Search

The term &ldquo, responsibility&rdquo, embodies many meanings, also in the context of corporate research and innovation (R&amp, I). The approach of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has emerged as a promoter for responsible conduct of innovation but so far lacks a systematic framework for describing, inventorying, and eventually managing different responsibilities that R&amp, I units hold in companies and further in society. In this paper we take forward the idea of developing RRI into a &ldquo, meta-responsibility&rdquo, approach, for orchestrating responsibilities in corporate R&amp, I. First, we introduce a frame for defining responsibility, which is inclusive of four elements (care, liability, accountability, and responsiveness), and is attentive to the intrinsic uncertainty of the R&amp, I setting. Drawing on empirical data from interviews, we then examine how these responsibility elements become operationalised in an actual R&amp, I project. As a result, we develop a meta-responsibility map for corporate R&amp, I, bringing various and sometimes contradicting principles, expectations and obligations under the common terminology of responsibility. We suggest that such integrative outlook on responsibilities increases theoretical solidity and practical applicability of RRI as an innovation management approach. Regarding R&amp, I practices, we conclude that the meta-responsibility map can support R&amp, I units in exploring their co-existing and sometimes conflicting responsibilities, and in managing those responsibilities in the highly uncertain R&amp, I setting. In particular, meta-responsibility shows applicability in (i) balancing risk and precaution, (ii) exposing and addressing concerns about the goals and impacts of innovation, and (iii) accelerating sectoral transition whilst securing one&rsquo, s own competitive advantage in it.

The concept of mutual responsiveness is currently based on little empirical data in the literature of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). This paper explores RRI’s idea of mutual responsiveness in the light of recent RRI case studies on private sector research and development (R&D). In RRI, responsible innovation is understood as a joint endeavour of innovators and societal stakeholders, who become mutually responsive to each other in defining the ‘right impacts’ of the innovation in society, and in steering the innovation towards realising those impacts. Yet, the case studies identified several reasons for why the idea of mutual responsiveness does not always appear feasible or desirable in actual R&D situations. Inspired by the discrepancies between theory and practice, we suggest three further elaborations for the concept of responsiveness in RRI. Process-responsiveness is suggested for identifying situations that require stakeholder involvement specifically during R&D. Product-responsiveness is suggested for mobilising the potential of innovation products to be adaptable according to diverse stakeholder needs. Presponsiveness is suggested as responsiveness towards stakeholders that are not (yet) reachable at a given time of R&D. Our aim is to contribute to a more tangible understanding of responsiveness in RRI, and suggest directions for further analysis in upcoming RRI case studies.

This study examines the energy and mass balances of algae cultivation and different post-processing pathways. Flue gases and excess heat from a combined heat and power (CHP) plant are used in algae cultivation, with nutrients from municipal wastewater. In the studied pathways, algae are cultivated in open ponds and photobioreactors with or without artificial lighting. Algal mass is used for methane, biodiesel or ethanol production, or it is combusted in a boiler. Results show that in most process pathways energy output exceeds the energy consumption in processing, and the energy returns are approximately twice as large as the electricity input. A large fraction of input energy is low-temperature heat, while the products have a higher value. Energy outputs from different pathways are similar, but heat and electricity consumption in processing vary significantly. Supercritical water gasification pathway is identified as a possible future option, whereas lipid extraction pathways are suggested to be the most likely candidates for industrial scale operations.

Lactococcus piscium is a psychrotrophic lactic acid bacterium and is known to be one of the predominant species within spoilage microbial communities in cold-stored packaged foods, particularly in meat products. Its presence in such products has been associated with the formation of buttery and sour off-odors. Nevertheless, the spoilage potential of L. piscium varies dramatically depending on the strain and growth conditions. Additional knowledge about the genome is required to explain such variation, understand its phylogeny, and study gene functions. Here, we present the complete and annotated genomic sequence of L. piscium MKFS47, combined with a time course analysis of the glucose catabolism-based transcriptome. In addition, a comparative analysis of gene contents was done for L. piscium MKFS47 and 29 other lactococci, revealing three distinct clades within the genus. The genome of L. piscium MKFS47 consists of one chromosome, carrying 2,289 genes, and two plasmids. A wide range of carbohydrates was predicted to be fermented, and growth on glycerol was observed. Both carbohydrate and glycerol catabolic pathways were significantly upregulated in the course of time as a result of glucose exhaustion. At the same time, differential expression of the pyruvate utilization pathways, implicated in the formation of spoilage substances, switched the metabolism toward a heterofermentative mode. In agreement with data from previous inoculation studies, L. piscium MKFS47 was identified as an efficient producer of buttery-odor compounds under aerobic conditions. Finally, genes and pathways that may contribute to increased survival in meat environments were considered.