abstract: Several prominent research strategy organizations recommend applying life cycle assessment (LCA) early in the development of emerging technologies. For example, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the National Research Council, the Department of Energy, and the National Nanotechnology Initiative identify the potential for LCA to inform research and development (R&D) of photovoltaics and products containing engineered nanomaterials (ENMs). In this capacity, application of LCA to emerging technologies may contribute to the growing movement for responsible research and innovation (RRI). However, existing LCA practices are largely retrospective and ill-suited to support the objectives of RRI. For example, barriers related to data availability, rapid technology change, and isolation of environmental from technical research inhibit application of LCA to developing technologies. This dissertation focuses on development of anticipatory LCA tools that incorporate elements of technology forecasting, provide robust explorations of uncertainty, and engage diverse innovation actors in overcoming retrospective approaches to environmental assessment and improvement of emerging technologies. Chapter one contextualizes current LCA practices within the growing literature articulating RRI and identifies the optimal place in the stage gate innovation model to apply LCA. Chapter one concludes with a call to develop anticipatory LCA – building on the theory of anticipatory governance – as a series of methodological improvements that seek to align LCA practices with the objectives of RRI. Chapter two provides a framework for anticipatory LCA, identifies where research from multiple disciplines informs LCA practice, and builds off the recommendations presented in the preceding chapter. Chapter two focuses on crystalline and thin film photovoltaics (PV) to illustrate the novel framework, in part because PV is an environmentally motivated technology undergoing extensive R&D efforts and rapid increases in scale of deployment. The chapter concludes with a series of research recommendations that seek to direct PV research agenda towards pathways with the greatest potential for environmental improvement. Similar to PV, engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) are an emerging technology with numerous potential applications, are the subject of active R&D efforts, and are characterized by high uncertainty regarding potential environmental implications. Chapter three introduces a Monte Carlo impact assessment tool based on the toxicity impact assessment model USEtox and demonstrates stochastic characterization factor (CF) development to prioritize risk research with the greatest potential to improve certainty in CFs. The case study explores a hypothetical decision in which personal care product developers are interested in replacing the conventional antioxidant niacinamide with the novel ENM C60, but face high data uncertainty, are unsure regarding potential ecotoxicity impacts associated with this substitution, and do not know what future risk-relevant experiments to invest in that most efficiently improve certainty in the comparison. Results suggest experiments that elucidate C60 partitioning to suspended solids should be prioritized over parameters with little influence on results. This dissertation demonstrates a novel anticipatory approach to exploration of uncertainty in environmental models that can create new, actionable knowledge with potential to guide future research and development decisions. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Civil and Environmental Engineering 2016

Many innovative businesses have discovered an added value in collaborating with experts, users or other stakeholders in developing innovative products or services. Not all collaboration with stakeholders, however, corresponds to the criteria for opening up an innovation process to the needs of societal actors under the terms of responsible innovation. The question of what makes collaboration meaningful in the sense of responsible innovation was presented and discussed in a 75 min workshop at the European Science Open Forum (ESOF) in Toulouse, France in June 2018. Identified success factors and challenges for making a collaboration process meaningful for the collaborating parties highlight the importance of competent process preparation and facilitation, investment of time and effort to enable mutual understanding and the development of trustful relationships as well as the collaborating partners' willingness to implement changes that result from the collaboration process.

The power of financial innovations to impact societies at global scales compels us to ask how innovation occurs, how it is governed and how to support the responsible initiation and emergence of such innovation in society. This thesis focuses on investigating and comparing current approaches to, and limitations of, the governance of financial innovation and perceptions of responsible financial innovation in three very different institutional settings: a large, global asset management company; a SME developing disruptive, technology - related platforms and services based on big data and associated analytics supporting customer relationship management in the banking and retail sectors; and a global insurance broker. To date there has been almost no published empirical research into the processes and governance of financial innovation in such corporate settings. The initial hypothesis that financial innovation is not governed (internally, externally) was not supported by the empirical data: rather these suggest the existence of formal and informal mechanisms for innovation governance. As suggested in the literature, financial innovation was observed to be largely incremental in nature and involve multiple stakeholders, co-ordinated internally by an ‘innovation owner’ (e.g. an individual, a group of individuals or a department). The research suggests that while there is broad statutory (regulation) and non-statutory governance of the financial sector, there is limited direct regulation of financial innovation per se. Despite this, contextual regulation (e.g. EU) and industry standards set an important governance frame within which innovation was observed to occur, complemented by a range of organizational innovation governance approaches, which ranged from completely informal, ad hoc (‘de facto’) processes to formal staging innovation management tools. It was not possible to generalize across sectors, emphasizing the need for more empirical work in other organizations in order to understand innovation management and governance across the financial sector as a whole. Responsible financial innovation is an emerging concept associated with a very small body of academic literature. The case study data show responsible financial innovation to be perceived as an ‘interpretively flexible umbrella’ term, underpinned by a value system that leads to quantifiable positive outputs (e.g. creating customer satisfaction). The research suggests that several ‘competencies’ (e.g. compliance, learning, communication, monitoring, and ownership) were perceived as relevant to responsible financial innovation by respondents. Themes emerging from the study mirrored to some extent the seven framings suggested by Armstrong et al. (2012) and Muniesa and Lenglet (2012) and the four dimensions of responsible innovation proposed by Owen et al. (2013); these however were very narrowly framed, especially with regard to second-order reflexivity (e.g. on the normative purposes and functions of finance in society). While dimensions of anticipation, reflection, deliberation and responsiveness (Owen et al., 2013) were evident to varying degrees in the cases these were narrowly configured (e.g. around ethics of data monetization, or on anticipation of operational risks), with deliberation often being internally focused, or including only a limited range of external stakeholders. These observations cause me to argue that current mechanisms for governing financial innovation are not sufficiently robust to support their responsible emergence in society. I conclude that any framework for responsible financial innovation should endeavor to broaden the scope for stakeholder engagement and make use of multi-level governance mechanisms (including committees in the innovation and governance process), while continuing to acknowledge the importance of contextual legislation in the framing of innovation trajectories. I recommend the initiation of a cross sector and independent institution for systematic financial innovations assessment, the establishment of formal cross-sector fora and communication channels to facilitate engagement with external stakeholders, and the codification of responsible financial innovation competencies into contextual legislation.

Dans cette thèse, nous étudions les concepts de durabilité et de responsabilité à l’ère de la numérisation, époque marquée par l’émergence de nouvelles technologies numériques de rupture. Nous cherchons à identifier dans quelle mesure les technologies numériques peuvent contribuer aux objectifs de durabilité et de responsabilité et comment une technologie numérique spécifique peut faciliter l’atteinte de ces objectifs.Ces critères nous ont conduits au choix de la fabrication additive, plus communément connue sous le nom de « technologie d'impression 3D » (3DP). Observée à travers du prisme conceptuel de l'innovation responsable, notre étude dévoile au travers de ses principaux résultats certains des mystères que revêtent les 3DP auprès du grand public. En combinant le concept d'innovation responsable avec une technologie numérique spécifique, nous avons adopté une approche de recherche utilisant la théorie enracinée pour suivre les processus d'adoption/diffusion actuels à partir du terrain, et identifier les utilisateurs précurseurs et influents du domaine des 3DP. Ainsi, les principaux résultats peuvent être divisés en deux thèmes, dans un premier temps pour expliquer les caractéristiques des systèmes sociotechniques dans lequel la 3DP est située et, dans un deuxième temps, discuter des avantages et des défis sociaux, économiques et environnementaux de 3DP pour le grand public. Dans la seconde partie, la première section, consacrée aux caractéristiques du système sociotechnique, se concentre sur le processus d'adoption actuel, l'identification des utilisateurs influents prenant forme dans la culture ‘Maker’ et dans les espaces de coworking. Cette section présente également les caractéristiques actuelles de ces primo utilisateurs et les particularités de 3DP pour le grand public, telles que le déséquilibre hommes-femmes pour les utilisateurs actuels, et la manière dont contribueront la 3DP au développement de nouveaux produits. La seconde section de nos principaux résultats offre une analyse détaillée des avantages et des défis sociaux, économiques et environnementaux spécifiques de 3DP au niveau consommateur.Ces résultats indiquent qu'il existe une attente sociétale croissante auprès des 3DP pour adoucir les systèmes de production actuels et aboutir à des logiques de production plus durables. Par conséquent, les opportunités économiques offrent la possibilité de développer de nouveaux services et produits dans le marché des 3DP, caractérisé par une forte expansion et de faibles barrières à l'entrée, qui séduisent une grande variété de petites et moyennes entreprises (PME). Enfin, la nature environnementale des 3DP au niveau consommateur, même si elle offre des possibilités prometteuses pour préserver les ressources, optimiser la production, maîtriser l’obsolescence planifiée et recycler et réutiliser les matériaux, fait toujours face à un certain nombre de problèmes, qui limitent les apports environnementaux dans le cas d’une adoption de masse. Les contributions théoriques correspondent principalement aux spécificités du processus d'adoption des 3DP au niveau consommateur, à l’identification des caractéristiques des primo utilisateurs et des utilisateurs influents, mais aussi aux implications en termes de développement durable, sujets rarement traités dans la littérature en gestion. Nos principales conclusions apportent également des informations détaillées aux praticiens qui peuvent mener leurs activités entrepreneuriales, en mobilisant ces technologies pour améliorer les modèles d’affaires existants ou en développant des produits et services entièrement nouveaux. Les législateurs peuvent tirer parti des informations sur les pratiques 3DP actuelles et élaborer des politiques pour soutenir la recherche et l'innovation dans le domaine des 3DP ou pour identifier les menaces potentielles pour le public, telles que les risques liés à la propriété intellectuelle ou les problématiques de standard. / This study investigates the concepts of sustainability and responsibility in innovation through the processes of digitalization, marked by the emergence of new disruptive digital technologies. We observe the link between the digitalization and sustainability to understand how a specific digital technology can lead to sustainable and responsible outcomes. These criteria led us to additive manufacturing, or more commonly known, 3D Printing (3DP) technology.We adopted a responsible innovation concept as a set of principles to guide our study on 3DP. Moreover, this study design enabled us to align responsible innovation with existing research methods such as grounded theory. Through a bottom-up research approach, we observed trajectories of the current 3DP adoption/diffusion process and identified early users within their sociotechnical environment where 3DP is currently available. This constituted a solid ground to discuss 3DP sustainable and responsible nature and related implications. Responsible innovation concept, 3DP technology and our research methods are described in the Part I of this document.Part II elaborates main findings that can be divided into two sections. In the first section, we present characteristics of the sociotechnical system, current adoption process, 3DP innovation characteristics, and identify lead users. Current lead users of consumer-level 3DP are seen in the form of Maker culture and the coworking spaces. We present the insights on this specific interaction between the 3DP and Maker culture, whilst also discussing characteristic gender imbalance and new product development.The second section offers detailed analysis of consumer-level 3DP social, economic and environmental implications. Social implications indicate that there is an increasing societal expectation where 3DP is expected to lead a transformation towards more sustainable means of production. Economic implications are concentrated on the business opportunities relying on the growing 3DP market. As an evolving and niche market, current expansion and low-entry barriers are attracting interest of Small and Medium Entrepreneurs (SMEs) who develop new 3DP services and products. Lastly, even though with a promising potential to preserve raw resources, optimize production, tackle planned obsolescence, ensure recycling and reuse of materials, consumer-level 3DP still faces several environmental challenges. Possible rebound effect in energy and resources could lead to consequences that undermine its additive nature, where ecology is not a central topic for 3DP further development.Theoretical contributions of our study can be summarized in the specificities of consumer-level 3DP adoption process, characteristics of the early adopters and sustainability implications. These topics are scarcely covered in management research. Moreover, our key findings also provide detailed managerial contributions for the practitioners and the policy-makers. These can contribute to entrepreneurial activities that demand 3DP alignment with existing business models or development of new products and services based on this technology. Policy-makers can obtain insights on the current 3DP practices that can help guide policies to support research and innovation linked to 3DP technology. Our study insights can assist their understanding of possible threats hidden in Intellectual Property (IP), security and standardization issues related to 3DP technology.Finally, our main intention was to contribute to the ongoing scholar debate about the 3DP technology, digitalization and sustainability. For these purposes, we have developed a detailed thesis monograph offering a broad range of findings, whilst two fully published peer-reviewed publications, alongside several conference papers, ensure public visibility of our work. The published peer-reviewed articles are available in the Appendices section of this document.

abstract: Three dilemmas plague governance of scientific research and technological innovation: the dilemma of orientation, the dilemma of legitimacy, and the dilemma of control. The dilemma of orientation risks innovation heedless of long-term implications. The dilemma of legitimacy grapples with delegation of authority in democracies, often at the expense of broader public interest. The dilemma of control poses that the undesirable implications of new technologies are hard to grasp, yet once grasped, all too difficult to remedy. That humanity has innovated itself into the sustainability crisis is a prime manifestation of these dilemmas. Responsible innovation (RI), with foci on anticipation, inclusion, reflection, coordination, and adaptation, aims to mitigate dilemmas of orientation, legitimacy, and control. The aspiration of RI is to bend the processes of technology development toward more just, sustainable, and societally desirable outcomes. Despite the potential for fruitful interaction across RI’s constitutive domains—sustainability science and social studies of science and technology—most sustainability scientists under-theorize the sociopolitical dimensions of technological systems and most science and technology scholars hesitate to take a normative, solutions-oriented stance. Efforts to advance RI, although notable, entail one-off projects that do not lend themselves to comparative analysis for learning. In this dissertation, I offer an intervention research framework to aid systematic study of intentional programs of change to advance responsible innovation. Two empirical studies demonstrate the framework in application. An evaluation of Science Outside the Lab presents a program to help early-career scientists and engineers understand the complexities of science policy. An evaluation of a Community Engagement Workshop presents a program to help engineers better look beyond technology, listen to and learn from people, and empower communities. Each program is efficacious in helping scientists and engineers more thoughtfully engage with mediators of science and technology governance dilemmas: Science Outside the Lab in revealing the dilemmas of orientation and legitimacy; Community Engagement Workshop in offering reflexive and inclusive approaches to control. As part of a larger intervention research portfolio, these and other projects hold promise for aiding governance of science and technology through responsible innovation. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Sustainability 2016

abstract: While artificial intelligence (AI) has seen enormous technical progress in recent years, less progress has occurred in understanding the governance issues raised by AI. In this dissertation, I make four contributions to the study and practice of AI governance. First, I connect AI to the literature and practices of responsible research and innovation (RRI) and explore their applicability to AI governance. I focus in particular on AI’s status as a general purpose technology (GPT), and suggest some of the distinctive challenges for RRI in this context such as the critical importance of publication norms in AI and the need for coordination. Second, I provide an assessment of existing AI governance efforts from an RRI perspective, synthesizing for the first time a wide range of literatures on AI governance and highlighting several limitations of extant efforts. This assessment helps identify areas for methodological exploration. Third, I explore, through several short case studies, the value of three different RRI-inspired methods for making AI governance more anticipatory and reflexive: expert elicitation, scenario planning, and formal modeling. In each case, I explain why these particular methods were deployed, what they produced, and what lessons can be learned for improving the governance of AI in the future. I find that RRI-inspired methods have substantial potential in the context of AI, and early utility to the GPT-oriented perspective on what RRI in AI entails. Finally, I describe several areas for future work that would put RRI in AI on a sounder footing. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Human and Social Dimensions of Science and Technology 2019

Problématique : L’innovation responsable en santé est un domaine en croissance qui vise à contribuer à une meilleure gouvernance des systèmes de santé. Par contre, il y a actuellement très peu d’outils qui rendent plus opérationnels ses concepts et qui visent à soutenir des choix éclairés par les détenteurs d’enjeux du domaine de la santé. Objectifs : Ce projet de recherche a pour objectifs d’évaluer la fiabilité d’un Outil de dépistage et d’évaluation de l’innovation responsable en santé (IRS) et d’accroitre sa fiabilité lors de son application. Méthodes : Le devis de recherche mixte repose sur l’évaluation quantitative de la fiabilité de l’outil par le biais d’une mesure d’accord interjuges et sur le développement et l’évaluation quantitative et qualitative d’un Guide d’utilisation visant à accroitre la facilité d’utilisation de l’outil. Des entrevues semi-dirigées ont été conduites auprès de (n=6) participants et participantes, afin de faire ressortir les points de convergence et de divergence concernant le Guide d’utilisation. Résultats : Les coefficients de Gwet calculés pour l’accord interjuges varient entre 0,693 et 1, ce qui signifie que l’accord varie de « substantiel » à « parfait ». Les commentaires des participants et des participantes ont fait ressortir que le Guide d’utilisation était complet sur le plan de l’information présentée, bien qu’un peu redondant. Des recommandations sont proposées afin de réviser le guide. Conclusion : Ce projet contribue à la santé publique en produisant des connaissances utiles sur l’application d’outils par des équipes interdisciplinaires. L’Outil IRS dont la fiabilité est maintenant mieux connue pourra également, à plus long terme, favoriser les initiatives responsables en santé. / Abstract Introduction: Responsible innovation in health is a growing field of research that aims to contribute to better governance of health systems. There are currently very few tools to support its operationalization and the choices stakeholders in the health field make. Objectives: The objectives of this research project are to assess the reliability of a Responsible Innovation in Health (RIH) screening and assessment Tool and how its reliability may be increased during its application. Methods: The mixed methods study design is based on the quantitative evaluation of the reliability of the Tool by means of a measure of interrater agreement and on the development and evaluation of a user guide aiming to increase the usability of the Tool. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with (n = 6) participants, in order to highlight the points of convergence and divergence concerning the user guide. Results: The Gwet coefficients calculated for the interrater agreement vary between 0.693 and 1, which means that the agreement varies from “substantial” to “perfect”. Participants’ comments indicated that the user guide was comprehensive in terms of the information presented, although somewhat redundant. Recommendations are suggested in order to revise the guide. Conclusion: This project contributes to public health by producing useful knowledge on the application of tools by interdisciplinary teams. The IRS Tool, whose reliability is now better known, may also, in the longer term, encourage responsible health initiatives.

Scientific research, technological development, and commercialisation are processes through which new technologies continually emerge and enter markets. Nanotechnology is an example of an emergent technology (or rather a suite of technologies) which promises to open up a universe of possibilities for the development of new products and processes. Advocates of the technology argue that nanotechnology has the potential to spur economic development while at the same time offering partial solutions to many of the grand challenges of our times such as alleviating hunger, providing new energy sources, reducing climate change, curing diseases, etc. However, alongside these optimistic views, there are also fears and apprehensions concerning the safe and ethical development of nanotechnologies, including the need to address potential negative impacts on the natural environment and human health and safety. The food and food packaging area has shown itself to be a particularly sensitive sector in this respect where the potential for nanoparticles to enter the human body has enhanced the sensitivity of the industry to public concern. The past has shown that any changes or modifications made to food have resulted in public backlash (e.g. GM foods). Due to this some parts of the food and packaging industry remain cautious about making transparent their use of nanotechnologies in their products and processes. However, simultaneously pressure is mounting from regulatory agencies, and from some activists, to pursue the safe and 'responsible' development of nanotechnologies (whatever that may be) as an ethical obligation. The use of nanotechnologies in food and food packaging has become increasingly complex because of its introduction at various points in the food chain, giving rise to debates as to "who is responsible". As a contribution to the debate on what constitutes the 'responsible' governance of new/emergent technologies, this thesis investigates the governance of nanotechnologies and the idea of 'responsibility' and 'responsible innovation' through the lens of perspectives of different actors within the nanotech food chain. A qualitative research methodology was used where semi-structured interviews were conducted with a heterogeneous group of actors with a particular focus on the food and food packaging sectors. Research in comparative national settings (Canada and India) was conducted on the grounds that regulation of nanotechnologies differs significantly across OECD and non-OECD countries, and where the global debate on nanotechnologies is organised and dominated by OECD countries. Findings from this thesis showed that the set of critical elements, such as health and safety, that are put forward by such OECD countries like Canada for the 'responsible' development of nanotechnologies are not the same as that found in India and are seen to differ. In India, meeting the grand challenges of society such as food security, clean drinking water and alleviating poverty take precedent over other elements, where science, technology (such as nanotechnologies) and innovation are harnessed by entrepreneurs, and small and large firms to solve these national problems. However, while I began the study with the intention of comparing two national territories with different regulatory settings, the study also found a case of collaborative Canada-India transnational research network where 'responsibility' is influenced through certain funding criteria set by the more dominant partner, Canada. This suggests the return of public intervention by dominant OECD countries in pro-actively shaping R&D processes that are influencing the 'responsible' development of nano-products in such emerging markets, where there is a potential for future trade associations.

abstract: Research confirms that climate change is primarily due to the influx of greenhouse gases from the anthropogenic burning of fossil fuels for energy. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the dominant greenhouse gas contributing to climate change. Although research also confirms that negative emission technologies (NETs) are necessary to stay within 1.5-2°C of global warming, this dissertation proposes that the climate change problem has been ineffectively communicated to suggest that CO2 emissions reduction is the only solution to climate change. Chapter 1 explains that current United States (US) policies focus heavily on reducing CO2 emissions, but ignore the concentrations of previous CO2 emissions accumulating in the atmosphere. Through political, technological, and ethical lenses, this dissertation evaluates whether the management process of CO2 emissions and concentrations in the US today can effectively combat climate change. Chapter 2 discusses the historical management of US air pollution, why CO2 is regulated as an air pollutant, and how the current political framing of climate change as an air pollution problem promotes the use of market-based solutions to reduce emissions but ignores CO2 concentrations. Chapter 3 argues for the need to reframe climate change solutions to include reducing CO2 concentrations along with emissions. It presents the scientific reasoning and technological needs for reducing CO2 concentrations, why direct air capture (DAC) is the most effective NET to do so, and existing regulatory systems that can inform future CO2 removal policy. Chapter 4 explores whether Responsible Innovation (RI), a framework that includes society in the innovation process of emerging technologies, is effective for the ethical research and deployment of DAC; reveals the need for increased DAC governance strategies, and suggests how RI can be expanded to allow continued research of controversial emerging technologies in case of a climate change emergency. Overall, this dissertation argues that climate change must be reframed as a two-part problem: preventing new CO2 emissions and reducing concentrations, which demands increased investment in DAC research, development, and deployment. However, without a national or global governance strategy for DAC, it will remain difficult to include CO2 concentration reduction as an essential piece to the climate change solution. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Civil, Environmental and Sustainable Engineering 2020

Il lavoro di ricerca ha a oggetto l’analisi del modello europeo (UE) di regolamentazione delle nanotecnologie nel settore agroalimentare, con riferimento agli aspetti etico-giuridici e sociali, ai fini della definizione del quadro normativo di riferimento nella sua relazione con la dimensione di complessità e incertezza intrinseca nel sapere scientifico-tecnologico. La prospettiva teorica da cui muove l’analisi è la co-produzione tra i linguaggi della scienza e del diritto proposta dagli STS (Science & Technologies Studies). Partendo dalla descrizione degli aspetti scientifici dei nanomateriali e delle applicazioni nanotecnologiche nel settore alimentare, il lavoro analizza, in primo luogo, le problematiche correlate alle procedure di gestione del rischio – dalle prospettive più riduzionistiche della cd. “scienza del rischio” nell'innovazione alle più complesse modalità di valutazione integrata del rischio. L’indagine s’incentra, quindi, sulle forme che la normazione sta assumendo nell'intreccio con i saperi delle nanotecnologie, attraverso un approccio comparatistico delle esperienze normative europea e statunitense. L’ultima parte del lavoro s’indirizza, infine, all’analisi delle esigenze di democraticità sottese alle suddette scelte scientifico-giuridiche, problematizzando il concetto di governance anticipatoria e responsabile delle nanotecnologie (concetto correlato all’idea di riuscire a guidare i processi di innovazione attivamente), alla luce del rapporto tra conoscenze scientifiche, politiche agroalimentari e diritto. / In recent decades technoscientific innovation has pushed the food boundaries to a new frontier of nanofood. Such a term refers to an array of food products, whose processes of growing, production and packaging involve nanoscale (nanotechnology and nanosciences) knowledges and applications. This research focuses on the analysis of the European (EU) regulatory framework in the field of agrofood nanotechnology. The analysis considers the salient features of emerging applications of nanotechnologies in the agrofood sector and compares the legal framework on nanofood in the EU with the USA’s regulatory approach. It also develops an interpretation of the normative evolution in the EU, by trying to understand what is the role of science in governing technological risks in nanofood safety, and assessing how adequate the regulatory instruments are in achieving the goal of responsible research and innovation as proposed within the process of rethinking European governance.