IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i7p2811-d340319.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Universities in a Sustainable Society. Why Value-Free Research is Neither Possible nor Desirable

Author

Listed:
  • Markus Vogt

    (Chair of Christian Social Ethics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Munich (LMU), 80539 Munich, Germany)

  • Christoph Weber

    (Chair of Christian Social Ethics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Munich (LMU), 80539 Munich, Germany)

Abstract

The current climate crisis confronts us with a deep discrepancy between knowledge and action. Therefore, this article is looking for a readjustment of the relationship between science and society. The positivist self-understanding of science and its fragmented organizational form lead to a marginalization of ethical questions. Instead, sustainability calls for a re-examination of the preconditions and embedding contexts of supposedly value-free research. Faced with the increasing complexity of the modern world, ethics must spell out a new “grammar of responsibility” that addresses the prevalent “declamatory overload of responsibility”. Ethicists can fulfil this role by uncovering and regulating conflicting goals and dilemmas. Instead of playing the role of “marginal echo chambers”, universities ought to assume their social responsibility as structural policy actors. This article suggests a methodology of responsible research as a specific ethical contribution to the model of “transformative” and “catalytic” science for a “post-normal age”. True to their founding mission, academia should herald a “New Enlightenment” that is more self-reflexive regarding its own practical and ethical preconditions, foundations, and consequences. This article presents a possible practical method for fostering the dialogue between the natural sciences and the humanities and to link research, education, practice, and social communication in new ways. It is concluded that a foundation of a whole-rationality approach with a multidimensional understanding of wisdom and, respectively, rationality and sagacity is necessary for sustainable universities.

Suggested Citation

  • Markus Vogt & Christoph Weber, 2020. "The Role of Universities in a Sustainable Society. Why Value-Free Research is Neither Possible nor Desirable," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2811-:d:340319
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2811/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/7/2811/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sebastian Mehling & Nina Kolleck, 2019. "Cross-Sector Collaboration in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs): A Critical Analysis of an Urban Sustainability Development Program," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-24, September.
    2. Scott Bremer, 2013. "Mobilising high-quality knowledge through dialogic environmental governance: a comparison of approaches and their institutional settings," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 16(1/2), pages 66-90.
    3. Mittelstrass, Jürgen, 2018. "The Order of Knowledge: From Disciplinarity to Transdisciplinarity and Back," European Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(S2), pages 68-75, October.
    4. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bror Giesenbauer & Georg Müller-Christ, 2020. "University 4.0: Promoting the Transformation of Higher Education Institutions toward Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold, 2016. "Modeling the effect of responsible research and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 126-133.
    2. Anja Salzmann & Frode Guribye & Astrid Gynnild, 2021. "Mobile Journalists as Traceable Data Objects: Surveillance Capitalism and Responsible Innovation in Mobile Journalism," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 130-139.
    3. Llopis, Oscar & D'Este, Pablo & McKelvey, Maureen & Yegros, Alfredo, 2022. "Navigating multiple logics: Legitimacy and the quest for societal impact in science," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    4. Hoti, Ferdiana & Perko, Tanja & Thijssen, Peter & Renn, Ortwin, 2021. "Who is willing to participate? Examining public participation intention concerning decommissioning of nuclear power plants in Belgium," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    5. Reichelt, Nicole & Nettle, Ruth, 2023. "Practice insights for the responsible adoption of smart farming technologies using a participatory technology assessment approach: The case of virtual herding technology in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    6. Agata Gurzawska & Markus Mäkinen & Philip Brey, 2017. "Implementation of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) Practices in Industry: Providing the Right Incentives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-26, September.
    7. Justus Henke, 2019. "Third Mission as an Opportunity for Professionalization in Science Management," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-20, November.
    8. Fritz-Julius Grafe & Harald A. Mieg, 2021. "Precaution and Innovation in the Context of Wastewater Regulation: An Examination of Financial Innovation under UWWTD Disputes in London and Milan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-10, August.
    9. van Geenhuizen, Marina & Ye, Qing, 2014. "Responsible innovators: open networks on the way to sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 28-40.
    10. Thais Assis de Souza & Rodrigo Marçal Gandia & Bruna Habib Cavazza & André Grützmann & Isabelle Nicolaï, 2020. "A Conceptual Proposal for Responsible Innovation," Post-Print hal-03014720, HAL.
    11. Glover, Dominic & Poole, Nigel, 2019. "Principles of innovation to build nutrition-sensitive food systems in South Asia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 63-73.
    12. Turner, James A & Guesmi, Bouali & Gil, José M. & Heanue, Kevin & Sierra, Miguel & Percy, Helen & Bortagaray, Isabel & Chams, Nour & Milne, Cath, 2022. "Evaluation capacity building in response to the agricultural research impact agenda: Emerging insights from Ireland, Catalonia (Spain), New Zealand, and Uruguay," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    13. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2018. "Renewable energy research and technologies through responsible research and innovation looking glass: Reflexions, theoretical approaches and contemporary discourses," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 792-808.
    14. Tatiana Iakovleva & Elin Oftedal & John Bessant, 2021. "Changing Role of Users—Innovating Responsibly in Digital Health," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Sophie Pellé & Bernard Reber, 2015. "Responsible Innovation in the Light of Moral Responsibility," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01418017, HAL.
    16. Pablo Acebes & Zuriñe Iglesias-González & Francisco J. Muñoz-Galvez, 2021. "Do Traditional Livestock Systems Fit into Contemporary Landscapes? Integrating Social Perceptions and Values on Landscape Change," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, November.
    17. Woodson, Thomas S. & Hoffmann, Elina & Boutilier, Sophia, 2021. "Evaluating the NSF broader impacts with the Inclusion-Immediacy Criterion: A retrospective analysis of nanotechnology grants," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    18. Buhmann, Alexander & Fieseler, Christian, 2021. "Towards a deliberative framework for responsible innovation in artificial intelligence," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    19. Fisher, Erik, 2019. "Governing with ambivalence: The tentative origins of socio-technical integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1138-1149.
    20. Enrico Cozzoni & Carmine Passavanti & Cristina Ponsiglione & Simonetta Primario & Pierluigi Rippa, 2021. "Interorganizational Collaboration in Innovation Networks: An Agent Based Model for Responsible Research and Innovation in Additive Manufacturing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-17, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:7:p:2811-:d:340319. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.