The role of philanthropy in the promotion of responsible research and innovation : report of the participatory workshop held on 21-22 October 2013.
Date: 2014-10-20
Institutions: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
Subjects: EU research policy, financing method, foundation, industrial research, innovation, public financing, report, research and development, research expenditure (EU), research policy, scientific research

The role of philanthropy
in the promotion of

Responsible

Research and Innovation

Report of the participatory workshop 
held on 21-22 October 2013

Research and 
Innovation 

EUR 26543 EN

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
Directorate B – Innovation Union and European Research Area
Unit B.7 – Science with and for Society

Contact: Philippe Galiay

E-mail:  RTD-PUBLICATIONS@ec.europa.eu
            philippe.galiay@ec.europa.eu

European Commission
B-1049 Brussels

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

The role of philanthropy
in the promotion 
of Responsible Research
and Innovation

Report of the participatory workshop
held on 21-22 October 2013

Organized by the European Commission 
with the participation of the European Foundation Centre and La Caixa Foundation

Organization: Mr Philippe Galiay, European Commission, DG RTD-B6

Moderation: Ms Simone Tiesinga-Poutnik and Mr Jan Hein Nielsen

Reporting: Mr Theo Schuyt, Professor philanthropic studies, VU University Amsterdam

Hosting team: MM. Gilles Laroche (HoU), Karen Fabbri, Lino Paula, Dionysia Lagiou, DG RTD-B6

2014

Directorate-General for Research and Innovation
Science with and for Society

EUR 26543 EN

EUROPE DIRECT is a service to help you find answers 
to your questions about the European Union

Freephone number (*):

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers  
or these calls may be billed

LEGAL NOTICE

Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which 
might be made of the following information.

The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views 
of the European Commission.

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://europa.eu).

Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014

ISBN 978-92-79-35809-8
ISSN 1018-5593
doi:10.2777/64285

©  European Union, 2014
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

Cover Image: © gudrun, #49102795, 2014. Source: Fotolia.com.

Table of contents

Executive summary  ..........................................................................................................................................................  5

1 - Introduction  ...................................................................................................................................................................  7

2 -  Research and philanthropy: What do we know?  ...................................................................................  9

3 -  Community Framework Programmes and Responsible Research and Innovation  ..... 11

3.1 Research, innovation and responsibility  ............................................................................................... 11

3.2 ‘Responsibility’ at Community level  .......................................................................................................  12

3.3 ‘Responsibility’ all across Horizon 2020  .............................................................................................  13

4 -  The role of philanthropy in Responsible Research and Innovation   ....................................  15

4.1 Engage society: ‘Choosing together’  ...................................................................................................... 16

4.2 Ensure gender equality: ‘Unlock the full potential’  ........................................................................ 17

4.3 Science education: ‘Creative learning, fresh ideas’  ....................................................................... 17

4.4 Open access: ‘Share results to advance’  ............................................................................................. 17

4.5 Ethics: ‘Do the right ‘think’ and do it right!’ ........................................................................................ 17

4.6 Governance: ‘Design science for and with society’  ........................................................................ 18

5 -  Taking RRI and philanthropy into action  .................................................................................................. 19

5.1 RRI criteria, selection, evaluation and governance  ........................................................................ 19

5.2 Tips for implementing RRI  ...........................................................................................................................  20

5.3 Engaging the new generation ....................................................................................................................  20

5.4  Engaging citizens, foundations and other philanthropic organisation  ..............................  20

5.5  Boosting the role of foundations and other philanthropic organisations  .......................  20

6 -  Further thoughts and recommendations for putting RRI into action  ................................. 21

7 - Conclusion  ....................................................................................................................................................................  23

Annexes  ..................................................................................................................................................................................  25

“la Caixa” Foundation – Foundations, Research and Innovation  ...................................................  25

Innovating for and with society  ......................................................................................................................... 31

Newsletter of Participatory Workshop on the role of philanthropy in the promotion 
of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)  .........................................................................................  36

Executive summary

Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) represents a step forward in the debate on science 
in  society.  RRI  encompasses  all  stages  of  Research  and  Innovation  (R&I):  reflections  on 
relevant research, innovation and societal issues; design, organisation of the research agenda 
and research teams; involvement of research target groups in R&I; implementation of the 
research results; feedback towards stakeholders and evaluation of the results; open access 
to the results by third parties, monitoring and evaluation of R&I, education, etc... 

To that end, RRI supports collaboration between all stakeholders and integrates societal issues 
in order to improve the excellence of R&I, a goal that perfectly matches the philanthropy’s 
social legitimization as well as the European Commission.

The workshop showed how mutual understanding and collaboration might lead to success. 
Its main outcome is maybe the common will of the EC, foundations and other philanthropic 
organisations to go further in the development of RRI in Europe. Through their contributions 
during the workshop, the participants indicated their willingness to jointly develop further RRI 
governance. They underlined the needs:

1.  For regular exchange and reflections on the evolution of RRI;
2.  For participating in and supporting transdisciplinary activities;
3.  For a critical and independent look on RRI activities;
4.  For advancing the reflection on evaluation and assessment of RRI activities;
5.  For deciding on rules and priorities (EC should take the lead in this respect);
6. For reinforcing the knowledge base on RRI;
7.  For capacity building, including through science education and training;
8. And more broadly for strengthening RRI communication and public relations.

One  example  of  common  field  of  reflection  unanimously  stated  by  the  participants  of  the 
workshop is that the idea of excellence in research is currently changing. Many plead to define 
a new excellence concept, moving beyond dimensions such as impact factor, valorisation and 
patent performance. Public and private funders should reflect on what constitutes excellence. 
Foundations proposed to take the lead on this reflection.

Finally,  the  role  of  other  important  actors  beyond  the  European  Commission,  foundations 
and  other  philanthropic  organisations  was  also  underlined  during  the  workshop:  national 
governments should make of RRI an operational “cross-cutting” issue; the business community 
should  be  more  involved  in  the  introduction  and  promotion  of  RRI  and  philanthropy;  most 
prestigious R&I institutes should become leaders in the promotion of RRI and philanthropy 
and researchers themselves should be ore engaged; and citizens and their associations should 
be more proactive in the development of philanthropy and RRI.

As ‘an antidote to victimhood’ RRI will be used to design our common European future. The 
whole of Horizon 2020 (including ‘Science with and for Society’) and the philanthropic world 
will work to that end.

5

1 - Introduction

The present report contains the results of a two-day workshop in which 22 EU foundations 
and  philanthropic  organisations  that  support  research  and  innovation  (R&I)  discussed  the 
concept and practice of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). This meeting indicates 
a new step in the developing relationship between the EC and the EU philanthropic community.

The idea of the workshop came out of the Euroscience Open Forum in Dublin on 13 July 2012, 
where EU foundations supporting research met EC officials to discuss new perspectives on 
heightening  the  social  impact  and  societal  relevance  of  research.  This  is  a  topic  in  which 
foundations, by their very nature, take a great interest.

The purpose of this participatory workshop organised by the European Commission and with 
the participation of La Caixa Foundation and the European Foundation Centre (EFC – www.
efc.be - in particular the Research Forum of the EFC) was to discuss how foundations and 
other philanthropic organisations (e.g. trusts, charities) can support a responsible approach to 
R&I. The challenge was how to place the notion of ‘responsibility’ at the heart of philanthropic 
support for R&I activities. The participatory workshop was chosen so as to create an open 
space for the exchange of ideas, experiences and plans for the future.

The EC organizers explicitly stated that they would not seek to impose any ideas, but on the 
contrary, to listen closely to their invited guests from the world of foundations.

The workshop was split into two parts. For the first day an open discussion was organised on 
the issue of RRI, structured by three questions to be answered:

1.  How do I understand and perceive RRI?
2.  Which activities are foundations working on that support RRI?
3.  What is missing (and what has to be reinforced)?

The second day focused on the central question: “What do I want to explore in order to put 
RRI and philanthropy into action?”

All  participants  at  the  workshop  received  direct  feedback  on  their  discussions,  paper 
presentations, contributions and speeches through newsletters. As early as the morning after 
the first day (!), all the information was made available to participants in a first Newsletter, 
which contained all the discussions, results, sheets, stickers, and photographs. The complete 
version  of  the  Newsletter  was  sent  to  all  participants  two  days  after  the  second –  and 
final – day (!).

The present report takes a more detached view of proceedings. It pays particular attention to:

1.  placing  the  workshop  in  the  broader  context  of  philanthropy  and  the  EC  Framework 

Programmes,

2.  summarizing and analysing the results of the workshop,
3.  formulating concrete recommendations for the short and medium-term.

The present report is intended to inform a wider forum of foundations and other philanthropic 
organisations as well as other RRI stakeholders.

7

2 -  Research and philanthropy: 

What do we know?

The  European  Union  faces  the  challenge  to  gain  a  competitive  advantage  at  the  world’s 
economic level. The knowledge economy is one of the pillars to reach this goal. Compared 
to  other  parts  of  the  world,  Europe  is  lagging  behind  with  regard  to  public  and  private 
investments  in  R&I.  Although  scientific  research  in  Europe  has  always  benefited  from  the 
philanthropic patronage of foundations, trusts and corporations the importance and role of 
philanthropy  in  the  European  research  landscape  has  not  fully  be  grasped,  while  Europe 
has developed a large and remarkable philanthropic sector. A rough estimate is that about 
10.000 philanthropic organisations in the EU support R&I.

For that reason the European Foundation Centre (EFC) launched its Research Forum, December 
4th 2007 in cooperation with the EC Directorate- General Research and Innovation. The EFC 
Research Forum provides a platform for research-funding foundations to learn, collaborate 
and advocate together.

From their side, the European Commission has made serious efforts to increase the knowledge 
of private investments in R&I. The Directorate-General Research and Innovation commissioned 
two  reports,  written  by  Expert  Groups:  Giving  More  for  Research  in  Europe:  Strengthening 
the  Role  of  Philanthropy  in  the  Financing  of  Research  (2006)  and  Engaging  Philanthropy 
for  University  Research.  Fundraising  by  university  from  philanthropic  sources:  developing 
partnerships between universities and private donors – Report by an Expert Group (2008).

Besides  these  initiatives,  in  2008  the  EC  Directorate  General  Research  and  Innovation 
commissioned  a  ‘Study  to  assess  fundraising  from  philanthropy  for  research  funding  in 
European universities’. The study was carried out by the Centre of Philanthropic Studies at 
VU University in cooperation with Kent University and resulted in the publication ‘Giving in 
Evidence’1.  The  researchers  concluded  that  philanthropic  fundraising  is  not,  on  the  whole, 
taken seriously in European universities. Although universities in Europe perceive foundations 
to  be  the  most  important  donor  (compared  to  other  donors  such  as  corporations,  alumni, 
wealthy individuals), only a very small number of universities are raising significant sums of 
money for research from foundations. In a positive light, this may be interpreted as indicative 
of a significant untapped potential.

In July 2012, the Centre of Philanthropic Studies at VU University Amsterdam (www.giving.nl) 
was commissioned by the European Commission, DG Research and Innovation, to coordinate 
a study on the contributions of foundations to R&I in the EU 27 (plus Norway and Switzerland). 
This two-year study, also known as the European Foundations for Research and Innovation 
(EUFORI) Study is a follow-up of the Foundations Research and Mapping (FOREMAP) project. 
FOREMAP  was  the  first  attempt  to  systematically  document  foundations’  contributions  to 
research in Europe, findings were published in 2009 by the EFC.

The aim of the EUFORI Study is to quantify and assess foundations’ financial support and 
policies  for  R&I  in  the  EU,  make  a  comparative  analysis  between  EU  Member  States,  and 
identify  trends  and  the  potential  for  future  developments  in  this  sector.  The  coordinating 
team  of  the  EUFORI  Study  works  together  with  researchers  from  29  European  countries. 

1  Reference

9

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Most researchers are member of the European Research Network on Philanthropy (ERNOP – 
www.ernop.eu).  ERNOP  has  been  founded  in  January  2008  by  collaborating  philanthropy 
researchers in Europe, in order to advance, coordinate and promote excellence in philanthropic 
research in Europe. Currently more than 100 researchers in twenty one European countries 
have joined ERNOP.

To sum up, the awareness of the (untapped) potential of philanthropy as a source of research 
funding in Europe is growing, not only among policy makers, but also among the recipients of 
philanthropic funding for research, such as universities, as well.

10

3 -  Community Framework Programmes 

and Responsible Research and 
Innovation

Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) is an inclusive approach to R&I. It ensures that 
societal actors work together during the whole R&I process, aiming to better align both the 
process and outcomes of R&I, with the values, needs and expectations of European society. 
In doing so, it fosters the creativity and innovativeness of European societies to tackle the 
grand societal challenges that lie before us, while at the same time pro-actively addresses 
potential  side  or  long  term  effects.  RRI  has  been  introduced  in  the  FP7-Science  in  Society 
Work Programme in 2012 and several projects have been funded to better understand, shape 
and disseminate the concept (e.g. ‘RESPONSIBILITY’, ‘RESPONSIBLE INDUSTRY’, ‘RRI Tools’).

As  it  will  be  applied  under  Horizon  2020,  RRI  is  a  package  that  consists  of  designing  and 
implementing R&I policy that will:

1.  engage society more broadly in its R&I activities,
2.  increase the access to scientific results,
3.  ensure gender equality in both the research process and research content,
4.  take account of the ethics dimension, and
5.  promote formal and informal science education.

3.1 Research, innovation and responsibility

RRI  is  not  ‘stricto  sensu’  a  creation  of  the  R&I  Community  R&I  policy.  The  concept  of 
‘responsibility’  is  used  since  a  long  time  in  the  business  arena.  The  expression  ‘Corporate 
Social Responsibility’ (CSR) was popularised in the late 1960s and early 1970s after many 
multinational  corporations  coined  the  term  ‘stakeholder’,  meaning  those  on  whom  an 
organisation’s activities have an impact.

‘Responsibility’ is understood as the following for CSR:

“Responsibility is literally what it says – our ability to respond. It’s a choice we make... To be 
responsible is to be proactive in the world, to be sensitive to the interconnections, and to be 
willing to do something constructive, as a way of giving back. Being responsible for something 
means that we are entrusted with realizing its potential, turning promise into reality. Taking 
responsibility is a way of taking ownership in our lives, of acknowledging our own hand in the 
shaping of destiny. Responsibility is the antidote for victimhood.” 2

The  ‘Responsible  Care’  initiative,  launched  in  1985  by  the  Canadian  Chemical  Producers’ 
Association, grew into the ‘Responsible Care Global Charter’ in 2006. The European Venture 
Capital  Association  is  exploring  ‘Responsible  Investment’  as  a  new  business  model.  The 
notion of responsibility is also not novel to R&I, which has to a large extent emerged from 
philosophical reflections dating back to the second half of the 20th century, notably under 
the influence of the philosopher Hans Jonas. These reflections brought about a few concrete 
outcomes such as codes of conduct, and oaths.

2  Kotler, P. (2011).The Age of Responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the new DNA of Business, Wiley, Pages 4-5.

11

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Some questions around Responsible Research and Innovation 

Ø  Who defines what RRI is? 

 (policy makers, scientists, industry, organised civil society, citizens) 

Ø  What are the criteria for RRI? 

 (profitability, appropriation schemes, resilience, ecological footprint) 

Ø  How to separate responsible R&I from non responsible R&I? 

(biotechnological agriculture/GMO, organic agriculture, nanotechnologies, nuclear energy, 
renewable energies, energy saving, urban development, drugs, prevention, risk management) 

Ø  How to promote the first one and to avoid the latter? 

Ø  RRI and planetary boundaries? 

Ø  What about RRI, our economic model and our life standard? 

Ø  Re-conceptualise progress? 

Ø  What links of RRI to divers movements (ecological transition, commons, 

revalorisation of different knowledge forms)? 

In her key-note speech during the introductory session of the workshop, Dr. Claudia Neubauer 
gave also the reasons why Fondation Sciences Citoyennes think that there is a need for RRI. 
Nevertheless, she underlined as well the various questions remaining to be answered up to 
now: Who defines what RRI is? What are the criteria distinguishing what is responsible from 
what is not? Intuitive answers are not enough obviously to sustain a robust policy or even 
more, enforce legislation!

Despite all these unresolved questions, Dr. Claudia Neubauer concluded her speech by stating 
that “Philanthropy has an important role to play in Responsible Research and Innovation.”!

3.2 ‘Responsibility’ at Community level

The proposal to introduce RRI in Horizon 2020 finds its roots within the above reflections and 
within those launched in 2000 on the relationship between Science and Society in the ERA, 
that was itself triggered by the various crises of the 90s (e.g. GMOs, BSE) involving scientific 
progress.  The  2001  Eurobarometer  Survey  gave  a  mixed  picture  of  European  attitudes  to 
science, ranging from confidence and hopes to lack of interest in scientific activities or even 
fears  regarding  some  of  their  impacts.  In  December  2001  at  the  request  of  the  Member 
States, the European Commission approved a Science and Society Action Plan aiming to pool 
efforts at European level in order to develop stronger and more harmonious relations between 
science and society. The Action Plan focused on promoting scientific education and culture, 
bringing science policies closer to citizens, women as well as men, and putting responsible 
science at the heart of policy making.

The  notion  of  ‘responsibility’  has  therefore  been  at  the  heart  of  the  reflections  on  the 
development of the European Research Area (ERA) and of the Framework Programmes (FPs) 
since  2000.  Beyond  Science  and  Society  (S&S)  in  FP6  and  Science  in  Society  (SiS)  in  FP7, 
this notion has been also developed in several fields of R&I, as well as across Community 
policies.  In  2011  the  European  Commission  stated  in  its  new  policy  on  Corporate  Social 
Responsibility, that enterprises, to fully meet their social responsibility, “should have in place 
a  process  to  integrate  social,  environmental,  ethical  and  human  rights  concerns  into  their 
business  operations  and  core  strategy  in  close  collaboration  with  their  stakeholders”.  This 

12

3 - Community Framework Programmes and Responsible Research and Innovation

integration is essential to maintaining trust in innovation, including social innovation, across 
the single market.

The Member States, through the 2008 Council conclusions, stressed that the ERA “is firmly 
rooted  in  society  and  responsive  to  its  needs  and  ambitions  in  pursuit  of  sustainable 
development”,  and  subsequently  in  2010,  that  “the  social  dimension  of  the  ERA  should 
encompass  […]  supporting  research  and  debate  on  the  principles  of  responsible  research 
through partnerships between researchers, policy-makers and society at large”.

Science,  that  was  considered  initially  as  being  somehow  separated  from  society  (Science 
and  Society),  is  being  increasingly  considered  as  being  fully  immersed  and  integrated  in 
society (Science in Society). Its means, rationale, activities, outcomes and impacts, notably 
through innovation, can no more be considered and devised in isolation of society’s interests, 
values and concerns. Science is now meant to be not only for society but also with society 
under Horizon 2020.

3.3 ‘Responsibility’ all across Horizon 2020

More recent Eurobarometers have confirmed the dual (multiple?) face of R&I. in response to 
this situation, the RRI cross-cutting issue will be explicitly addressed in Horizon 2020, avoiding 
inter alia the development of a European societal resistance to innovation.

The  fact  that  RRI  is  a  cross-cutting  issue  in  Horizon  20203  implies  very  concretely  that, 
whenever relevant, the RRI aspects are to be embedded in the design of Horizon 2020 project 
proposals. Especially where reference is made to RRI in call texts, applicants are expected to 
include relevant RRI aspects in the description of work of project proposals. This may mean, 
for  example,  that  a  project  dedicates  explicit  attention  to  the  potential  gender  aspects  of 
the proposal; a public engagement is made an integral part of a project work planning; or 
that a specific focus is placed on outreach activities to stimulate learning and interest about 
the outcomes of a project. In these cases it may also be relevant to ensure that a partner 
with specific expertise on these aspects is present in the project consortium, making more 
concrete the opening of R&I to society and, vice versa, the engagement of society in R&I.

3  Art. 13 of the Horizon 2020 Regulation

13

4 -  The role of philanthropy in 

Responsible Research and Innovation 

If the Commission has been active in terms of ‘responsibility’ in R&I, the philanthropic world 
has not been inactive, quite the contrary, although not putting the same explicit emphasis on 
the notion of ‘responsibility’.

Areas	  of	  RR&I	  supported	  

Public	  understanding	  of	  and	  engagement	  in	  science	  

Science	  education	  for	  children	  and	  youth	  

Communication	  training	  and	  support	  for	  researchers	  

Promotion	  of	  evidence-­‐based	  policymaking	  

Open	  access	  to	  research	  results	  and	  data	  

Ethics	  in	  science	  

Gender	  equality	  

Unspeciﬁed/Other	  

0	  

5	  

10	  

15	  

20	  

25	  

30	  

Participants mapping RRI activities in the philanthropic world 

Mr. Enric Banda (La Caixa Foundation) presented in his keynote speech (Annex I) the result of 
a survey established by foundations belonging to the Research Forum of the EFC. It is obvious 
through this survey that foundations are interested and already active in all RRI keys.

Why	  are	  foundations	  interested	  in	  RRI?	  

(cid:127) Social	  beneﬁt	  and	  transformative.	  Improves	  quality	  of	  life
(cid:127) Close	  to	  talent.	  Inspires	  young	  scientists
(cid:127) Seek	  public	  engagement
(cid:127) Ethical	  practice
(cid:127) Have	  experience	  and	  are	  well	  placed	  as	  funding	  bodies.	  Can	  inﬂuence

research	  procedures

(cid:127) Range	  of	  activities	  go	  from	  funding	  to	  communicating	  to	  science

education	  to	  public	  engagement

(cid:127) Have	  strong	  linkages	  with	  society	  and	  are	  used	  to	  manage	  stakeholders
(cid:127)

Image

Mr.  Enric  Banda  stated  in  his  opening  speech:  “Research  and  Innovation  are  two  different 
animals,  we  know  it  already,  we  don’t  have  to  explain  it”.  This  statement  wasn’t  meant  to 
create a gap between the two activities. On the contrary, Prof. Banda wished to emphasize 
the joint task the EC and the foundations have to accomplish:  excellent research as well as 
societal impact through excellent innovation.

15

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Foundations  in  particular  justify  and  derive  their  existence  by  means  of  their  established 
societal position. They aim to serve the public good by private funding, just like governments, 
such as the EC, aim to serve the public good by public funding.

The EC’s ‘Science in Society’ research programme and the concept of ‘Responsible Research 
and Innovation’ are attempts to make the EU a knowledge-based society. Connecting society 
with science must not be implemented at the expense of the quality of science, but should 
rather result in more excellent science. This objective was one of the basic objectives of the 
participating foundations.  

Academia,  the  scientific  community,  universities  and  academic  research  institutes  are  all 
different phenomena, however. Science and academic research are still a matter for scientists, 
for academic professionals.  According to the analysis T. Johnson (1972) made in his book 
Professions  and  Power  (London:  Macmillan),  professions  tend  to  close  their  ‘market’.  The 
degree to which they succeed indicates the degree of their professionalization.  Consequently, 
they create their own educational courses, codes, procedures, professional groups and their 
own disciplinary bodies. In other words, they practise self-regulation and self-control. If their 
profession also has regard for the key values of society, such as health, justice and property, 
they  may  successfully  close  their  profession  to  outsiders.  Dutch  sociologist  Van  Doorn 
warned against this aspect of professionalism by highlighting the dark side of professions:  
a conspiracy against the layman.

In the 19th century, French sociologist Emile Durkheim called for the development of professions 
to defend the public good in society in times of loss of societal cohesion4. In another book5, 
Durkheim’s analysis of the division of labour shows how the development of industrialized 
societies has differentiated, separated and ‘compartmentalised’ distinctive societal domains, 
science among them. In many EU countries, the funding of research by national ministries of 
Education and Research has contributed toward a ‘free and independent’ research community, 
separated from the policy domains of other ministries. What counts today is the H index: the 
number of citations by colleagues, i.e., the academic professional community.  The cumulative 
exposure of all H indices of universities is one of the six criteria used in the Shanghai index, 
which ranks the most prestigious universities in the world. This ranking shows the academic 
prestige of the university involved and is awarded by a specific academic professional group. 

The  participants  to  the  workshop  were  invited  to  introduce  themselves  and  exchange 
ideas,  experiences  and  knowledge  on  RRI.  Foundations  were  then  asked  to  report  on  their 
RRI  practices.  At  the  end,  ‘missing  issues’  had  to  be  detected  as  well  as  the  ‘activities  to 
be  reinforced’.  The  outputs  of  the  discussions  are  summarized  here  below  following  the 
5 RRI keys.

4.1 Engage society: ‘Choosing together’

The  success  of  the  science  and  society  relationship  is  a  joint  responsibility  of  science  and 
society. To “engage” means to allow societal stakeholders to have their say in all steps of 
the  research  process:  formulating  central  questions,  methodology  and  dissemination  of 
the  results.  This  must  be  done  with  respect  for  the  professional  integrity  and  quality  of 
the researchers. EC R&I are paid for by EU citizens and corporations, which puts the onus 
on the research community to legitimize its work. Funded research also needs a licence to 

4 
5 

‘Suicide’, 1897
‘The Division of Labor in Society’, 1893

16

4 - The role of philanthropy in Responsible Research and Innovation 

operate and there is an enduring obligation on researchers to be accountable, not only to their 
professional colleagues, but also to society at large.

Participants  stated  that  they  were  already  promoting  a  more  democratic  governance  of 
science, the engagement of all societal actors (e.g. citizens, NGOs, private sector, industry) 
and  the  integration  of  society’s  expectations,  interests  and  values  in  science  (e.g.  through 
transdisciplinary approaches to R&I (e.g. transdisciplinary committees), participatory research 
with NGOs, internship programmes, public-private partnerships).

They agreed nevertheless that these activities could be reinforced. Common tools and policy 
were  needed  (e.g.  innovative  media  for  engagement).  The  capacity  of  foundations  to  take 
risks should be reinforced as well as the outreach towards the private sector, notably industry. 
There is a potential for better advocating the RRI paradigm shift and enhancing the culture of 
sharing, co-creation and cooperation among R&I stakeholders.

4.2 Ensure gender equality: ‘Unlock the full potential’

There was an agreement among the participants that the balanced participation of men and 
women at all levels of the R&I processes and organisations, and the integration of the gender 
dimension in R&I content was to be addressed. Some foundations are already active in this 
field ‘e.g. AcademiaNet of the Robert Bosh Foundation). ‘Gender in R&I content’ and ‘gender 
flexibility’ were nevertheless two issues that were deemed to be reinforced.

4.3 Science education: ‘Creative learning, fresh ideas’

It appears that foundations are making considerable efforts in this RRI dimension. The need for 
a scientifically literate society, for boosting the interest of children and youth in maths, science 
and  technology,  for  basic  and  life-long  training  programmes  for  researchers  (notably  the 
younger ones) was easily acknowledged. Foundations reported number of activities relating 
to science communication, science museums, “hands on” experiential learning approach for 
teachers,  young  leader  programme,  transferable  skills  for  young  researchers,  or  Research 
fellowships partnership with media to sustain a prize for scientific thesis. The comprehensive 
approach to RRI in formal and informal education was nevertheless felt missing or at least 
to be reinforced.

4.4 Open access: ‘Share results to advance’

In the workshop a lot of attention was paid to the role of the media and communication but 
although mentioned, the open access to research results from publicly funded R&I did not 
attract many comments and suggestions.

4.5 Ethics: ‘Do the right ‘think’ and do it right!’

As for open access to research results, little has been reported as far as ‘ethics’ is concerned. 
Ethics has been mentioned among the ‘missing’ or ‘to be reinforced’ items under a call to 
‘promote social responsibility and ethical approach’. Mention was made also of the notion of 
‘integrity’ that was as well ‘missing’ or ‘to be reinforced’.

17

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

4.6 Governance: ‘Design science for and with society’

This  last  dimension  of  RRI  is  a  kind  of  umbrella  for  all  the  others.  There  is  indeed  a  will 
among the foundations to promote a more democratic governance of science but this was not 
expressed as specific governance activities. There was a need for tools here in order to create 
an  enabling  environment  for  the  engagement  of  society  in  research  and  vice-versa.  The 
aspects ‘missing’ or ‘to be reinforced’ in this field were expressed e.g. in terms of necessary 
lobbying of member States, in terms of measure of social impacts of technology, of system 
thinking for the long term.

18

5 - Taking RRI and philanthropy into action

5 -  Taking RRI and philanthropy 

into action

“We did research on society; subsequently, in view of the obligation to increase the 
societal relevance of research, we did research for society; but now, performing RRI, 
we conduct research with society”. (Quote from a participant)

This  chapter  contains  suggestions,  ideas  and  concrete  proposals  for  moving  forward  to 
implement  RRI.  At  the  start  of  second  day  of  the  workshop,  participants  were  invited  to 
step  forward  to  participate  in  an  open  space  discussion.  Thirteen  participants  volunteered 
and proposed subjects for reflexion on a sheet of paper on the wall of the conference room 
(See Newsletter in Annex III). The rest of the audience were then invited to select and attend 
a session of their choice. Two rounds were planned. All participants were encouraged to feel 
free to switch to a more interesting and /or inspiring session if they so desired. There was 
plenty of action and movement involved in “putting RRI into action”.

The  13  sessions  proposed  resulted  in  a  ‘tsunami’  of  fruitful  and  useful  ideas,  strategies, 
further specification of the dimensions of the RRI concept, and contributions. A selection of 
raw statements is made here below.

5.1 RRI criteria, selection, evaluation and governance

Monitoring and evaluation is the weak part of RRI; what criteria must be developed?

•  The concept of excellence is currently changing (the editorial boards and review groups 
of, for instance, Nature and Science, are becoming less important in defining the highest 
standard of academic excellence);

•  Define a new excellence concept in Horizon 2020, integrating social impact; change beyond 

the impact factor, patents and just returns principle;

•  Start the process of intelligent reflection on what is excellence: now, in five years’ time, and 

beyond;

•  The ultimate goal: EC DG R&I develops a gold standard for evaluation in Europe;
• 

Invest the limited budgets intelligently in the best research; don’t use the “politically driven 
geographical  dispersion  of  grant-making”,  as  this  leads  to  ‘mediocre  science’.  The  best 
research process is the one that serves society in the best way possible: it attracts public 
interest.

Looking for impacts through Horizon 2020:

•  An  upstream  and  sustained  public  engagement  process  with  predetermined  feedback 

loops;

•  Defining the actors;
•  Platform for exchange;
•  Launching demonstrative actions;
•  Favouring open science;
•  Must  consult  or  preferably  include  civil  society  as  a  participant,  as  civil  society  will  be 

affected by the research.

19

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

5.2 Tips for implementing RRI

•  Show it works; make a website showing successful RRI examples;
•  Deal with resistance in the research community;
•  Mobilize the end users;
•  Educate boards of trustees.

5.3 Engaging the new generation

•  Support curiosity, critical thinking; educate pupils so that they can explain to others;
•  Collaboration between school, industry and research.

5.4  Engaging citizens, foundations and other philanthropic 

organisation

•  Promote participatory research and citizens’ science.
•  Educate Boards of Trustees of philanthropic organisations;
•  Develop networks of donors in similar thematic areas with evidence based cases;

5.5  Boosting the role of foundations and other philanthropic 

organisations

•  Allow foundations and other philanthropic organisations to participate in formulating the 

text of an EC call for research;

•  Trust in the EC will increase if it shows its commitment by offering foundations and other 

philanthropic organisations a chance to participate.

20

6 - Further thoughts and recommendations for putting RRI into action

6 -  Further thoughts and 

recommendations for putting RRI 
into action

Based on the discussions held during the workshop, the outcomes of the open space and your 
rapporteur’s experience, this chapter discusses further the strategy needed to put RRI onto 
the research agenda of the EU and philanthropic organisations but also research institutes, 
universities, the business community, NGO’s and society at large. The introduction of Corporate 
Social Responsibility within the business community will be used as a starting point.

Corporate Social Responsibility CSR) is a form of self-regulation by companies. Consumerism 
(action groups) has appeared as a strong force in keeping international companies focused 
on  the  effects  of  child  labour,  as  well  as  the  exploitation  of  people  and  the  environment. 
The  marketing  effects  and  financial  consequences  have  prompted  companies  to  develop 
standards  of  decent  commercial  behaviour  in  order  to  get  ‘a  licence  to  operate’,  for  the 
sake of their stakeholders. It was – and is – society at large that corrected – and continues 
to  correct –  companies.  Aside  from  internal  and  moral  stimuli,  commercial  and  financial 
risks in particular are motives for CSR. The ample opportunities modern media offer to the 
general  public  for  exerting  control  and,  if  necessary,  reacting,  provide  an  important  and 
efficient weapon for cases where companies don’t behave properly (e.g. actions against the 
textile  industry  following  the  collapse  of  a  factory  in  Bangladesh  in  2013,  causing  more 
than 1000 casualties).

As  resource  dependence  and  institutional  theory  have  proved,  organisations  adapt  their 
behaviour  to  the  environment  they  depend  on.  In  terms  of  finance,  scientific  research 
predominantly  depends  on  government  funding,  on  funding  by  foundations  /  philanthropy, 
and  on  cause-related  funding  by  companies  (for  example  pharmaceuticals).  If  the  specific 
nature of the professional academic community is taken into consideration, however, using 
such a one-sided financial strategy to ask for and promote RRI will be neither sufficient nor 
effective. Professionals protect their autonomy and professional integrity, as a result of which 
the best way to implement RRI is to show that RRI makes their research even more excellent. 
In short, RRI must be developed and promoted as the best type of research available. For the 
academic community this means having empirical evidence.

Due  to  the  underlying  principle  of  inviting  ‘society  to  engage’,  it  is  not  easy  to  convince 
academia  in  the  EU  of  the  merits  of  RRI.  RRI  emphasizes  a  “culture  of  sharing”  whereas, 
within  the  academic  community,  a  strong  “culture  of  competiveness”  prevails.  Universities 
consolidate their profiles and compete with each other by using their position in the Shanghai 
Ranking,  where  the  leading  criterion  for  selection  and  distinction  is  still  the  citation  index 
(H index). The introduction and transformation of the concept of ‘excellent research’ will also 
imply the necessity of changing the internal reward system of universities, which will not be 
an easy job.

Undeniably, it is likely that the introduction of RRI will be impeded and perhaps obstructed by 
using the professional defence of ‘integrity’. Engaging society will increase the possibilities of 
blurring the lines between the various interests. This fear is not entirely unjustified, and this 
point will require attention when RRI is introduced. 

21

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Nevertheless, because the majority of researchers, universities and research institutes put 
their mouths where the money is, these financial sources may function as ‘soft persuaders’ of 
RRI, and therefore an additional way to steer the research community towards RRI.

Who are the stakeholders with regard to R&I in the EU, and RRI in particular? The answer 
is not so simple anymore. A categorization such as ‘funders’, ‘suppliers’ and ‘consumers’ of 
research results may not be valid anymore. Indeed, citizens can be ‘consumers’ of research 
results, but they can also be ‘suppliers’ (e.g. citizens’ science) and even ‘funders’ (e.g. crowd 
funding). Researchers are themselves ‘suppliers’ and ‘’consumers’. Policy makers are obviously 
among  the  ‘funders’  but  are  also  ‘consumers’  (e.g.  through  scientific  advice).  Philanthropic 
organisations can be also ‘funders’ of course but may wish to be ‘consumers’ for guiding their 
own choices, or even ‘suppliers’ when it is to better know their own world (e.g. relationship 
with  ERNOP).  A  new  taxonomy  has  therefore  to  be  put  in  place  for  better  understanding 
the many interactions among the various stakeholders of the RRI world and better helping 
them to perform better. For the time being, when Horizon 2020 is about to be launched, one 
can  only  modestly  suggest  a  few  recommendations  addressed  to  the  main  stakeholders, 
i.e. public authorities, foundations, business, research organisations, as well as citizens and 
Civil Society Organisations.

•  For  their  part  the  EC,  ERC,  ERA,  Horizon  2020,  national  governments,  and  national 
research councils funded by national governments should fit the RRI criteria in terms of 
their  grant-making  and  subsidy  policies,  making  RRI  a  ‘cross-cutting’  issue  in  their  R&I 
programmes. Governments can adapt their legal framework to support RRI.

•  Foundations (European Research Forum, EFC, NEF) have funds and the freedom to take 
risks, at least more risks than public authorities. The further development of RRI criteria – 
along  with  the  EC –  may  prove  a  very  challenging  and  exciting  task  for  these  bodies. 
Foundations  may  also  play  a  role  in  influencing  the  R&I  governance  at  European  and 
national levels.

•  Corporations have not yet become involved enough as R&I funders. Action must be taken 

to get the business community involved in the introduction and promotion of RRI.

•  Professionals take note of what other professionals do. Professional organizations such 
as the European University Association and many prestigious research institutes such as 
the Max Planck and Rathenau Institutes would function as leaders in the implementation 
of a strategy to introduce RRI. They harbour a great “capacity for change”. If they agree to 
promote RRI, their members and other institutes will follow.

•  Biomed research on Down’s syndrome became more successful once the strategy of ‘social 
inclusion’  of  Down’s  syndrome  patients  was  deployed.  The  LEGO  Company  successfully 
upgraded  their  products  and  profits  when  they  invited  their  “consumers”  to  co-create. 
Organizational changes are needed in academic institutions, boards of grant-makers and 
review boards. 

22

7 - Conclusion

The societal significance of philanthropy is growing. The role of citizens’ initiatives, foundations 
and  social  enterprises  in  the  development  of  RRI  in  Europe  is  becoming  clearer.  Europe  is 
now rediscovering the potential of philanthropy for the common good in addressing societal 
challenges6.  Public  administrators,  including  the  European  Commission  as  well  as  Member 
States, will therefore have to rise to the challenging task of creating a legal, economic and 
cultural framework that will stimulate and enhance philanthropic activities in RRI.

Philanthropic organizations enjoy a considerable degree of independence. Anheier and Leat 
argue  that  foundations  are  “among  the  freest  institutions  in  modern  societies:  free  in  the 
sense of being independent of market forces and the popular political will. This enables them 
to ignore political, disciplinary and professional boundaries, if they choose so, and to take 
risks and consider approaches others cannot (Anheier and Daly 2007: 4).7

The availability of private wealth ‘outside’ the state in Western Europe creates opportunities 
for the European Commission and governments to meet the challenges they face.

The  workshop  showed  how  mutual  understanding  and  collaboration  might  lead  to 
success.  Its  main  outcome  is  maybe  the  common  will  of  the  EC  and  foundations  and 
other  philanthropic  organisations  to  go  further  in  the  development  of  RRI  in  Europe. 
Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) is recognized by the European Commission and 
EU foundations as a step forward in the debate on science in society: RRI aims to improve 
the excellence of research by engaging societal stakeholders in R&I, a goal that perfectly 
matches the philanthropy’s social legitimization as well as the European Commission.

Advancing  RRI  in  Europe  cannot  be  the  responsibility  of  one  actor,  be  it  the  European 
Commission,  but  of  all  the  stakeholders  together.  Through  their  contributions  during  the 
workshop, the participants indicated their willingness to jointly develop further RRI governance. 
They underlined the needs:

1.  For  regular  exchange  and  reflections  on  the  evolution  of  RRI.  To  that  end,  the  EC  will 
offer the possibility to set up a Knowledge Sharing Platform in its first Science With and 
For Society call for 2014 and the EC is open to participating to other multistakeholders 
workshops organised by other stakeholders;

2.  For  (and  the  will  to)  participating  in  and  supporting  transdisciplinary  activities  involving 

different stakeholders;

3.  For  a  critical  and  independent  look  on  RRI  activities,  including  socio-economic  and 

humanities monitoring;

4.  For advancing the reflection on evaluation and assessment of RRI activities, at project and 

programme levels, including on impact indicators;

5.  For  deciding  on  rules  and  priorities,  suggesting  that  the  EC  should  take  the  lead  in  this 

respect;

6. For reinforcing the knowledge base on RRI;
7.  For capacity building, including through formal and informal science education and training;
8. And  more  broadly  for  strengthening  communication  and  public  relations,  ensuring 

6  Schuyt, Th. (2013) Philanthropy and the Philanthropy Sector; An Introduction. London: Ashgate
7  Anheier, H.K. and S. Daly (eds) (2007) The Politics of Foundations. A comparative analysis London: Routledge

23

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

transparency and the broadest dissemination of RRI in Europe and beyond.

One  example  of  common  field  of  reflection  unanimously  stated  by  the  participants  of  the 
workshop  is  that  the  idea  of  excellence  in  research  is  currently  changing.  Existing  ranking 
procedures (Shanghai Index; citation indices with regard to defining the highest standard of 
academic excellence) are discussed. Many plead to define a new excellence concept in Horizon 
2020, moving beyond dimensions such as impact factor, valorisation and patent performance.

Foundations proposed to take the lead on this reflection. They (European Research Forum, EFC 
and NEF), as research funders, have the freedom to take risks, and the further development 
of RRI evaluation criteria is a challenging task. They could also play a role in influencing the 
European and national R&I policies8 in that respect.

The role of other important actors was also underlined during the workshop.

For their part, beyond the EC and philanthropic organisations, national governments, national 
research councils funded by national governments should introduce RRI criteria in a coherent 
way into their grant-making and subsidy policies, making RRI an operational “cross-cutting” 
issue. Governments have indeed an important role in creating the legal framework at national 
and regional levels to support RRI and philanthropic activities.

Corporations have not yet been sufficiently approached as research funders. Action has to 
be taken to get the business community more involved in the introduction and promotion of 
RRI and philanthropy.

As  professionals  take  note  of  what  other  professionals  do,  in  a  strategy  to  introduce  RRI, 
professional  groups  (E.g.  European  University  Association)  and  most  prestigious  research 
institutes  should  function  as  leaders  in  the  promotion  of  RRI  and  in  their  relationship  to 
philanthropy. They harbour a great ‘capacity for change’. If they agree to promote RRI, their 
members and other institutes will follow.

Finally,  and  perhaps  more  importantly,  citizens  and  their  associations  (e.g.  civil  society 
organisations) should be more proactive in the evolution of philanthropy and RRI. Referring 
to an expression already used above, RRI is also ‘an antidote to victimhood’ and should be 
used more often to design our common European future. Science with and for Society and the 
whole of Horizon 2020 will support all stakeholders to that end.

8  The 2014 NEF conference in Warsaw (PL) could put this aspect on its agenda

24

Annexes

“la Caixa” Foundation – Foundations, Research and Innovation

Department of Science and Environment  

Foundations, Research and Innovation 

Department of Science, Research and the Environment 

Enric Banda 

18 June 2010 

Page ‹No› 

Social aim of ”la Caixa” 

To offer financial services to citizens 

& 

return to society a significant part of the financial business profits  

in the form of social programmes and activities. 

 Social commitment belongs to the core objective of ”la Caixa” 

Department of Science, Research and the Environment 

18 June 2010 

Page ‹No› 

25

 
 
 
THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Aim of the Department of Science and Environment 

Mission: 

Encourage critical thought and increase 

knowledge  as main drivers of  
development for individuals and society	  

Method 

To generate, disseminate  

and apply scientific knowledge  

Department of Science, Research and the Environment 

18 June 2010 

Page ‹No› 

Mission:	  to	  strengthen	  the	  independent	  	  
funding	  element	  of	  European	  	  
philanthropy	  through	  robust	  
	  cooperation	  with	  an	  array	  of	  partners	  

EFC	  Research	  Forum	  
	  Platform	  for	  research-­‐funding	  
foundations	  to	  learn,	  collaborate	  and	  
advocate	  	  together	  

Department of Science, Research and the Environment 

18 June 2010 

Page ‹No› 

26

 
Annexes

Philanthropy.	   Foundations	   are	   one	   form	   of	   philanthropy.	  
But	   thre	   are	   other	   ways:	   venture	   philanthropy,	   social	  
enterprise,	  crowdfunding,	  etc.	  

Some	  trends	  in	  philanthropy	  
Changing	  world	  

Engagement	  in	  projects	  

Increasing	  collaboration	  

Measuring	  impact	  

Get	  closer	  to	  society	  

Drivers	  of	  change	  

Involving	  young	  people	  

New	  approaches	  

From	  Science	  in	  Society	  
	  to	  	  
Responsible	  Research	  and	  Innovation	  

Mapping	  foundations’	  activities	  
in	  RR&I	  

 EFC Research Forum 

Department of Science, Research and the Environment 

18 June 2010 

Page ‹No› 

27

 
THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Years	  of	  engagement	  in	  RR&I	  activities:	  

s
n
o
i
t
a
d
n
u
o
F
f
o

.

N

16	  

14	  

12	  

10	  

8	  

6	  

4	  

2	  

0	  

Areas	  of	  RR&I	  supported	  

Public	  understanding	  of	  and	  engagement	  in	  science	  

Science	  education	  for	  children	  and	  youth	  

Communication	  training	  and	  support	  for	  researchers	  

Promotion	  of	  evidence-­‐based	  policymaking	  

Open	  access	  to	  research	  results	  and	  data	  

Ethics	  in	  science	  

Gender	  equality	  

Unspeciﬁed/Other	  

0	  

5	  

10	  

15	  

20	  

25	  

30	  

28

	  
	  
	  
Annexes

Why	  are	  foundations	  interested	  in	  RRI?	  

(cid:127) Social	  beneﬁt	  and	  transformative.	  Improves	  quality	  of	  life
(cid:127) Close	  to	  talent.	  Inspires	  young	  scientists
(cid:127) Seek	  public	  engagement
(cid:127) Ethical	  practice
(cid:127) Have	  experience	  and	  are	  well	  placed	  as	  funding	  bodies.	  Can	  inﬂuence

research	  procedures

(cid:127) Range	  of	  activities	  go	  from	  funding	  to	  communicating	  to	  science

education	  to	  public	  engagement

(cid:127) Have	  strong	  linkages	  with	  society	  and	  are	  used	  to	  manage	  stakeholders
(cid:127)

Image

Conclusions	  

(cid:127) Foundations	  are	  interested	  in	  RRI

(cid:127) Foundations	  can	  help

(cid:127) Foundations	  want	  to	  help

(cid:127) Foundations	  want	  to	  learn	  how	  to	  help

29

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Department of Science and Environment  

THANK YOU 
FOR YOUR 
ATTENTION 

30

Innovating for and with society

Annexes

Innovating for and with society 
why we need responsible research and 
innovation 

Dr. Claudia Neubauer 

Fondation Sciences Citoyennes - NGO think tank on sciences and 
democracy 

Participatory workshop on the role of philanthropy in the promotion of responsible 
research and innovation, 21-22 October 2013, Brussels, Belgium 

Fondation Sciences Citoyennes 

Ø  to increase research and expertise capacities of civil society, NGOs, 
consumerists, citizen movements and trade unions, support of the 
scientific third sector to respond to growing social and ecological 
demands 

Ø  to stimulate the freedom of expression and debate in the scientific 
world, to support whistle blowers and the development of public 
controversies on key scientific issues with strong societal dimensions 

Ø  to promote the democratic elaboration of scientific and technical 

choices (technical democracy, knowledge democracy) 

31

 
 
THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Context 

Anthropocene: man is the driving force behind bio-geological transitions, 
“anthropogenisation » of our planet, a powerful framework to consider global 
change and how to manage it 

Planetary boundaries - Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity: climate 
change; ocean acidification; stratospheric ozone; biogeochemical nitrogen cycle; 
phosphorus cycle; global freshwater use; land system change; the rate of loss of 
biological diversity; chemical pollution and atmospheric aerosol loading 

Societal system: unlimited growth, competition, economy/GDP, financial markets, 
limits to democracy, technocracy ; separation of Nature and Man where man 
controls nature, (post)modernity, progress, industrialisation, and rationalisation 

Research and innovation: commercialisation of research, research as purveyor for 
new high technology products and of competitive advantage; The Research, The 
Innovation, The Knowledge by rarely asking What Research, What Innovation, 
What and Who's Knowledge and What for? 

Poverty, social injustice and environmental injustice did almost not decline or even 
raise again 

32

Annexes

What	  model	  of	  development?	  

Responsible Research and Innovation 

1. The deliberate focus of research and the products of innovation to
achieve a social or environmental benefit. 

2. The consistent, ongoing involvement of society, from beginning to end
of the innovation process, including the public & non-governmental 
groups, who are themselves mindful of the public good. 

3. Assessing and effectively prioritising social, ethical and
environmental impacts, risks and opportunities, both now and in the 
future, alongside the technical and commercial. 

4. Openness and transparency are an integral component of the research
and innovation process 

Hilary Sutcliffe, 2012 

33

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Some questions around Responsible Research and Innovation 

Ø  Who defines what RRI is? 

 (policy makers, scientists, industry, organised civil society, citizens) 

Ø  What are the criteria for RRI? 

 (profitability, appropriation schemes, resilience, ecological footprint) 

Ø  How to separate responsible R&I from non responsible R&I? 

(biotechnological agriculture/GMO, organic agriculture, nanotechnologies, nuclear energy, 
renewable energies, energy saving, urban development, drugs, prevention, risk management) 

Ø  How to promote the first one and to avoid the latter? 

Ø  RRI and planetary boundaries? 

Ø  What about RRI, our economic model and our life standard? 

Ø  Re-conceptualise progress? 

Ø  What links of RRI to divers movements (ecological transition, commons, 

revalorisation of different knowledge forms)? 

Innovation, Sustainability, Development:

!"#$%"

“A radical shift is needed in how we 
think about and perform 
innovation... We need a new politics 
of innovation. This is not about being 
‘pro’ or ‘anti’ science or technology, 
but about addressing real questions 
of choice: ‘which science?’, ‘what 
technology?’ and, especially, ‘whose 
innovation?’ and ‘what kinds of 
change? In other words, we need to 
foster more diverse and far more 
fairly distributed forms of – and 
directions for – innovation, towards 
greater social justice.” 

34

Participatory plant breeding 

v  Common work of peasants, scientists, associations, consumers, food 
processors, retailers 

v  Response to the need of new varieties not covert by modern 
industrial breeding  

v  Co-construction of a methodology for sustainable plant 
management  

v  Different scientific disciplines: population genetics, functional 
ecology, anthropology, history, sociology,  etc. 

v  Industrial breeding = separation conservation (seed banks), 
breeding (in stations, in labs) and) ó PPB: a continual process in the 
farmers’ fields 

v  Uses landraces and historical varieties  

v  Output: production of locally adapted populations and/or varieties 

Overcome the myth that only highly complex and cost intensive research 
and technologies can create employment, sustainability, and well-being, 

Seek for major non productiviste innovations, allow and support plurality 
in technology choice, 

Support decentralised governance, decentralised energy supply, locally 
adapted and produced agriculture, etc. 

Facilitate cooperation and knowledge exchange between civil society 
organisations and academia in order to realise the innovative potential of 
the non-profit sector in numerous research and innovation domains. 

Philanthropy	  has	  an	  important	  role	  to	  play	  in	  	  
Responsible	  Research	  and	  Innova9on.	  

Annexes

35

 
  
 
	  
	  
Annexes

Newsletter of Participatory Workshop on the role of philanthropy 
in the promotion of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)

21-22 October 2013

Fondation Universitaire – rue d’Egmont 11, Brussels

Organised by the European Commission with the participation of La Caixa Foundation 
and the European Foundation Centre

Purpose of workshop:
To  promote  RRI  and  facilitate  future  collaboration  of  stakeholders,  to  discuss  how 
foundations  and  other  philanthropic  organisations  (e.g.  trusts,  charities)  can  support 
a responsible approach to research and innovation.

• To get the stakeholders to know each other and their work within RRI
• To explore possibilities for cooperation
• To explore and co-create actions for collaboration

37

 
THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Monday 21 October

How It All Started and Getting Started

Welcome and Introduction
by Octavi Quintana, Director, European Commission (DGg RTD-B ‘ERA’) And 
Mr Philippe Galiay, European Commission, ‘RRI in Horizon 2020 and ERA’

Octavi  Quintana  warmly  welcomed  the  participants  to  the  workshop.  He  underlined  the 
commonalities  of  the  questioning  of  both  public  and  private  organisations  in  their  search 
for efficiency towards the goals they pursue, in that case various aspects of public good (e.g. 
growth and jobs, societal challenges). How to choose the fields of actions? How to mobilise 
energy around a goal? How to select projects? How to be sure that we fund correspond to 
the real needs of European Society? The answer proposed by the European Commission is 
Responsible Research and Innovation.

Octavi Quintana gave his expectations from the workshop: a better uptake of Responsible 
Research  and  Innovation  and  a  clarification  of  what  are  our  respective  responsibilities  in 
setting a R&I system that is efficient and accountable to society for the way it works, the 
outputs it produces and the impacts it has on the economy, the environment and social links. 
He translated this into several practical questions for feeding the discussions to come: How 
do we choose our agendas? How do we evaluate the proposals? With which criteria do we 
evaluate them? How do we follow up what we have been funding? How do we disseminate 
the  ideas?  Is  our  governance  adequate?  How  could  we  develop  a  context  favourable  to 
philanthropy and to our own activities? Etc.

38

Let’s work together! 

Presentation of the Programme of the day by Philippe Galiay

Annexes

Philippe took the floor:  the “Six blind men” of the story can recognise the elephant by recovering 
sight or… talking to each other!The same goes for Responsible Research 
and Innovation!It is only through exchanges and working together that 
the  RRI  vision  will  be  realised  and  that  the  research  and  innovation 
system will become an integral part of society. ERA and Horizon 2020 
will be instrumental to that end.

and introduced the hosting team: Simone Tiesinga-Poutnik, Jan Hein Nielsen, Gilles Laroche, 
Karen Fabbri, Lino Paula, Noora Eronen, Anne Piret and the rapporteur: Theo Schuyt

 Have you ever seen an elephant without ears?

39

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Key note speech: Enric Banda, Fundacio LA CAIXA

Why	  are	  foundations	  interested	  in	  RRI?	  

(cid:127) Social	  beneﬁt	  and	  transformative.	  Improves	  quality	  of	  life
(cid:127) Close	  to	  talent.	  Inspires	  young	  scientists
(cid:127) Seek	  public	  engagement
(cid:127) Ethical	  practice
(cid:127) Have	  experience	  and	  are	  well	  placed	  as	  funding	  bodies.	  Can	  inﬂuence

research	  procedures

(cid:127) Range	  of	  activities	  go	  from	  funding	  to	  communicating	  to	  science

education	  to	  public	  engagement

(cid:127) Have	  strong	  linkages	  with	  society	  and	  are	  used	  to	  manage	  stakeholders
(cid:127)

Image

Areas	  of	  RR&I	  supported	  

Public	  understanding	  of	  and	  engagement	  in	  science	  

Science	  education	  for	  children	  and	  youth	  

Communication	  training	  and	  support	  for	  researchers	  

Promotion	  of	  evidence-­‐based	  policymaking	  

Open	  access	  to	  research	  results	  and	  data	  

Ethics	  in	  science	  

Gender	  equality	  

Unspeciﬁed/Other	  

40

0	  

5	  

10	  

15	  

20	  

25	  

30	  

Key note speech: Claudia Neubauer, Fondation Sciences Citoyennes

Annexes

Innovating for and with society 
why we need responsible research and 
innovation 

Dr. Claudia Neubauer 

Fondation Sciences Citoyennes - NGO think tank on sciences and 
democracy 

Participatory workshop on the role of philanthropy in the promotion of responsible 
research and innovation, 21-22 October 2013, Brussels, Belgium 

Responsible Research and Innovation 

1. The deliberate focus of research and the products of innovation to
achieve a social or environmental benefit. 
2. The consistent, ongoing involvement of society, from beginning to end
of the innovation process, including the public & non-governmental 
groups, who are themselves mindful of the public good. 
3. Assessing and effectively prioritising social, ethical and
environmental impacts, risks and opportunities, both now and in the 
future, alongside the technical and commercial. 
4. Openness and transparency are an integral component of the research
and innovation process 

Hilary Sutcliffe, 2012 

Context 

Anthropocene: man is the driving force behind bio-geological transitions, 
“anthropogenisation » of our planet, a powerful framework to consider global 
change and how to manage it 
Planetary boundaries - Exploring the Safe Operating Space for Humanity: climate 
change; ocean acidification; stratospheric ozone; biogeochemical nitrogen cycle; 
phosphorus cycle; global freshwater use; land system change; the rate of loss of 
biological diversity; chemical pollution and atmospheric aerosol loading 
Societal system: unlimited growth, competition, economy/GDP, financial markets, 
limits to democracy, technocracy ; separation of Nature and Man where man 
controls nature, (post)modernity, progress, industrialisation, and rationalisation 
Research and innovation: commercialisation of research, research as purveyor for 
new high technology products and of competitive advantage; The Research, The 
Innovation, The Knowledge by rarely asking What Research, What Innovation, 
What and Who's Knowledge and What for? 
Poverty, social injustice and environmental injustice did almost not decline or even 

raise again 

41

 
 
THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Café – Getting to Know Each Other

To get introduced to the participants and their work. To set a common inspirational 
baseline for the sessions of workshop

Why did you choose to be here at this workshop? 
How do I understand and perceive Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)?

Harvesting: TWEETS: why did you come today?

Influence and 
participate in 
a growing field

To better 
understand 
Institution’s 
involvement

Sharing and 
getting to know 
the players

To get engaged 
in RRI process

Learning from 
each other

Sharing 
experience

Transnational 
cooperation

To find out com-
mon interests

Good practices 
and governance 
of RRI

Learn, partici-
pate and con-
tribute to the 
RRI “movement”

To build RRI

Learn on pro-
moting philan-
thropy in R&D 
and new view 
on RRI

Understand and integrate 
perspectives

To know more about RRI

To link with foundations

Because we are all 
concerned

Smart investment of 
funds of philanthropic 
and public sources re: RRI

Idealistic experience – 
based learning

Learning and under-
standing what RRI is?

To learn more about us

Learn about the meeting 
point of philanthropy and 
social responsibility of 
organisations + research

Consider RRI important 
for fostering societal 
change, change in sci-
ence, change in funding, 
change in education, and 
change in policies / legal 
framework

What is innovation, sci-
entific integrity, intellec-
tual property, knowledge 
transfer?

42

Café – RRI and Philanthropy

To give a full shared picture of activities, focus areas and missing issues within responsible 
research and innovation and philanthropy

Annexes

Which activities are foundations working on that support responsible research & 
innovation and philanthropy?

43

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

On the basis of the first question, what is missing? 
What should be reinforced?

44

Tweets of the day

Annexes

45

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Closing remarks and bridging day 2

Philippe Galiay, Theo Schuyt, Simone Tiesinga-Poutnik, Jan Hein Nielsen

‘Pillow question’: “What do I want to explore to take RRI and philanthropy into action?”

46

Annexes

Announcement of evening event by Mr Ignasi Lopez

Evening event – Tuesday 22 October

Action for collaboration

Introduction and framing

Philippe welcome all into day 2 and give a framing of today work.

What  do  I  want  to  explore  to  take  RRI  and  philanthropy  into  action?  Now  comes  the  time 
of  concreteness  and  action!  What  is  missing?  What  should  be  reinforced?  Improved?  Now 
comes the time to reflect on actions, programmes, policies, governance, and the whole chain 
of  activities  leading  from  ideas  to  the  evaluation  of  impacts.  Now  is  the  time  for  think  in 
holistic terms of the ‘RRI package’ (‘Did you ever see an elephant without ear?’) and about the 
concrete steps leading to its realisation!

Simona and Jan invited to give all an opportunity to work on the issues they feel inclined to 
with others stakeholders and to set the agenda together.

Focus Question: What do I want to explore together to take RRI and philanthropy into action?

47

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

ROOMS

1

2

FRANCQUY 1

Foundations – how to take the 
role in EU

RRI stakeholders & how to get 
them

FRANCQUY 2

how to smartly invest in RRI – 
 selection criteria, good governance

FRANCQUY 3

RRI & evaluation – how do we 
make sure that the RRI we con-
duct is actually responsible

promoting social & responsible 
and ethical approach

JW 1

A 1

A2

A3

What is distinctly European in 
RRI foundation

social science & humanities – role 
of RRI

strategies & tools to support RRI 
& to forster research/civil society

participatory R&I citizen science 
- engagement

promoting better governance 
& fair value capturing between 
funders, research and society

science education – how to en-
gage the new generation in RRI 
contribution of foundation

donor motivation and expectation

explore concrete path for founda-
tion to engage

48

OPEN SPACE session 1

Annexes

49

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

50

Annexes

51

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

52

Annexes

53

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

54

OPEN SPACE session 2

Annexes

55

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

56

Annexes

57

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

58

Annexes

59

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Convergence of open space sessions

60

Closing session:

Recollection, reflexions and check out

Annexes

Octavi 
Quintana-Trias

Does the EC serve 
the same role? 
YES we all have 
goal of serving 

society

Ingrid 
Wuenning

Smart investment – 
no longer « juste retour »

So much enthusiasm

This is first step in a promising 

process

Need for working openly 
Efficiency + science quality + 
impact!!!

All stakeholders together to 
make this happen

Horizon 2020 provides 
incentives to act

ERA is the policy level 

 Horizon 2020 is the operational level

Thank you

RRI is changing our vision

Foundations : private 
€ + more risk taking 
+ faster

Horizon 2020 = 
public €

Science 2.0

Start a reflexion 

on the definition 

of excellence

Changing our 
concept of excellence

RRI: ideal marriage – serving public good

61

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Check out

What am I leaving with?

EC should become “gold 
standard” to evaluate 
research

So many ideas but little 
consensus! Sign things are 
changing … not sure how 
and into what but welcome

Widening social impact 
of research

We are breaking walls 
and building bridges. 
Stakeholder relations and 
mobilisation of networks. 
Now foundations too! Let’s 
strengthen

Parallel with CSR 
community. From 
competition to community 
speaking 1 voice 
Collaboration creativity is 
vital for Europe

62

Annexes

List of Participants

FONDATIONS

Angelini

Banda

Burgheim

Decoster

Dehem

Gaia

Enric

Jonas

Juliette

Humane Society

La Caixa Foundation

Volkswagen Stiftung

Fondation pour le Progrès de l’Homme (FPH)

Jean-François

EIT Foundation

Espegård Hassel

Nina

Lundbeckfonden

Hannoyer

Heersterbeek

Horosova

Hulsman

Ibanez

Korhonen

Lalo

Legout

Lobo-Luppi

Lopez

López Martínez

Lunardi

Mango

Moreno

Oliveros

Osset

Peretz

Porro

Michele

Sarah

Patricia

Ria

Centre Francais Fondations

Fondation Roi Baudouin

European Molecular Biology Laboratory

Wageningen University

Mari Carmen

Foundation Ibercivis

Kalle

Kone Foundation

Raphaelle

Axa Research Fund

Valérie

Léticia

Ignasi

Javier

Fondation Le Jeune

Fondation Mérieux

La Caixa Foundation

Fundación Barrie

Riccardo

Fondazione Monte dei Paschi di Siena

Carlo

Teresa

Oliver

Miquel

Anne

Ricardo

Fondazione Cariplo

Bernard van Leer Foundation

Agropolis Fondation

Fundació Víctor Grífols i Lucas

CHU Brugmann

Fonda Cariplo

Santamaría

Guillermon

La Caixa Foundation

Sanz

Serrano

Streiter

Trujillo

Valls

von Poschinger

Wünning

Zieliński

María

Firmin

Felix

Fundación General CSIC

Foundation Ibercivis

Mercator Stiftung

Abraham

European Fondation Center

Ricard

Kinga

Ingrid

Adam

Zohar Consulting

Fondation de Luxembourg

Robert Bosch Stiftung

Foundation for Polish Science

63

THE ROLE OF PHILANTHROPY IN THE PROMOTION OF RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AND INNOVATION

Mikkel

Norbert

Marzia

Bunning

Danish Science Communication

Wilabonn

ECSITE

ATHENA

Jean Pierre

Euroscience

EUN

Fondation Sciences Citoyennes

European Academy of Sciences

IFOK

Collaborating Centre on Sustainable 
 Consumption and Production gGmbH

IFZ - University of Klagenfurt

Riga

Amsterdam

University A Coruña, Director, Inditex Chair of 
Social Responsibility

Centre of Innovation and Technology, 
 Polytechnic Univ. Barcelona

EXPERTS

Bohm

Steinhaus

Mazzonetto

De Cock

Alix

Gras-Velázquez

Neubauer

Fayl

Banthien

Zurad

Karner

Kundzina

Bekkers

Rey

Àgueda

Claudia

Gilbert

Henning

Jadwiga

Sandra

Laïla

René

Marta

Sánchez

Susana

MODERATORS

Nielsen

Jan Hein

Tiesinga-Poutnik

Simone

RAPPORTEUR

Schuyt

Theo

VU University Amsterdam

COMMISSION

Quintana-Trias

Laroche

Galiay

Fabbri

Paula

Lagiou

Spichtinger

Eronen

Lauritsalo

Piret

64

Octavi

Gilles

Philippe

Karen

Lino

Dionysia

Daniel

Noora

Laura

Anne

EC RTD-B6

EC RTD-B6

EC RTD-B6

EC RTD-B6

EC RTD-B6

EC RTD-B6

EC RTD-B6

EC RTD-B6

EC RTD-B6

EC RTD-B6

HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS 

  one copy:

Free publications:
• 
   via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu);
•  more than one copy or posters/maps: 

from the European Union’s representations (http://ec.europa.eu/represent_en.htm);
from the delegations in non-EU countries (http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/index_en.htm);

  by contacting the Europe Direct service (http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm) or 
  calling 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (freephone number from anywhere in the EU) (*). 
(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you).   

Priced publications:
• 

 via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu).

Priced subscriptions:
• 

 via one of the sales agents of the Publications Office of the European Union  
(http://publications.europa.eu/others/agents/index_en.htm).

 
 
Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) represents 
a step forward in the debate on science in society. 
RRI encompasses all stages of Research and Innovation 
(R&I). To that end, RRI supports collaboration between 
all stakeholders and integrates societal issues in order 
to improve the excellence of R&I, a goal that perfectly 
matches the philanthropy’s social legitimization as well 
as the European Commission. 

The workshop showed how mutual understanding and 
collaboration might lead to success.  Its main outcome 
is maybe the common will of the EC, foundations and 
other philanthropic organisations to go further in the 
development of RRI in Europe.

Studies and reports

K
I
-
N
A
-
2
6
-
5
4
3
-
E
N
-
C

doi:10.2777/64285