The Boundaries of Scientific Innovation in the EU Green Deal Context

[1] Nikas A., et al. Perspective of comprehensive and comprehensible multi-model energy and climate science in Europe. Energy 2021:215:119153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.11915310.1016/j.energy.2020.119153 Search in Google Scholar

[2] Stirling A. Opening up and closing down: power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science Technology & Human Values 2008:33:262–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224390731126510.1177/0162243907311265 Search in Google Scholar

[3] Davies D., et al. Creative learning environments in education-A systematic literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity 2012:8:80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2012.07.00410.1016/j.tsc.2012.07.004 Search in Google Scholar

[4] Gough D., Oliver S., Thomas J. An introduction to systematic reviews (2^nd ed.). London: Sage, 2017.10.53841/bpsptr.2017.23.2.95 Search in Google Scholar

[5] Bhattacherjee A. Social science research: Principles, methods, and practices. Textbooks collection 3 (2^nd ed.). Tampa: University of South Florida, 2012. Search in Google Scholar

[6] Sharif B. The relations between acculturation and creativity and innovation in higher education: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review 2019:28:100287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.10028710.1016/j.edurev.2019.100287 Search in Google Scholar

[7] Goldfarb S., Marcellonib C., Shaw K. Innovating science communication: the structure supporting ATLAS Education & Outreach. Nuclear and Particle Physics Proceedings 2016:273–275:1276–1283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2015.09.20410.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2015.09.204 Search in Google Scholar

[8] Bloomfield J., Steward F. The Politics of the Green New Deal. The Political Quarterly 2020:91(4):770–779. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.1291710.1111/1467-923X.12917 Search in Google Scholar

[9] Linnér B. O., Wibeck V. Conceptualising variations in societal transformations towards sustainability. Environmental Science and Policy 2020:106:221–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.01.00710.1016/j.envsci.2020.01.007 Search in Google Scholar

[10] Skjærseth J. B. Towards a European Green Deal: The evolution of EU climate and energy policy mixes. International Environmental Agreements 2021:21:25–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-021-09529-410.1007/s10784-021-09529-4 Search in Google Scholar

[11] Stilgoea J., Owen R., Macnaghten P. Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy 2013:42(9):1568–1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.00810.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008 Search in Google Scholar

[12] Landeweerd L., et al. Reflections on different governance styles in regulating science: a contribution to ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’. Life Sciences, Society and Policy 2015:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-015-0026-y10.1186/s40504-015-0026-y453111626260065 Search in Google Scholar

[13] Owen R., et al. A Framework for Responsible Innovation. Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society. Chichester: Wiley, 2013:27–50.10.1002/9781118551424.ch2 Search in Google Scholar

[14] Lacey J., Coates R., Herington M. Open science for responsible innovation in Australia: understanding the expectations and priorities of scientists and researchers. Journal of Responsible Innovation 2020:7(3):427–449.10.1080/23299460.2020.1800969 Search in Google Scholar

[15] Ravetz J. The science of ‘what-if?’ Futures 1997:29:533–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2020.180096910.1080/23299460.2020.1800969 Search in Google Scholar

[16] Borup M., et al. The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 2006:18:285–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/0953732060077700210.1080/09537320600777002 Search in Google Scholar

[17] Swierstra T., Rip A. Nano-ethics as NEST-ethics: patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology. NanoEthics 2007:3:3–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-007-0005-810.1007/s11569-007-0005-8 Search in Google Scholar

[18] Lövbrand E., Pielke R., Beck S. A democracy paradox in studies of science and technology. Science, Technology & Human Values 2011:36:474–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/016224391036615410.1177/0162243910366154 Search in Google Scholar

[19] Rose N. Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.10.1017/CBO9780511488856 Search in Google Scholar

[20] Wilsdon J., Willis R. See-Through Science. Demos, London: Demos, 2004. Search in Google Scholar

[21] Jasanoff S. Technologies of humility: citizen participation in governing science. Minerva 2003:41:223–244. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:102555751232010.1023/A:1025557512320 Search in Google Scholar

[22] van Oudheusden M. Questioning ‘participation’: a critical appraisal of its conceptualization in a Flemish participatory technology assessment. Science and Engineering Ethics 2011:17:673–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9313-z10.1007/s11948-011-9313-z21952725 Search in Google Scholar

[23] Gillard R., et al. Transformational responses to climate change: beyond a systems perspective of social change in mitigation and adaptation. WIREs Clim. Change 2016:7:251–265. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.38410.1002/wcc.384 Search in Google Scholar

[24] Pacala S., Socolow R. Stabilization wedges: solving the climate problem for the next 50 years with current technologies. Planning for Climate Change: A Reader in Green Infrastructure and Sustainable Design for Resilient Cities. Oxfordshire: Tayler and Francis, 2018:55–61.10.4324/9781351201117-8 Search in Google Scholar

[25] Turekian V. The Evolution of Science Diplomacy. Global Policy 2018:9(3):5–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.1262210.1111/1758-5899.12622 Search in Google Scholar

[26] Özkaragöz D. E., Uygun Z, Akçomak I. S. Can science diplomacy address the global climate change challenge? Environmental Policy and Government 2021:31:31–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.191110.1002/eet.1911 Search in Google Scholar

[27] Hornsby D. J., Parshotam A. Science diplomacy, epistemic communities, and practice in sub-Saharan Africa. Global Policy 2018:9(3):29–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.1256510.1111/1758-5899.12565 Search in Google Scholar

[28] Goodsite M. E., et al. The role of science diplomacy: A historical development and international legal framework of arctic research stations under conditions of climate change, post-cold war geopolitics and globalization/power transition. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences 2016:6(4):645–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0329-610.1007/s13412-015-0329-6 Search in Google Scholar

[29] Davis L. S., Patman, R. G. New day or false Dawn? Science diplomacy – New day or false Dawn? Singapore: World Scientific Publishing, 2015:261–275.10.1142/9789814440073_0014 Search in Google Scholar

[30] The Royal Society. New frontiers in science diplomacy: Navigating the changing balance of power. London: The Royal Society, 2010. Search in Google Scholar

[31] Copeland D. Science Diplomacy. The Sage Handbook of Diplomacy. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2016:628–641.10.4135/9781473957930.n52 Search in Google Scholar

[32] Hölscher J. K., Wittmayer J. M., Loorbach D. Transition versus transformation: What’s the difference? Environ. Innovation Societal Transitions 2018:27:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.10.00710.1016/j.eist.2017.10.007 Search in Google Scholar

[33] Hone K. E., Kurbalija J. Accelerating Basic Science in an Intergovernmental Framework: Learning from CERN’s Science Diplomacy. Global Policy 2018:9(3):67–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.1258910.1111/1758-5899.12589 Search in Google Scholar

[34] Lalli R. (2021) Crafting Europe from CERN to Dubna: Physics as diplomacy in the foundation of the European Physical Society. Centaurus 2021:63:103–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/1600-0498.1230410.1111/1600-0498.12304 Search in Google Scholar

[35] Quevedo F. Science and Diplomacy. The Importance of International Research Institutions for Science Diplomacy. 2013 [Online]. [Accessed dd.mm.yyyy]. Available: https://www.sciencediplomacy.org/perspective/2013/importance-international-research-institutions-for-science-diplomacy Search in Google Scholar

[36] Ruffini P.-B. Science and Diplomacy. A New Dimension of International Relations. New York: Springer, 2017. Search in Google Scholar

[37] Stein J. A. Science, Technology and European Foreign Policy: European Integration, Global Interaction. Science and Public Policy 2002:29(6):463–477. https://doi.org/10.3152/14715430278178078710.3152/147154302781780787 Search in Google Scholar

[38] Robinson M. The CERN Community; A Mechanism for Effective Global Collaboration? Global Policy 2019:10(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.1260810.1111/1758-5899.12608 Search in Google Scholar

[39] Lami S. Science & Diplomacy. Challenges and New Requirements for International Collaborations. 2017 [Online]. [Accessed 15.04.2021]. Available: https://www.sciencediplomacy.org/article/2017/mega-science-collaborations Search in Google Scholar

[40] Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences (2013) The Nobel Prize in Physics 2013 Search in Google Scholar

[41] Palmer S. E., Schibeci R. A. What Conceptions of Science Communication are Espoused by Science Research Funding Bodies? Public Understanding of Science 2014:23:511–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/096366251245529510.1177/096366251245529525414920 Search in Google Scholar

[42] CERN. CERN Annual Report 2017. Geneva: CERN, 2018. Search in Google Scholar

[43] CERN. CERN Annual Report 2019. Geneva: CERN, 2019. Search in Google Scholar

[44] CERN. CERN Environmental Report 2017–2018. Geneva: CERN, 2019. Search in Google Scholar