The Limits of Conventional Reflexivity: Cross-Cultural Inclusion, Technical Deliberations, and Indigenous Environmental Justice

• In Event: Reflecting on Reflexivity in Practice: Responsible Innovation, Engagement, and Governance - II

Abstract

The meaningful inclusion of stakeholders in the development and regulation of new technologies is central to the theoretical frameworks of responsible innovation (Stilgoe, Owen & Macnaghten, 2013) and inclusive risk governance (Renn, 2008). Key to both of these frameworks is reflexivity by technical experts, which is often spurred by interactions with interested lay communities. However, if lay communities and expert stakeholders share a common set of normative assumptions, key questions may remain unexamined. This shortcoming is illuminated when there is an attempt to include historically marginalized communities, such as Indigenous Peoples, who may not share the same assumptions. Furthermore, conventional approaches to reflexivity often fail to explicitly consider the historical and contemporary dimensions of power that shape inclusive governance processes. We examine these limitations of reflexivity via the case study of the potential reintroduction of the genetically engineered American chestnut tree. We suggest that the inclusion of principles from indigenous environmental justice can help shape a reflection process that is more effective, equitable, and just.

Authors

• S. Kathleen Barnhill-Dilling, North Carolina State University

• Louie Rivers III, North Carolina State University