Lisa Häberlein

This document provides you with methodological guidance on how to design ethical governance activities in the context of strategic development in Higher Education, Funding and Research Centres (HEFRCs) wishing to implement an ETHNA System. The guide outlines a set of options and vivid examples for conducting deliberative workshops with key actors in your organisation, e.g., actors from civil society, research, innovation and funding communities, business and industry or policy makers. By engaging stakeholders in deliberative participation at an early stage, you can effectively identify, discuss and take into account societal values, needs and expectations related to the RRI activity you plan to undertake. This guide will help you learn more about methods and techniques to promote dialogical learning and deliberation in stakeholder workshops. Both dialogical learning and deliberation are key pathways to engage stakeholders in the ethical governance of R&I.

Trust in science post-Covid appears to be a complex matter. On the one hand, the COVID-19 pandemic added value to the epistemic trustworthiness of scientific opinion and its potential to drive evidence-based policies, while it also spurred scientific distrust and societal polarization (e.g., vaccines), especially on social media. In this work we sought to understand the ways in which trust in science might be bolstered by adopting a multistakeholder perspective. This objective was achieved by considering stakeholders’ views on (a) how perceived key actors affect trust in science, and (b) what proposed actions can be taken by each actor identified. Data were collected using 16 focus groups and 10 individual interviews across different European contexts with general public (n = 66), journalists (n = 23) and scientists (n = 35), and were analysed using thematic analysis. Regarding how perceived key actors affect trust in science, participants viewed policymakers, media, scientific and social media actors as occupying a dual function (facilitators and hinderers of trust in science), and pointed to the value of multi-actor collaboration. Regarding what actions should be taken for enhancing trust in science, participants indicated the value of enhancing understanding of scientific integrity and practices, through science literacy and science communication, and also pointed to social media platform regulation. Implications stemming from the data are discussed, considering how multiple identified stewards of trust can contribute to an ecosystem of trust.

This guide enables Higher Education, Funding and Research Centres (HEFRCs) to explore possible stakeholder engagement strategies that can help to encourage sustainable research and innovation (R&I) practices. It can serve as a concrete roadmap for engaging stakeholders from a wide range of societal groups who are willing to participate in a dialogue on ethical governance. The stakeholder mapping guide aims to enhance the positive impact of implementing an ETHNA System by developing a governance structure that promotes more responsible research and innovation (RRI) based on citizen and community discourse. Using this guide can thus contribute to ensure that research is more responsive to society‘s needs, values, and expectations

In this volume thirteen essays highlight the subject of human rights from different points of view. The guiding questions include the following: Can feminists and gender researchers ground their commitment to greater gender justice in human rights? Is there a single concept of human rights? Do human rights include individual rights or group rights? Are the demands of human rights addressed to institutions or to individuals? Is there an intrinsic moment of Eurocentrism within human rights? Are human rights a moral or legal measure, or somewhere in between? Who is recognized as a human being?

This document is an up-to-date map on curricula in which research integrity (RI) or research ethics (RE) is currently included. It contains a collection of curricula in which RI/RE or associated fields are mentioned from the Path2Integrity partner countries Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany, Poland and Spain. Moving forward, the Path2Integrity training programme for educators will develop research integrity courses for trainers using this map as a reference. In this way, the project aims to support educators in closing possible gaps. At a broader level, Path2Integrity is involved in discourse with various stakeholders to establish a board of educational policymakers and stakeholders comprised of members from at least eight different countries to foster RI and parts of RI in European curricula.