ABSTRACT

Despite reflexivity being held up as a core pillar of Responsible Research and Innovation (R(R)I), actors in the field have yet to consider the importance of R(R)I's history. Acknowledging field has multiple histories, not only the ones that are told but also the ones that could be told, is necessary in order to meet the requirement of reflexivity. Inspired by the notion of ANTihistory, I therefore propose an alternative historiography. Based on ethnographic and archival research, I trace some of the interactions between early iterations of Science and Technology Studies (STS) and Technology Assessment (TA) which do not regularly feature as a part of R(R)I's established history, thereby drawing attention to potentially ‘forgotten' or ‘neglected' histories. I also propose the Appropriate Technology (AT) movement as an ‘alternative' forebear of R(R)I. I argue that the interpretative richness offered by empirical historical analysis provides insights for thinking about R(R)I’s possible future(s).

摘要

尽管反思性被认为是负责任的研究和创新 (R(R)I) 的核心支柱，但该领域的参与者尚未考虑 R(R)I 历史的重要性。承认场具有多重历史，不仅是被告知的历史，也包括可被告知的历史，这对于满足反身性的要求是必要的。因此，受到反历史概念的启发，我提出了另一种史学。基于人种学和档案研究，我追溯了科学技术研究 (STS) 和技术评估 (TA) 的早期迭代之间的一些相互作用，这些相互作用并不经常作为 R(R)I 既定历史的一部分，从而引起人们的注意可能“被遗忘”或“被忽视”的历史。我还建议将适当技术 (AT) 运动作为 R(R)I 的“替代”前身。我认为经验历史分析提供的丰富解释为思考 R(R)I 可能的未来提供了见解。