Comparar métodos
Revisa los métodos seleccionados uno junto a otro; las filas que difieren aparecen resaltadas.
| Anticipatory Governance Analysis× | Responsible Research and Innovation Assessment× | |
|---|---|---|
| Campo | Science Technology Studies | Science Technology Studies |
| Familia | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Año de origen≠ | 2008 | 2013 |
| Autor original≠ | David H. Guston, Daniel Barben, Erik Fisher, Cynthia Selin | Jack Stilgoe, Richard Owen, Phil Macnaghten |
| Tipo≠ | Governance framework and analytic approach for emerging technologies | Normative governance and reflexive-assessment process |
| Fuente seminal≠ | Guston, D. H. (2014). Understanding 'anticipatory governance'. Social Studies of Science, 44(2), 218-242. DOI ↗ | Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568-1580. DOI ↗ |
| Alias | Anticipatory governance framework, Foresight-engagement-integration analysis, Reflexive technology governance | RRI assessment, Responsible innovation framework, AIRR assessment |
| Relacionados | 4 | 4 |
| Resumen≠ | Anticipatory governance is a framework for steering emerging technologies—nanotechnology, synthetic biology, AI—while their trajectories are still open, rather than waiting to react to harms after they have hardened. Developed by David Guston and colleagues at the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University, it defines anticipatory governance as a broad societal capacity, distributed across the research enterprise and the public, built from three intertwined components: foresight, public engagement, and integration. The aim is not to predict the future but to build the reflexive capacity to imagine plausible futures and act on them wisely in the present. | Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) assessment is an approach to governing science and innovation that asks not only whether a technology works but whether it is desirable, and seeks to align research and innovation with the values, needs, and expectations of society. The influential Stilgoe-Owen-Macnaghten framework operationalises this through four dimensions—anticipation, reflexivity, inclusion, and responsiveness (AIRR)—that are built into the innovation process so that direction and purpose, not just risk and product, become objects of deliberate care. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de datos ↗ |
|
|