Log in
Work on synthetic biology carried out by Calvert and Frow at the Univ. of Edinburgh since 2007 has led to two different types of impact: on creativity, culture and society; and on public policy. Their research on design in synthetic biology involved artists and designers from across the world. It has resulted in the production of novel cultural artefacts (exhibited in France, Austria, Ireland, the USA and Japan and viewed by 28,000 unique visitors to our website) as well as dedicated events, which have provided new opportunities for public discussion about synthetic biology and the design of living things. Their research findings on the importance of the early-stage involvement of social scientists in synthetic biology and the role of responsible innovation in the field were taken up in the UK Synthetic Biology Roadmap and have led to changes in UK research policy.
A decade of social science research on emerging technologies carried out and/or directed by Oxford researchers at InSIS (Institute for Science, Innovation and Society) provided the basis for the Oxford Principles for the Governance of Geoengineering Research. These Principles were endorsed by the House of Commons Science and Technology (S&T) Committee in 2010 and were subsequently accepted by the UK Government in its official response to the Committee's report - meaning that appropriate governance arrangements are now a necessary precondition for responsible research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) of geoengineering. The Principles have also been "generally endorsed" by the international geoengineering research community in its efforts to ensure responsible conduct in the controversial emerging area of environmental technology.
DU research into nanotechnology and geoengineering has used deliberative forms of public engagement involving focus groups with lay publics to explore the complexity of societal concerns about emerging technologies. The results of this research have made a major contribution to the development of a framework of responsible innovation. This framework has been applied to RCUK-funded research, where it led to the withdrawal of the UK's first field trial of a prospective geoengineering technology. This framework has had direct impact on European policy debate and on the UK's Engineering and Physical Science Research Council, which has begun to embed responsible innovation in an operational context.
Within the field of `computer ethics', considerations of the design processes required for software development has remained relatively neglected until the foundational work of Dr Penny Duquenoy under the direction of Prof. Harold Thimbleby helped introduce and establish the need for such concerns. The impact of the embedding of ethics in technology is observable by noting the routine use of ethics expert reviewers and evaluators and on Advisory Boards in EU funded projects since 2007. This has been replicated by the EPSRC who also now include input from ethics experts into their programmes such as the RCUK `Global Uncertainties' initiative. At a professional level, ethics has also become a core consideration for the British Computer Society and its representations to the community it serves.
For the last two decades, sociologists at Lancaster have demonstrated the centrality of social organisation and practice for climate change policy. This case study focuses on the impact of Elizabeth Shove's research in particular. Shove's work challenges the prevailing emphasis on individual attitudes and behaviours and shows that the consumption of energy, water and other natural resources is an outcome of shared social practices. Through innovative forms of interaction and collaboration ("working parties"; exhibitions, etc.) Shove has inspired organisations such as WWF, the Environment Agency, DECC, DCLG, DEFRA, the Scottish Government and the International Energy Agency to take social practices seriously as topics of policy, planning and intervention. Individual behavioural models are no longer the only point of reference in policy design.
Research from the world leading Centre for Computing and Social Responsibility (CCSR) influences policy decisions and practice at national and international levels.
The specific examples cited in this case study demonstrate the role CCSR research played in shaping electronic voting and electronic government in the UK, leading to the suspension of electronic voting in 2008 and an annual cost saving to the UK Government of £4m, and impacts on European ICT research policy including direct contributions to an EGE Opinion, namely the "The Opinion on Ethics and ICT". EGE Opinions are considered to be "soft law" as they are authoritative in their area of expertise. The `Opinion on Ethics and ICT' guided ICT research policy with regards to ethics and ICT during the FP7 funding programme, and it has been adopted as a set of underpinning principles for the Horizon 2020 programme. Other research findings have similarly informed the Horizon 2020 cross cutting theme of `Responsible Research and Innovation'.
The ESRC Innogen Centre brought together a multiplicity of disciplines for a large 12-year research programme (2002-14) on the impact of regulation on innovation dynamics in the life sciences. Research design promoted interactions between stakeholders to achieve policy impact. Innogen developed a range of tooIs to disseminate research findings and influence policy in Europe, the African Union (AU), Kenya, Qatar and at the OECD. We used secondments and temporary placements to achieve impact, as well as more traditional activities and outputs, resulting in major policy impacts in Europe, Africa and the Middle East.
The research has explored the impact of welfare transformations on the activities of social workers on the frontline. A key concern has been to explore the gap between, on the one hand, social work ethical statements and the commitments of practitioners on entering the field and, on the other, the workplace reality of marketization, austerity driven cuts and a range of restrictions placed on workers by new regulatory regimes. The research explores the potential, internationally, for a new `engaged' social work practice that draws service users, carers, academics, and practitioners together in defence of good quality, value driven social work.
Our research on life-science innovation, its regulation and governance has led to three systematic frameworks with which we conduct `action research' with decision-makers in government and companies: TARGET, which supports regional R&D policy-making; AGIT, which focuses on improving policy and the regulation of life-science innovation; and ALSIS, which allows decision-makers in companies systematically to work through the decisions they will need to make in innovation processes. Users of all three frameworks in both government and companies testify to the way in which they have led to improved decision-making. Our lead researcher, Tait, has applied insights from AGIT in high-level policy roles in areas such as synthetic biology and cell-based therapies, and others involved testify to the impact of her interventions. Other evidence of impact includes companies finding this research valuable enough to partner with us in it.
Research needs to engage with global environmental challenges more effectively. How to achieve this has been the focus of studies by academics at Newcastle with their expertise recognised in the appointment in 2003 of Philip Lowe and Jeremy Phillipson to lead the £26million Rural Economy and Land Use Programme (Relu), funded by three Research Councils, the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Scottish Government. The Directorship allowed Lowe and Phillipson to experiment with innovative processes for the conduct of research in 94 projects funded under the programme, in particular through instigating ideas of interdisciplinarity and co-production, and to develop techniques for assessing the efficacy of such methods. The insights gained from this effort have had significant and widespread impact on science policy and on organisations responses to environmental challenges such as government departments and agencies (DEFRA, Scottish Office and Food Standards Agency, for example), PLCs (including Wessex Water and M&S), environmental Trusts and more.