Towards Principled Responsible Research and Innovation: Employing the Difference Principle in Funding Decisions

Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has emerged as a science policy framework that attempts to import broad social values into technological innovation processes whilst supporting institutional decision-making under conditions of uncertainty and ambiguity. When looking at RRI from a ‘principled’ perspective, we consider responsibility and justice to be important cornerstones of the framework. The main aim of this article is to suggest a method of realising these principles through the application of a limited Rawlsian Difference Principle in the distribution of public funds for research and innovation. There are reasons why the world's combined innovative capacity has spewed forth iPhones and space shuttles but not yet managed to produce clean energy or universal access to clean water. (Stilgoe 2013, xii) I derive great optimism from empathy's evolutionary antiquity. It makes it a robust trait that will develop in virtually every human being so that society can count on it and try to foster and grow it. It is a human universal. (de Waal 2009, 209) Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has emerged as a science policy framework that attempts to import broad social values into technological innovation processes whilst supporting institutional decision-making under conditions of uncertainty and ambiguity. In this respect, RRI re-focuses technological governance from standard debates on risks to discussions about the ethical stewardship of innovation. This is a radical step in Science & Technology (S&T) policy as it lifts the non-quantifiable concept of values into the driving seat of decision-making. The focus of innovation then goes beyond product considerations to include the processes and – importantly – the purposes of innovation (Owen et al. 2013, 34). Shared public values are seen as the cornerstone of the new RRI framework, while market mechanisms and risk-based regulations are of a secondary order. What are the values that could drive RRI? There are different approaches to the identification of public values. They can be located in democratically agreed processes and commitments (such as European Union treaties and policy statements) or they can be developed organically via public engagement processes. Both approaches have advantages and disadvantages. For instance, although constitutional values can be regarded as democratically legitimate, their application to specific technological fields can be difficult or ambiguous (Schroeder and Rerimassie 2015). On the other hand, public engagement can accurately reflect stakeholder values but is not necessarily free from bias and lobbyist agenda setting. We argue that if RRI is to be more successful in resolving policy dilemmas arising from poorly described and uncertain technological impacts, basic universal principles need to be evoked and applied. When looking at RRI from a ‘principled’ perspective, we consider responsibility and justice to be important cornerstones of the framework. One could describe them in the following manner: Research and innovation should be conducted responsibly. Publicly funded research and innovation should be focused fairly on socially beneficial targets. Research and innovation should promote and not hinder social justice. The main aim of this article is to suggest a method of realising these principles through the application of a limited Rawlsian Difference Principle in the distribution of public funds for research and innovation. This paper is in three parts. The first part discusses the above principles and introduces the Rawlsian Difference Principle. The second part identifies how RRI is currently applied by public funding bodies. The third part discusses the operationalisation of the Rawlsian Difference Principle in responsible funding decisions

Dream capitalism

John Tomasi’s Free Market Fairness represents an heroic attempt to bridge the gap between Rawlsian ‘high liberals’ and the advocates of classical liberalism/contemporary libertarianism. I argue that Tomasi’s project fails, above all because it cannot give a compelling account of contemporary (American) capitalism or of its capacity to deliver free market fairness

Experimental feasibility of investigating acoustic waves in Couette flow with entropy and pressure gradients

The feasibility is discussed for an experimental program for studying the behavior of acoustic wave propagation in the presence of strong gradients of pressure, temperature, and flow. Theory suggests that gradients effects can be experimentally observed as resonant frequency shifts and mode shape changes in a waveguide. A convenient experimental geometry for such experiments is the annular region between two co-rotating cylinders. Radial temperature gradients in a spinning annulus can be generated by differentially heating the two cylinders via electromagnetic induction. Radial pressure gradients can be controlled by varying the cylinder spin rates. Present technology appears adequate to construct an apparatus to allow independent control of temperature and pressure gradients. A complicating feature of a more advanced experiment, involving flow gradients, is the requirement for independently controlled cylinder spin rates. Also, the boundary condition at annulus terminations must be such that flow gradients are minimally disturbed. The design and construction of an advanced apparatus to include flow gradients will require additional technology development

A Formal Theory of Democratic Deliberation

Inspired by impossibility theorems of social choice theory, many democratic theorists have argued that aggregative forms of democracy cannot lend full democratic justification for the collective decisions reached. Hence, democratic theorists have turned their attention to deliberative democracy, according to which “outcomes are democratically legitimate if and only if they could be the object of a free and reasoned agreement among equals” (Cohen 1997a, 73). However, relatively little work has been done to offer a formal theory of democratic deliberation. This article helps fill that gap by offering a formal theory of three different modes of democratic deliberation: myopic discussion, constructive discussion, and debate. We show that myopic discussion suffers from indeterminacy of long run outcomes, while constructive discussion and debate are conclusive. Finally, unlike the other two modes of deliberation, debate is path independent and converges to a unique compromise position, irrespective of the initial status quo

Evaluation of the Advanced Subsonic Technology Program Noise Reduction Benefits

This report presents a detailed evaluation of the aircraft noise reduction technology concepts developed during the course of the NASA/FAA Advanced Subsonic Technology (AST) Noise Reduction Program. In 1992, NASA and the FAA initiated a cosponsored, multi-year program with the U.S. aircraft industry focused on achieving significant advances in aircraft noise reduction. The program achieved success through a systematic development and validation of noise reduction technology. Using the NASA Aircraft Noise Prediction Program, the noise reduction benefit of the technologies that reached a NASA technology readiness level of 5 or 6 were applied to each of four classes of aircraft which included a large four engine aircraft, a large twin engine aircraft, a small twin engine aircraft and a business jet. Total aircraft noise reductions resulting from the implementation of the appropriate technologies for each class of aircraft are presented and compared to the AST program goals

The modest professor:Interpretive charity and interpretive humility in John Rawls's lectures on the history of political philosophy

Governmen

Collaboration in electronic resource provision in university libraries: SHEDL, a Scottish case study

This case study examines the growth of collaboration among Scottish higher education institutions. Following a summary of the work of the Scottish Confederation of University and Research Libraries (SCURL), more detailed information is provided on collaboration in the fields of acquisition, licensing, selection, and purchasing. Some of the UK background is outlined, relating to NESLi2 in particular, in order to illuminate the options within Scotland. The origins of negotiations on electronic resource provision within Scotland are described, drawing on developments in other countries including Ireland and Scandinavia. After initial setbacks, the implementation of the Scottish Higher Education Digital Library (SHEDL) from 2007 to 2009 is detailed. Current benefits arising from SHEDL are explained, and some possible future developments are discussed

ANOPP Landing Gear Noise Prediction Comparisons to Model-scale Data

The NASA Aircraft NOise Prediction Program (ANOPP) includes two methods for computing the noise from landing gear: the "Fink" method and the "Guo" method. Both methods have been predominately validated and used to predict full-scale landing gear noise. The two methods are compared, and their ability to predict the noise for model-scale landing gear is investigated. Predictions are made using both the Fink and Guo methods and compared to measured acoustic data obtained for a high-fidelity, 6.3%-scale, Boeing 777 main landing gear. A process is developed by which full-scale predictions can be scaled to compare with model-scale data. The measurements were obtained in the NASA Langley Quiet Flow Facility for a range of Mach numbers at a large number of observer polar (flyover) and azimuthal (sideline) observer angles. Spectra and contours of the measured sound pressure levels as a function of polar and azimuthal angle characterize the directivity of landing gear noise. Comparisons of predicted noise spectra and contours from each ANOPP method are made. Both methods predict comparable amplitudes and trends for the flyover locations, but deviate at the sideline locations. Neither method fully captures the measured noise directivity. The availability of these measured data provides the opportunity to further understand and advance noise prediction capabilities, particularly for noise directivity