne Hoerlesberger, Austrian Institute of Technology 14.45 – 15.00 Discussion
15.00 – 16.00 Round Table on Lead questions: How do we conceptualize ‘anticipation’ in such a way that it leads to open anticipatory governance? What is the significance of anticipatory governance for Open Science and Responsible Research and Innovation? What are the narratives of open anticipatory governance in different institutional and organizational settings? How can we assess Anticipatory Governance? How can mission-oriented research be best practiced as part of facilitating anticipatory governance?
I know it wasn’t really a hologram but the use of some old technology called Pepper’s Ghost, but that is a mere technicality I feel. This week, and not for the first time in his political career, French Presidential candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon conducted 12 simultaneous political rallies using what the press describe as hologram technology.
Mélenchon employed an optical illusion known as “Pepper’s Ghost,” where a 2D image is projected onto a thin film or pane of glass to give the impression that the speaker is actually present, the same technology used when Tupac Shakur (who was already dead) joined Snoop Dogg on stage more than 10 years ago.
There have been lots of concerts since then, Roy Orbison, for the rock and rollers, Whitney Houston for pop lovers and Maria Calla touring with a full orchestra for the opera lover in you. But the use of this technology has also raised some questions. Although the owners of the estates of these dead stars might agree to allow such a concert, it remains impossible to ask the artist themselves if they agree with this form of exploitation.
Which brings me back into the political arena. A politician can conduct a rally in as many cities as they would like, projecting an image and sound and have an interactive event, but they could also host guest conversations if they liked. A conversation with Winston Churchill? A short scripted introduction from Gandhi? What other uses might come to mind? And what might the implications be for the democratic process?
The availability of new techniques easily makes (the illusion of) 3D possible, and readers might like to look up Cheoptics or Musion Eyeliner to get some ideas of what is commercially available today. Easily transportable systems designed for touring are available, so I am not suggesting something that would be logistically difficult to do.
It seems a small step to move from using your own candidate to introducing iconic historical political figures on stage, but not an unproblematic one.