While Responsible Research and Innovation has the potential for democratising the governance of research and innovation, translating it in the Global South would need dialogues and engaging with the plural knowledge systems and ongoing experiments on innovation at the margins that seek to construct alternatives. Entrenched power relations in the South do not allow for public dialogues that allows for society to engage with, if not speak back, to scientists in co-creating newer knowledge. Through the case study of the System of Rice Intensification (SRI), an agroecological innovation that arose outside the formal research establishment, we show how vulnerable farming communities can proactively co-create alternatives to existing dilemmas in Indian agriculture. Re-imaging RRI in India, we suggest, requires closer attention to the role of civil society organisations in creating innovation spaces through informal and heterogeneous networks of social learning. Networks, we suggest, allow for better expression of creative dissent that could open newer vistas and alternative framing of knowledge. The RRI agenda is thus incomplete without an engagement with the politics of knowledge, and scientific controversies reveal technological lock-ins that hinders alternative framings and pathways.

尽管负责任的研究和创新有可能使研究和创新的治理民主化，但在全球南方进行翻译将需要对话，并与多元化的知识体系和正在进行的创新实验进行接轨，以寻求替代方案。南方根深蒂固的权力关系不允许进行公开对话，以允许社会与科学家互动，甚至不回头，共同创造新知识。通过对水稻集约化系统（SRI）的案例研究，这是在正式研究机构之外进行的农业生态创新，我们展示了脆弱的农业社区如何能够主动地共同创造印度农业现有困境的替代方案。我们建议在印度重新想象RRI，需要更加关注民间社会组织在通过非正式和异构的社会学习网络创造创新空间中的作用。我们认为，网络可以更好地表达不同政见，从而可以开辟新的视野和另类的知识框架。因此，如果不参与知识政治，RRI议程将是不完整的，而科学争议则揭示了技术锁定，阻碍了另类框架和途径的发展。