Integrating the management of socio-ethical factors into industry innovation: towards a concept of Open Innovation 2.0
In: International Food and Agribusiness Management ReviewSearch for other papers by Thomas B. Long in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Vincent Blok in
Current site
Google Scholar
To create a sustainable future, innovations are needed that integrate socio-ethical issues. Responsible innovation provides a method for managing these issues, and tries to ensure that innovation is conducted for and with society. The application of responsible innovation in industry contexts, where many of these innovations are developed, is limited by challenges related to dominant business logics, stakeholder management problems and resource constraints. Open innovation is an approach more commonly employed within industry contexts, which involves activities that overlap with responsible innovation dimensions and practices. This means that open innovation could represent a way to integrate the management of socio-ethical factors into industry contexts in a less disruptive and costly way. This paper explores the extent to which open innovation and responsible innovation overlap and could be compatible. Both open innovation and responsible innovation are reviewed theoretically before an empirical enquiry is launched through semi-structured interviews (n=11) with entrepreneurs developing innovations in the context of climate-smart agriculture in Europe. We find evidence for compatibility between exploratory open innovation activities and dimensions of responsible innovation. Results indicate that the management of socio-ethical issues through open innovation requires sensitivity to ethical issues and a motivation to include ethical considerations strategically in innovation processes. These findings are incorporated into a provisional extended open innovation model for the management of socio-ethical in industry contexts – an Open Innovation 2.0.
-
Asante, K., R. Owen and G. Williamson. 2014. Governance of new product development and perceptions of responsible innovation in the financial sector: insights from an ethnographic case study. Journal of Responsible Innovation 1(1): 9-30.
'Governance of new product development and perceptions of responsible innovation in the financial sector: insights from an ethnographic case study ' () 1 Journal of Responsible Innovation : 9 -30.
-
Berker, T. 2010. Dealing with uncertainty in sustainable innovation: mainstreaming and substitution. International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development 5(1): 65-79.
'Dealing with uncertainty in sustainable innovation: mainstreaming and substitution ' () 5 International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development : 65 -79.
-
Bessant, J. 2013.Innovation in the twenty-first century. In: Responsible innovation, edited by R. Owen, J. Bessant and M. Heintz. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken NJ, USA, pp. 1-25.
'Innovation in the twenty-first century ', in Responsible innovation , () 1 -25.
-
Blok, V., L. Hoffmans and E. Wubben. 2015. Stakeholder engagement for responsible innovation in the private sector: critical issues and management practices. Journal of Chain and Network Science 15(2): 147-164.
'Stakeholder engagement for responsible innovation in the private sector: critical issues and management practices ' () 15 Journal of Chain and Network Science : 147 -164.
-
Blok, V. and P. Lemmens. 2015. The emerging concept of responsible innovation: three reasons why it is questionable and calls for a radical transformation of the concept of innovation. In: Responsible innovation: issues in conceptualization, governance and implementation, edited by E.J. Koops, J. van den Hoven, H.A. Romijn, T.E. Swierstra and I. Oosterlaken. Springer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
'The emerging concept of responsible innovation: three reasons why it is questionable and calls for a radical transformation of the concept of innovation ' () Responsible innovation: issues in conceptualization, governance and implementation .
-
Bos, J. and G. Munnichs. 2016. Digitalisering van dieren: verkenning precision livestock farming, edited by R. Instituut. Rathenau Instituut, Den Haag, the Netherlands.
'Digitalisering van dieren: verkenning precision livestock farming' () .
-
Burget, M., E. Bardone and M. Pedaste. 2017. Definitions and conceptual dimensions of responsible research and innovation: a literature review. Science and Engineering Ethics 23: 1-19.
'Definitions and conceptual dimensions of responsible research and innovation: a literature review ' () 23 Science and Engineering Ethics : 1 -19.
-
Carbonell, I.M. 2016. The ethics of big data in big agriculture. Internet Policy Review 5(1).
'The ethics of big data in big agriculture ' () Internet Policy Review .
-
Chatfield, K., K. Iatridis, B.C. Stahl and N. Paspallis. 2017. Innovating responsibly in ICT for ageing: drivers, obstacles and implementation. Sustainability 9(6): 971.
'Innovating responsibly in ICT for ageing: drivers, obstacles and implementation ' () 9 Sustainability : 971 .
-
Chesbrough, H. and S. Brunswicker. 2013. Managing open innovation in large firms. Fraunhofer Verlag, Berkeley, CA, USA.
() Managing open innovation in large firms .
-
Chesbrough, H. and A.K. Crowther. 2006. Beyond high tech: early adopters of open innovation in other industries. R&D Management 36(3): 229-236.
'Beyond high tech: early adopters of open innovation in other industries ' () 36 R&D Management : 229 -236.
-
Chesbrough, H., W. Vanhaverbeke and J. West. 2006. Open innovation: researching a new paradigm. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Open innovation: researching a new paradigm , ().
-
Creswell, J.W. 2012. Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches: Sage publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
() Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches .
-
Dahlander, L. and D.M. Gann. 2010. How open is innovation?’ Research Policy 39(6): 699-709.
'How open is innovation?’ ' () 39 Research Policy : 699 -709.
-
Dearing, A. 2000. Sustainable innovation: drivers and barriers. Innovation and the Environment. OECD, Paris, France, pp. 103-125.
'Sustainable innovation: drivers and barriers ', in Innovation and the Environment , () 103 -125.
-
Dossa, Z. and K. Kaeufer. 2014. Understanding sustainability innovations through positive ethical networks. Journal of Business Ethics 119(4): 543-559.
'Understanding sustainability innovations through positive ethical networks ' () 119 Journal of Business Ethics : 543 -559.
-
Enkel, E., O. Gassmann and H. Chesbrough. 2009. Open R&D and open innovation: exploring the phenomenon. R&D Management 39(4): 311-316.
'Open R&D and open innovation: exploring the phenomenon ' () 39 R&D Management : 311 -316.
-
FAO. 2001. Ethical issues in food and agriculture. In: FAO ethics series. Food and Agricultural Organisation, Rome, Italy.
'Ethical issues in food and agriculture ' () FAO ethics series .
-
FAO. 2010. ‘Climate-smart’ agriculture: policies, practices and financing for food security, adaptation and mitigation. Food and Agricultural Organisation, Rome, Italy.
'‘Climate-smart’ agriculture: policies, practices and financing for food security, adaptation and mitigation' () .
-
Franke, N., P. Keinz and K. Klausberger. 2013. Does this sound like a fair deal?: antecedents and consequences of fairness expectations in the individual’s decision to participate in firm innovation. Organization Science 24(5): 1495-1516.
'Does this sound like a fair deal?: antecedents and consequences of fairness expectations in the individual’s decision to participate in firm innovation ' () 24 Organization Science : 1495 -1516.
-
Fredberg, T., M. Elmquist and S. Ollila. 2008. Managing open innovation – present findings and future directions. In: VINNOVA report VR (2008:02). Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems and Chalmers University of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden.
'Managing open innovation – present findings and future directions ', in VINNOVA report VR (2008:02) , ().
-
Füller, J., K. Hutter and M. Fries. 2012. Crowdsourcing for goodness sake: impact of incentive preference on contribution behavior for social innovation. In: Interdisciplinary approaches to product design, innovation, branding in international marketing, edited by K.S. Swan and S. Zou. Emerald Group Publishing Ltd., Bingley, UK, pp. 137-159.
'Crowdsourcing for goodness sake: impact of incentive preference on contribution behavior for social innovation ', in Interdisciplinary approaches to product design, innovation, branding in international marketing , () 137 -159.
-
Gassmann, O. 2006. Opening up the innovation process: towards an agenda. R&D Management 36(3): 223-228.
'Opening up the innovation process: towards an agenda ' () 36 R&D Management : 223 -228.
-
Gianni, R., P. Goujon, B. Reber and V. Ikonen. 2016. Development of a model of responsible innovation in research. In: Governance of responsible innovation GREAT. Governance for Responsible Innovation (GREAT) Project, Brussels, Belgium.
'Development of a model of responsible innovation in research ' () Governance of responsible innovation GREAT .
-
Gilgun, J.F. 2015. Deductive qualitative analysis as middle ground: theory-guided qualitative research. Amazon Digital Services LLC, Seattle, WA, USA.
'Deductive qualitative analysis as middle ground: theory-guided qualitative research' () .
-
Gillund, F., K. Millar, A. Utskarpen and A. Myhr. 2015. Examining the social and ethical issues raised by possible cultivation of genetically modified potato with late blight resistance in Norway. In Biosafety Report 2015/04, GenØk. Centre for Biosafety. Tromsø, Norway.
'Examining the social and ethical issues raised by possible cultivation of genetically modified potato with late blight resistance in Norway ' () Biosafety Report 2015/04, GenØk .
-
Gould, R. 2012. Open innovation and stakeholder engagement. Journal of technology management and innovation 7(3): 1-11.
'Open innovation and stakeholder engagement ' () 7 Journal of technology management and innovation : 1 -11.
-
Gray, A.W. and M.D. Boehlje. 2007. The industrialization of agriculture: implications for future policy. Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, Working Paper #07-10. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
'The industrialization of agriculture: implications for future policy' () .
-
Groves, C. 2006. Technological futures and non-reciprocal responsibility. The international journal of the humanities 4(2): 57-61.
'Technological futures and non-reciprocal responsibility ' () 4 The international journal of the humanities : 57 -61.
-
Hacking, I. 1983. Culpable ignorance of interference effects: Center for Philosophy and Public Policy, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA.
() Culpable ignorance of interference effects .
-
Huizingh, E.K.R.E. 2011. Open innovation: state of the art and future perspectives. Technovation 31(1): 2-9.
'Open innovation: state of the art and future perspectives ' () 31 Technovation : 2 -9.
-
Husted, B.W. and J. De Jesus Salazar. 2006. Taking Friedman seriously: maximizing profits and social performance. Journal of Management Studies 43(1): 75-91.
'Taking Friedman seriously: maximizing profits and social performance ' () 43 Journal of Management Studies : 75 -91.
-
Karim Network. 2015. Responsible innovation: a key driver for SME competitiveness and sustainable regional growth. Europe Karim Network Project, Brussels, Belgium. Available at: http://www.karimnetwork.com/responsible-innovation.
-
Lenssen, G., W. Gasparski, B. Rok, P. Lacy, S. Ayuso, M. Ángel Rodríguez and J. Enric Ricart. 2006. Using stakeholder dialogue as a source for new ideas: a dynamic capability underlying sustainable innovation. Corporate Governance 6(4): 475-490.
'Using stakeholder dialogue as a source for new ideas: a dynamic capability underlying sustainable innovation ' () 6 Corporate Governance : 475 -490.
-
Lubberink, R., V. Blok, J. van Ophem, and O. Omta. 2017. Lessons for responsible innovation in the business context: a systematic literature review of responsible-, social- and sustainable innovation practices. Sustainability 9: 1-31.
'Lessons for responsible innovation in the business context: a systematic literature review of responsible-, social- and sustainable innovation practices ' () 9 Sustainability : 1 -31.
-
Mays, N. and C. Pope. 2000. Assessing quality in qualitative research. British Medical Journal 320(7226): 50.
'Assessing quality in qualitative research ' () 320 British Medical Journal : 50 .
-
Mietzsch, E., D. Martini, W. Graf, K. Viola, T. Flörchinger, N. Hüther, E. Schulz, L. Pesonen, A. Kaloxylos, P. Magdalino, H. Koskinen, L. Norros, M. Koistinen, E. Antoniou, Z. Politopou-lou and C. Maestre. 2012. Smart farming: final assessment report. In: Smart food and agribusiness: future internet for safe and healthy food from farm to fork. Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/ydcb7k3d.
-
O’Reilly, K., D. Paper and S. Marx. 2012. Demystifying grounded theory for business research. Organizational Research Methods 15(2).
'Demystifying grounded theory for business research ' () Organizational Research Methods .
-
Owen, R., J. Stilgoe, P. Macnaghten, M. Gorman, E. Fisher and D. Guston. 2013. A framework for responsible innovation. In: Responsible innovation. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken NJ, USA, pp. 27-50.
'A framework for responsible innovation ', in Responsible innovation , () 27 -50.
-
Paarlberg, R. 2009. The ethics of modern agriculture. Society 46(1): 4-8.
'The ethics of modern agriculture ' () 46 Society : 4 -8.
-
PRISMA. 2016. About us. RRI PRISMA. Available at: http://www.rri-prisma.eu/about-us.
-
Rennings, K. 2000. Redefining innovation – eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics. Ecological Economics 32(2): 319-332.
'Redefining innovation – eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics ' () 32 Ecological Economics : 319 -332.
-
Responsible-Industry. 2014. Welcome – Responsible research and innovation in business and industry in the domain of ICT for health, demographic change and wellbeing. Responsible-Industry project. Available at: http://www.responsible-industry.eu.
-
Rohrbeck, R., L. Konnertz and S. Knab. 2013. Collaborative business modelling for systemic and sustainability innovations. International Journal of Technology Management 63(1-2): 4-23.
'Collaborative business modelling for systemic and sustainability innovations ' () 63 International Journal of Technology Management : 4 -23.
-
Scholten, V. and V. Blok. 2015. Responsible innovation in the private sector. Journal on Chain and Network Science 15: 101-105.
'Responsible innovation in the private sector ' () 15 Journal on Chain and Network Science : 101 -105.
-
Sheldon, I.M. 2002. Regulation of biotechnology: will we ever ‘freely’ trade GMOs? European Review of Agricultural Economics 29(1): 155-176.
'Regulation of biotechnology: will we ever ‘freely’ trade GMOs? ' () 29 European Review of Agricultural Economics : 155 -176.
-
Sonck, M., L. Asveld, L. Landeweerd and P. Osseweijer. 2017. ‘Creative tensions: mutual responsiveness adapted to private sector research and development. Life Sciences, Society and Policy 13(1): 14.
'‘Creative tensions: mutual responsiveness adapted to private sector research and development ' () 13 Life Sciences, Society and Policy : 14 .
-
Stahl, B.C., M. Obach, E. Yaghmaei, V. Ikonen, K. Chatfield and A. Brem. 2017. The responsible research and innovation (RRI) maturity model: linking theory and practice. Sustainability 9(6): 1036.
'The responsible research and innovation (RRI) maturity model: linking theory and practice ' () 9 Sustainability : 1036 .
-
Stilgoe, J., R. Owen and P. Macnaghten. 2013. Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy 42(9): 1568-1580.
'Developing a framework for responsible innovation ' () 42 Research Policy : 1568 -1580.
-
Sutcliffe, H. 2011. A report on responsible research and innovation. MATTER and the European Commission. Brussels, Belgium. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/yblxvgdj.
-
Tardy, O. 2009. Role of innovation in sustainable growth. In: OECD forum 2009: the crisis and beyond. OECD, Paris, France.
'Role of innovation in sustainable growth ' () OECD forum 2009: the crisis and beyond .
-
Trott, P. and D. Hartmann. 2009. Why ‘open innovation’ is old wine in new bottles. International Journal of Innovation Management 13(4): 715-736.
'Why ‘open innovation’ is old wine in new bottles ' () 13 International Journal of Innovation Management : 715 -736.
-
Van de Vrande, V., J.P.J. de Jong, W. Vanhaverbeke and M. de Rochemont. 2009. Open innovation in SMEs: trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation 29 (6-7): 423-437.
'Open innovation in SMEs: trends, motives and management challenges ' () 29 Technovation : 423 -437.
-
Van den Hoven, J., G.-J. Lokhorst and I. van de Poel. 2012. Engineering and the problem of moral overload. Science and Engineering Ethics 18(1): 143-155.
'Engineering and the problem of moral overload ' () 18 Science and Engineering Ethics : 143 -155.
-
Von Schomberg, R. 2011. Prospects for technology assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation. In: Technikfolgen abschätzen lehren, edited by M. Dusseldorp and R. Beecroft. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, Germany.
'Prospects for technology assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation ' () Technikfolgen abschätzen lehren .
-
Von Schomberg, R. 2013. A vision of responsible research and innovation. In: Responsible Innovation, edited by R. Owen, J. Bessant and M. Heintz. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, USA, pp. 51-74.
'A vision of responsible research and innovation ', in Responsible Innovation , () 51 -74.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Full Text Views | 665 | 263 | 28 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 442 | 181 | 20 |
Integrating the management of socio-ethical factors into industry innovation: towards a concept of Open Innovation 2.0
In: International Food and Agribusiness Management ReviewSearch for other papers by Thomas B. Long in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Vincent Blok in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
To create a sustainable future, innovations are needed that integrate socio-ethical issues. Responsible innovation provides a method for managing these issues, and tries to ensure that innovation is conducted for and with society. The application of responsible innovation in industry contexts, where many of these innovations are developed, is limited by challenges related to dominant business logics, stakeholder management problems and resource constraints. Open innovation is an approach more commonly employed within industry contexts, which involves activities that overlap with responsible innovation dimensions and practices. This means that open innovation could represent a way to integrate the management of socio-ethical factors into industry contexts in a less disruptive and costly way. This paper explores the extent to which open innovation and responsible innovation overlap and could be compatible. Both open innovation and responsible innovation are reviewed theoretically before an empirical enquiry is launched through semi-structured interviews (n=11) with entrepreneurs developing innovations in the context of climate-smart agriculture in Europe. We find evidence for compatibility between exploratory open innovation activities and dimensions of responsible innovation. Results indicate that the management of socio-ethical issues through open innovation requires sensitivity to ethical issues and a motivation to include ethical considerations strategically in innovation processes. These findings are incorporated into a provisional extended open innovation model for the management of socio-ethical in industry contexts – an Open Innovation 2.0.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Full Text Views | 665 | 263 | 28 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 442 | 181 | 20 |
