Responsible research and innovation (RRI) has emerged in recent years, especially in Europe, as a science policy framework that (a) seeks to align technological innovation with broader social values and (b) supports institutional decisions concerning the goals and trajectories of research and innovation under conditions of uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance. Rather than relying simply on consumer choice and market mechanisms on the one hand, or risk-based regulation on the other, RRI seeks to determine what constitute the goals, purposes and trajectories of (and alternatives to) technoscience and innovation, and thus the directions towards which these should be oriented, suggesting that these should be underpinned by shared public values. In addition to this overall philosophy of RRI, the European Commission has focused on five constituent policy keys (sometimes called pillars) of RRI that have their historical roots in the Science-in-Society programme; namely societal engagement, gender in research, open access, science education, and ethics. Action on these keys is seen as integral to an RRI approach and to Europe’s ability to respond to societal challenges. A further issue in the European context concerns how to ‘federate’ the RRI community in the EU and promote institutional changes to foster RRI in research institutions (a topic addressed at the European Commission RRI conference in Rome November 2014). This implies engaging stakeholders, research organisations, universities, funding agencies and public authorities in RRI. Some European research conducting and research funding organisations have begun to make formal policy commitments to RRI; others have developed RRI programmes and others still have embedded explicit RRI elements within broader programmes of emerging technologies and innovation. The European Commission’s ‘open to the world’ agenda implies involving non-European countries in the RRI discourse. However, beyond Europe, in emerging economies in the Global South (Brazil, India and China) and also in some advanced economies (Japan, Australia), there is little awareness of the concept of RRI, although some elements of the EC’s constituent keys have been taken up as thematic priorities by national research organisations. Considerable work needs to be done before RRI is recognised as a concept that offers traction in non-European contexts and research initiatives. There is a dearth of research that has assessed the challenges, efficacy and impact of the ongoing programmes on RRI, partly due to a lack of standardised methodologies that would be required to produce comparative results, and partly because these initiatives are themselves quite new. The project Responsible Research and Innovation in Practice (RRI-Practice), funded by the European Commission Horizon 2020 Science-with-and-for-Society programme (grant no 709 637), is an attempt to respond to this situation. The RRI-Practice project intends to advance European and global awareness of RRI, support its implementation in practice and provide a solid empirical knowledge base on RRI implementation. The main aim of RRI-Practice is to analyse RRI related discourses and pathways to implementation, including barriers and drivers, in a number of research conducting and research funding organisations worldwide, in order to identify, understand, disseminate and promote RRI implementation best practices that can be scaled up at European and global levels. The project started September 2016 and has so far concentrated on mapping the national RRI discourse in the 12 partner countries. As part of this work, national workshops have been held. This paper will present the analytic concept of the project and the results from the workshops, and will reflect on challenges identified in the work so far.

In the German S&T community, the term RRI is virtually unknown although its constituent parts (inclusion, reflection, transparency and anticipation) are widely discussed as part of the debate on sustainability. Responsibility in the German S&T context has a particular meaning that is based on research integrity issues and is related to the prevailing idea of the autonomy of science. Institutional arrangements in the country are independent and a top-down approach in conceptual implementation is not the norm. In addition, the implementation of RRI in research practices is facing considerable challenges as there is a conflict between the increasing application of quantitative standards in research evaluation processes and the mainly qualitatively assessed inclusion of various stakeholders in the research process. In order to correctly develop the implementation of RRI in research processes, one must reassess the current research evaluation criteria and initiate change at the level of peer groups.

Background: Public trust is crucial during health crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, for the effective implementation of scientific and policy interventions. This study investigates factors contributing to the decline in trust in the health sector within the European Union during the pandemic. Methods: Using the publicly available 2020–2022 Standard Eurobarometer dataset, we employed a "geography of trust" approach. We applied equal quantile mapping to visualise high and low trust countries and Local Spatial Autocorrelation (LISA) to identify statistically significant clusters. Using a series of one-way ANOVA, we found associations between socio-economic and other variables available in the same dataset with trust. Results: Trust in health institutions and medical staff declined in 20 of 27 EU countries from 2020 to 2022. Clear geographical clusters of Western and Central Europe as the high-trust countries and Eastern Europe as the low-trust countries emerged through mapping. One-way ANOVA revealed that contrary to several studies, age, gender, and most demographics did not vary with trust, but trust was directly associated with the satisfaction with measures taken to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, and individual perceptions about their life and national affairs (p < 0.001). Conclusion: High-trust Western European countries share characteristics in health systems, governance, and pandemic responses. Understanding this interplay could inform trust-building strategies. The persistent low trust in Eastern Europe may stem from slow government responses and requires nuanced approaches considering unique contexts. The decline in traditionally high-trust countries highlights challenges even in established social contexts. This study provides valuable insights for policymakers aiming to foster trust during health crises.

Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has emerged as a science policy framework that attempts to import broad social values into technological innovation processes whilst supporting institutional decision-making under conditions of uncertainty and ambiguity. When looking at RRI from a ‘principled’ perspective, we consider responsibility and justice to be important cornerstones of the framework. The main aim of this article is to suggest a method of realising these principles through the application of a limited Rawlsian Difference Principle in the distribution of public funds for research and innovation.