LIST OF PANELS

This panel focuses on two central themes: resilience and responsible sociotechnical innovation. Here, we understand resilience as the responsiveness of policies and the durability of solutions, especially in the face of emergency situations, such as the Covid-19 pandemic. Sociotechnical innovation should be understood as a process of change both in technological dimensions and in their relations with actors and social structures (Macnaghten et al., 2005; Lowe et al., 2008). Specific key issues (e.g., ethics, equality, governance, sustainability) and process dimensions (e.g., anticipation, reflexivity) must also be contemplated for innovations to be considered responsible.

We intend to gather studies with a primary focus on sociotechnical innovation, as a dimension to be observed, and on accountability, as a characteristic to be valued. Likewise, we seek to attract studies that evaluate more resilient policies and their potential learning for applications in future emergencies. Analyses of national and subnational experiences in formulating, implementing and evaluating the results of public policies in different contexts will be welcome, contributing to identifying social and political practices that favour the construction of a more sustainable, egalitarian and resilient political and socioeconomic agenda in the face of instabilities and different crises.

The theoretical debate is inspired by the emerging research field of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), which emerged in the past decade under the impetus of innovation studies and science and technology policymaking. RRI emphasizes participatory and inclusive approaches in developing solutions that are "ethically acceptable, sustainable, and socially desirable" in addressing major societal challenges, such as the UN Sustainable Development Goals (Von Schomberg, 2013). Four procedural requirements are emphasized by this approach: 1) anticipation of risks, impacts, and consequences of innovations; 2) reflexivity towards the value systems and social practices that govern innovation; 3) inclusive development processes; and 4) responsiveness to knowledge, outcomes, and changing contexts (Stilgoe et al., 2013).

In the context of the Covid-19 health crisis, sociotechnical innovations played a central role and, by definition, should play a similar role in future global crisis. The development of specific vaccines against the Sars-CoV-2 virus, the large-scale diffusion of distance learning methods mediated by Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), and the rapid adoption of emergency cash transfer programs through a mobile registration app are examples of the massive and everyday character of the innovations adopted. They also suggest other characteristics of this movement: the uncertainty about the effects of technology, the urgency of adopting emergency measures, the limited opportunities for inclusive deliberation, the challenge posed to previous regulatory frameworks, the narrative dispute about how to frame the whole process, the stress of decision systems to act cooperatively, among other aspects of the relationship between technology and governance involved on a global scale.

The papers that will be received by the panel will analyze sociotechnical innovations and public policy resilience, evaluated according to internationally debated criteria of responsibility and capable of generating recommendations to public managers based on the evidence and the learning from successful experiences developed.

We stress the need to combine responsibility and resilience in line with the UN Research Roadmap for the COVID-19 Recovery (United Nations, 2020). According to this framework, social cohesion and community resilience are among the five pillars to be observed in the progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals. How can access to high-quality education in schools be ensured during emergencies? How can health systems be prepared to reach critical resources when needed? Which are the most suitable governance arrangements to face future shocks? These and other similar queries are welcome in the proposed panel.

The panel also would like to foster reflections on inclusive social dialogue and responsibility as understood by the Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) approach. The Covid-19 pandemic has evidenced how sociotechnical innovation – such as a new vaccines or remote teaching and learning – tends to be particularly relevant in times of crisis. RRI advocates anticipating social gains and losses for new technologies beyond their expected market-benefits and risks. This approach complements the idea of resilience with notions of participation, equity, sustainability and good governance. How will risks and benefits of innovations be socially distributed? What are the motivations behind an innovation and how transparent are they? To what extent does it advance the public or collectively agreed upon interest? How to evaluate possible negative long-term impacts? These questions will guide the debates that will be stimulated by this panel.

Our proposal emphasizes the confluence between public policies and responsibility in sociotechnical innovations, with a special interest in governance systems, federative arrangements, evaluations of results, impacts and pilot experiences, applied to different programs or policies, which have demonstrated a good capacity to respond to emergency situations or that can prevent future crises. The panel discussion will reflect the extent to which the solutions presented contribute to increasing policy resilience, to making innovations more responsible and to achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Submissions are welcome on the following themes (but are not limited to):

• Innovations in public policies as a process of change;

• Responsible innovations according to UN SGD Goals;

• Practices of sociotechnical innovation in public institutions and organizations;

• Case studies on the resilience of public policies in emergency situations - national and/or subnational experiences.

References

Lowe, P.; Phillipson, J.; Lee, R.P. (2008). Socio-technical innovation for sustainable food chains: roles for social science. Trends in Food Science & Technololgy, 19, 226-233.

Macnaghten, P., Kearnes, M., & Wynne, B. (2005). Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: What role for the social sciences? Science Communication, 27, 1-24.

Stilgoe, J.; Owen, R. & Macnaghten, P. (2013) Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42, 1568–1580.

Von Schomberg, R. (2013). A vision of Responsible Innovation. In: Owen, R.; Bessant, J; Heintz, M. (Eds.). Responsible Innovation (pp. 51-74). London, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2013. p. 51–74.

United Nations (2020). Research Roadmap for the COVID-19 Recovery: Leveraging the Power of Science for a More Equitable, Resilient and Sustainable Future. New York: United Nations. Available at: https://www.un.org/en/pdfs/UNCOVID19ResearchRoadmap.pdf