Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/techfore

Analysing acceptability of E-rickshaw as a public transport innovation in

Delhi: A responsible innovation perspective
Dr Rajbeer Singh *, Shilpa Mishra, Krishna Tripathi
Centre for Studies in Science Policy, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi 110067, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The Electrical (E)-rickshaw as of the many emerging technologies for e-mobility has witness critical and chal­
Acceptability of E-rickshaw lenging issues like sustainability, accountability and responsibility while it becomes one of the new trans­
Sustainability portation means in India. The responsible innovation approach is interesting to analyse for acceptance and
Deliberation & participation
adoption of E-rickshaw as a legal vehicle technology for India. Paper also addresses whether the case of E-
Responsible innovation
rickshaw as a component of the public transport in Delhi can be a responsible innovation. The interviews,
focused group discussions, non-participant observations, and survey methods used to trace deliberation and
participation processes for the emerging innovation. The findings suggest that reliability, safety, ownership,
solidarity, competitiveness, affordability, last-mile connectivity, accessibility, happiness, gender equity, non-
polluting, employability, social equity, comfortability, healthiness, profitability as universal and culture-
specific values are embedded in this innovation. These values make this product socially, economically and
environmentally sustainable in the region.

1. Introduction
The thirst for knowledge and innovation is aggressively shaping the
present human civilization by not only harbouring immense advantages
and opportunities but also at times causes challenges. Technologies and
innovations produce not only the understanding, knowledge, and value
(economic, social, or otherwise) but also questions, dilemmas, and un­
intended (and sometimes undesirable) impacts (Chamuah and Singh,
2020; Owen et al., 2013). Sometimes the negative effects of technology
outweigh its positive impacts. In this condition, the ruling authority has
no other option but to ban those new technologies which could become
very complex tasks. There is also a risk of technological lock-in which
implies that innovation is highly embedded in society, and controlling it
may have a huge cost and can be resisted by vested interests. In devel­
oping countries where already resources (financial and technological)
are in limited amounts and people are living in poverty, it becomes
difficult to quit new technologies that profit and improve their living
conditions. In this scenario, it is up to the policymakers to manage and
govern innovation to fulfil its purpose and also accommodate the un­
certainty associated with it. Additionally, it has become most significant
to address the issues of accountability and responsibility about the
development and deployment of new technologies as innovations in
society.
A responsible innovation framework to govern emerging technolo­
gies with care and responsiveness as its inherent philosophical corner­
stones (Owen et al., 2013b; Pavie and Egal, 2014; Schomberg, 2011;
Setiawan et al., 2019, 2017; Setiawan and Singh, 2015; Singh and
Kroesen, 2012; Von Schomberg, 2013; Xavier et al., 2014) are frontier
researchable issues here. In recent time existing system of technological
innovation fails to address the societal, environmental and economic
impact of innovation because this approach only focuses on technolog­
ical development and economic performance (Ko and Kim, 2020; Mis­
hra and Singh, 2018; Setiawan et al., 2017; Singh and Kroesen, 2012;
Von Schomberg, 2013). In such a scenario European Union proposed
responsible innovation to manage emerging technologies (Von Schom­
berg, 2013). As the framework of responsible innovation in the context
of developing countries has been less explored and a case study is needed
to understand the governance of emerging technologies under the
responsible innovation framework. The e-mobility has brought on the
horizon numerous technological innovations which pose long term
challenges for the society, economy and the environment. The popular
mode of e-mobility i.e. E-rickshaw brought unknown risks and benefits.
If society does not know such risks in advance then such a scenario poses
numerous questions to be answered by democracies and elected

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: rajbasera@gmail.com (D.R. Singh).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120908
Received 3 November 2020; Received in revised form 18 May 2021; Accepted 19 May 2021
Available online 14 June 2021
0040-1625/© 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
D.R. Singh et al.
governments. In this way, the adoption of E-rickshaw in Delhi fits as a
suitable case study to analyse responsible innovation for developing
countries. Hence this paper has attempted to understand the RI
approach in the governance of innovation in developing countries
through selecting an empirical observation exploring the adoption of
radical technology i.e. E-rickshaws in Delhi. For a better understanding
it is important to metion the context and details of the journey of
E-rickshaw from a frugal machine to a motorised vehicle. Therore,
hereafter, subection introduce these aspects.
1.1. Context: case
To bring the study into context, it is imperative to introduce and
discuss the need for E-rickshaw in the region (Delhi NCR) and its current
status as a component of the public transport medium. Recently, emis­
sions from the transport sector have emerged as the fastest-growing
source of greenhouse gas emissions (Wright and Fulton, 2005) which
necessitates experimenting with new transportation means deploying
alternative fuel, and electric vehicles provides an excellent option in this
scenario. Countries are adopting the electric vehicle to address fossil fuel
dependency, pollution and to increase employment opportunities.
Various countries of the world are adopting the electric vehicle as a new
transport medium under various missions and plans, for instance, France
has planned to stop the sale of all combustion engine vehicles by 2040
(Burch and Gilchrist, 2018). The Dutch government has presented a plan
to make all vehicles emissions-free by 2030 (Burch and Gilchrist, 2018;
Lambert, 2017). Considering similar developments, the Indian govern­
ment also launched Faster Adoption and Manufacturing (Hybrid &)
Electric vehicle (FAME) on 1st April 2015 (Shandilya et al., 2019).
National Mobility Mission 2020 is projected in 2013 with ‘aims to ach­
ieve national fuel security by promoting hybrid and electric vehicles in
the country’ (Shandilya et al., 2019). The adoption of the E-vehicle as
innovation is greatly influenced by its acceptability in the concerned
society and also involves the formulation of commensurate laws and
regulatory measures for its governance.
E-rickshaw was introduced in the year 2010 in Delhi as a green op­
tion of mobility in the city (Chakravarty, 2015). The purpose was also to
provide an easy commute option to visitors and to phase out conven­
tional hand-pulled Tri-cycle rickshaw (Chakravarty, 2015; Shandilya
et al., 2019) in frugal way. Soon this frugal machine gained so much
popularity with large number of drivers due to its low cost and easy
availability in the market. Further, the promotion of this Frugal Machine
was driven by severly deteriorating air quality in Delhi and National
Capital Region (NCR) and its impact on health. The health concerns
were brought under focus by WHO research which put up Delhi at a very
low ranking in the air quality of 1600 world cities (Times of India,
2019). Hence, there were serious effort put forward by the Government
to control and mitigate air pollution problems by applying various
measures like the odd-even scheme of traffic regulation and adoption of
electric vehicles. The E-rickshaw was presented as an alternative,
affordable and clean mode of mobility with the immense potential of
providing last-mile connectivity (Ghate and Suneja, 2018; Harding and
Kandlikar, 2017). At the early stage of introduction in Delhi, the
E-rickshaw as frugal machine did not face any regulatory hurdle as it
was considered as non- motorized transport medium (NMT), a jugad
(Frugal Machine) and without scientific standards (Harding, 2014;
Shandilya et al., 2019) on which the existing regulations regarding
motorized transport (MT) were not applicable. At this stage this new
Machine got benefits of ignorance and trivialsation of needs for classi­
fying it as a motor vehicle and regulate it. As a result, t in vacuum of
regulation, taxation rules, design rules, driver’s licence rules, rule for
plying on roads, traffic rules and regulating authorityhe number of
Frugal Machine kept swelling with many drivers got massive numbers of
jobs as a new employment source. In 2016, the numbers of electric
rickshaws plying on the roads were over 100,000 in Delhi (Ghate and
Suneja, 2018). Including other states, India had approximately 1.5
2
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908
million battery-powered E-rickshaw (Ward et al., 2018). Though the
E-rickshaw acquired popularity amongst the drivers and the commuters,
its acceptability in the mainstream public transport came into question
due to lack of governance mechanisms and being termed as unsafe and
irresponsible innovation. Due to accidents caused and mismanagement
of the E-rickshaw, Delhi high court ordered to ban it (Chakravarty,
2015) which was later overruled by amendment of Motor Vehicle Act,
2015 (Ghate and Suneja, 2018) by the Indian parliament. This new law
made a frugal machine as an emerging innovative motor vehicle named
as E-Rickshow. The law made it acceptable motorised vehicle in India.
The journey of this frugal machine driven by new technological inno­
vation has been very interesting, challenging and insightful from the
introduction of the concept and product to get accepted and adopted as
an innovation. The early introduction of frugal machine has posed
multiple risks without available process and means to govern and con­
trol them in a democracy. In absence of any such option at early stage led
to bumpy and contraining orders for ban from Courts for bringing a
framework of law to regulate, define and re-introduce after making a
new law. The aspects of accountability were missing at since early stage
and this motivated to explore the case as responsible innovation in areas
of emerging technologies of E mobility.
In the above context, this study has aimed to analyse the acceptance
and adoption of E-rickshaw as a legal vehicle technological innovation
for India. The questions put forward in this study are - how deliberation
and participation dimensions of responsible innovation are evidently
deployed in the process of acceptance and adoption of E-rickshaw? How
sustainability imparted in the emerging innovation that is E-rickshaws
in Delhi? How and What different values are embedded in this innova­
tion to make it a responsible innovation? To analyse this case, respon­
sible innovation theoretical framework is proposed in the next section.
2. Theoretical analytical framework
The shift from one socio-technical system to another socio-technical
system requires models of innovation and systems approaches to inno­
vation for analysis. Systems approaches to innovation include a range of
different perspectives and theories, such as multi-level perspective,
transition theory, and innovation system. The responsibility, its
conceptualization and sustainability (social, economic and environ­
mental) are less focused in innovation studies such as national system
(Freeman, 1995; Nelson, 2013), sectoral innovation systems (Malerba,
2002), regional innovation system (Doloreux and Parto, 2005), tech­
nological innovation systems (Hekkert et al., 2011) and open innovation
(Chesbrough, 2003)’(Singh and Kroesen, 2012). Sustainable innovation
approach focuses on the element of sustainability in the concerned
innovation but even then, it is devoid of the concept of responsibility
(Hellström, 2007; Nill and Kemp, 2009). Multi-level perspective (Genus
and Coles, 2008; Markard and Truffer, 2008; Smith et al., 2010) of
transition theories emphasize change from one socio-technical system to
another socio-technical system but these theories do not explain value
inclusion in innovation and responsibility. In this context, responsible
innovation emerged as an innovative approach which considers
accountability, responsibility, sustainability (social, economic, envi­
ronmental) and value inclusion in innovation (Chamuah and Singh,
2019; Mishra & Singh, 2018; Owen et al., 2013; Setiawan et al., 2017;
Setiawan & Singh, 2015; Singh & Kroesen, 2012; Van den Hoven, 2013;
Von Schomberg, 2013; Zahinos et al., 2013). According to Singh
&Kroesen (2012), responsible innovation (RI) means being caring or
ensuring care for certain values for social, economic and environmental
sustainability by engaging in anticipation, reflexivity, deliberation,
responsiveness and participation for bringing up any change in any idea,
product, process, method, way of business, and technology to bring
them in a specific market or use in a specific society. “RI is a transparent,
interactive process by which societal actors and innovators become mutually
responsive to each other with a view to the (ethical) acceptability, sustain­
ability, and societal desirability of the innovation process and its marketable
D.R. Singh et al.
products (to allow a proper embedding of scientific and technological ad­
vances in our society)” (Von Schomberg, 2013). In other words, RI means
taking care of the future through collective stewardship of science
innovation in the present” (Stilgoe et al., 2013).
Being caring means one has empathy or concern for the needs of
others (Singh and Kroesen, 2012) expressed as values. All actors
involved in the development and adoption of innovation have different
concerns. Ensuring the care of the values is a necessary condition for
responsible innovation (Singh and Kroesen, 2012) process. But, how
would these values be ensured or taken care of The values are grouped
into two groups, firstly, universal and secondly, culture-specific
(Setiawan et al., 2019; Setiawan and Singh, 2015; Singh and Kroesen,
2012). Since E-rickshaw as innovation is witnessed in a developing
country, it means culture-specific values makes it critically important for
a theoretical framework. Further, how these values are imparted in
innovation has acquired significance for RI. These values are imparted
by dimensions of RI such as
a Anticipatory or anticipation i.e. act of foresight to identify future
impacts of adoption of innovation (Mishra and Singh, 2018; Owen
et al., 2013b; Setiawan et al., 2019; Setiawan and Singh, 2015; Singh
and Kroesen, 2012),
b Reflective/Reflexivity i.e. cause and effect relationship as a circular
process that shapes the innovation (Mishra and Singh, 2018; Owen
et al., 2013b; Setiawan and Singh, 2015; Singh and Kroesen, 2012),
c Deliberation i.e. aspects of innovation and adoption of innovation
are explored through discussion, debate and critique of all stake­
holders that are involved in innovation process (Setiawan et al.,
2019; Setiawan and Singh, 2015; Singh and Kroesen, 2012).
d Deliberative (Owen et al., 2013b),
e Participation i.e. taking part into or to be par of discussions on
different aspects of innovative idea and innovation that help to
accommodate different views (Mishra and Singh, 2018; Setiawan
et al., 2019; Setiawan and Singh, 2015; Singh and Kroesen, 2012),
f Responsive/Responsiveness i.e. responding and taking into account
to all views, requirements, issues and values and, ensuring that
innovation process responds to stakeholders’ specific conditions
(Mishra and Singh, 2018; Owen et al., 2013b; Setiawan et al., 2019;
Setiawan and Singh, 2015; Singh and Kroesen, 2012).
The RI approach acquires greater importance for developing coun­
tries where technologies are adopted from the west without commit­
ment to the values of accountability and culturally specificity.
Therefore, two RI dimensions, deliberation and participation are very
important for the case of E-rickshaw in Delhi. Deliberation is an inclu­
sive, representative process that provides a platform for stakeholders to
exchange their views (Levine et al., 2005). Deliberation dimension is
‘the mutual communication that involves weighing and reflecting on
preferences, values and interests regarding matters of common con­
cern’(Mansbridge, 2015) and a process of discussions and debates
through which parties can reach an agreement (Heller and Rao, 2015).
In Indian context, process of deliberation with participation of the
stakeholders can allow discussions, debates and critique of all the as­
pects of an innovation. The discussions on positive impacts of the
innovation can encourage future improvements in the technological and
institutional aspects of the adoption of innovation and; discussions on
negative impacts can help minimise and manage the risks associated
with innovation (Setiawan et al., 2019; Singh and Kroesen, 2012).
Culture of Deliberation is not a new tradition in India; it has been present
since the pre-colonial and colonial period (Parthasarathy and Rao,
2017). In developing countries like India where inequalities are deeply
rooted deliberative forum like - judicial courts and parliamentary debate
give legitimacy to deliberated issues (Mansbridge, 2015). The process of
deliberation gives the legitimacy and acceptance of innovation and risks
associated with it in the society before, during and after bring it in the
market. The time orientation is always futuristic in such engagements.
3
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908
Further, the dimension of participation ensures that not only
empathetic views of stakeholder are involved but their representation
gets placed in the process of innovation while discussions and different
aspects are taken care of in the deliberation dimension. Deliberation and
participationare complementary to each other (Heller and Rao, 2015a).
Since developing countries have hierarchical and power proximity fac­
tors in their culture as critical role players in the process of participation
and deliberation (Setiawan et al., 2019; Setiawan and Singh, 2015).
These two dimensions found to be significantly different at the theo­
retical approach level in developing countries as demonstrated by
scholars (Mishra and Singh, 2018; Setiawan et al., 2019; Setiawan and
Singh, 2015; Singh and Kroesen, 2012) through their extensive work.
Therefore, in this paper, while focusing on the case of E-rickshaw in
India, we explore the two-dimension for this case study.
The goal of the RI dimensions is to provide methods and process, and
embed sustainability in the innovation. Sustainability means not to
compromise the interests of future generations while fulfilling the needs
of the present generation. In Social terms sustainability means the new
idea and innovation should not compromise and antagonise the cultural
and social life. Social sustainability suggests that innovation has to
create a synergy and cohesiveness with the society in which innovators
intends to innovate and get adopted the innovation. Adoption of inno­
vation should be without compromising the benefit of future generations
(Blok and Lemmens, 2015; Mishra and Singh, 2018; Owen et al., 2013a;
Setiawan et al., 2019; Setiawan and Singh, 2015; Singh and Kroesen,
2012). In the RI approach, sustainability includes social, economic and
environmental sustainabilities. For ensuring social sustainability, an
innovation should not affect adversly to the society and it should extend
benefits to all without bias and prejudice. Social justice must be served
by inculcating values in functions of the innovation. For faster adoption
by users, innovation should be affordable, accessible and durable to
become economically sustainable. Innovation should sustain the income
and spending capabilities of users (Owen et al., 2012; Setiawan and
Singh, 2015; Singh and Kroesen, 2012).
Sustainability reflects in a set of values. For the RI approach, the
value could be comprehended as something that a ‘person or group of
people consider important in life and that adds meaning or material to
their lives’ (Johri and Nair, 2011). Values are individual preferences (in
terms of action which extend benefits or outcomes/results that are
preferred by an individual). These individual preferences form collective
choices, these collective choices put in terms of importance. The col­
lective choices become universal choices for the societies world over as
well as cultural specific choices. Hence, they are termed as universal and
culture-specific values (Mishra and Singh, 2018; Setiawan and Singh,
2015; Singh and Kroesen, 2012).
Simultaneously, outcomes of the choices (may be positive or nega­
tive) which are beneficial or biologically not harmful and impact on
human bodies /organs called values. There should be a balance between
social, environmental and economic qualities for sustainable transport
(Litman and Burwell, 2006) in the society. In the case of transport; so­
cial, environmental and economic sustainability depends upon
following values. Social values include equity/ fairness, safety(van de
Poel, 2015), security, healthy, community development. The economic
values include the efficiency of transport, accessibility, affordability,
reliability (Kuo et al., 2001), poverty reducer, employability,
income-generating, livelihood and cost-effective. The environmental
values include low carbon emission, low noise pollution, biodiversity
protection(Litman and Burwell, 2006; Pooja et al., 2013; Steg and Gif­
ford, 2005), energy-efficient. Reliability means ‘the ability of a product
to perform its function adequately over a while without failing’ (Kuo
et al., 2001). Safety means the absence of risks and hazards (van de Poel,
2015). Comfortability encompasses comfort which means mental or
physical strength, encouragement or consolation (Heijs, 1994).
Ownership means the general right to own or possess an object, product
or service. It provides some other rights like the right to possess an
object, use it, manage it, derive income from it, bequeath it. Possession
D.R. Singh et al.
means custody or control on an object, service or product (Friedman and
Kahn Jr, 2002). Affordability is the ability to afford (bear expenses) any
product or service. The next section reveals the methodology deployed
for this research.
3. Methodology
The purpose of this study is to analyse the case of E-rickshaw an
emerging innovation in Delhi. The process of innovation is analysed
with the help of RI approach so that it can be identified that how
different dimensions of RI are demonstrated in action. Therefore,
methods of desk-based research and survey research are applied in the
collection of data and information. In desk-based research, innovation
systems and responsible innovation, theories were reviewed. And an
observation level data were collected through the survey methods, in­
terviews and focused group discussions. The three primary methods are
used to elicit information from the respondents- survey research, non-
participation observation-based survey, questionnaire-based survey,
and interviews. For a questionnaire survey, a questionnaire has been
prepared. The questionnaire aimed to find out the values that are pre­
sent in E-rickshaw. For the formation of questionnaire literature related
to values have been reviewed. The literature was searched using some
keywords such as values in technology, value-sensitive technology,
design for values. This search has given a basic understanding of values,
its definition and types of values. After that to find out the values that are
present in E-rickshaw literature was searched using keywords like values
in E-rickshaw, social economic and environmental advantages of E-
rickshaw and transport medium. In this literature, values are implicitly
and explicitly present. The literature helped in the questionnaire for­
mation and pilot study was also conducted at some location before the
finalisation of the questionnaire. Finally, questionnaires were distrib­
uted to 103 respondents (E-rickshaw drivers, passengers, manufactures)
in six locations of Delhi. Interviews were conducted with 20 respondents
from group of E-rickshaw manufacturers, battery dealers, Centre for
Science and Environment (CSE), International Centre for Automotive
Technology (ICAT). The inverviews were recorded on a voice recorded.
The recorded interviews transcripted and analyed with the aim to
identify and group the revealed key values by respondents. Interviews
were also considered for tracing the narrative and process witnessed
during the deliberation process on the issues surrounded the frugal
machine to E-rickshaw as a motorised vehicle. The total Six focused
group discussions were also conducted with E-rickshaw drivers in six
locations of Delhi. Further stakeholders were systematically identified
which has been discussed in the next section.
4. Identification of stakeholders
Responsible innovation framework emphasizes the involvement of
stakeholders in each step of innovation that makes innovation accept­
able. However, what is the need to identify stakeholders? How stake­
holders are identified? And who are the stakeholders in case of the E-
rickshaw in Delhi? Stakeholder engagement is a crucial element of
responsible innovation concept as all approaches of RI have one com­
mon element i.e. involvement of stakeholders (Blok and Lemmens,
2015). In responsible innovation approach, stakeholders, having their
objectives and interests and who are acting in the different cultural and
economic context, influence perception of what constitutes responsible
characteristics of an innovation coupled with its acceptable outcomes
(Lee and Petts, 2013). In this way, responsible innovation helps to go
beyond risk governance and ushers into innovation governance as
stakeholders not only exclusively focus on particular aspects but they
also take a position on all aspects of the innovation process (Schomberg,
2013). It is important here that how deliberation and participation di­
mensions of responsible innovation are evidently deployed in the pro­
cess of acceptance and adoption of E-rickshaw in Delhi? The purpose of
deliberation is to explore the views of stakeholders and participation
4
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908
aims to check whose views are considered in the deliberation process
and who is deliberating. Consequently, it is imperative to identify
stakeholders in this regard.
Now the question comes how can we define stakeholders? First
stakeholders defined in 1984 in the context of the firm, ‘any group or
individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of an orga­
nisation’s objectives’(Freeman, 2010). Stakeholders have also been
defined as such ‘any group of people organized, who shares a common
interest or stake in a particular issue or system’ (Grimble and Wellard,
1997). Any person or party who is affected by or can affect, the tech­
nology and/or its institutional and societal context could be considered
as a stakeholder (Correljé et al., 2015). The first step of the identification
of the stakeholders is to delimit the boundary of the system. For this
study, E-rickshaw is considered a socio-technical system consisting of
many stakeholders with various gradients of interactions within and
without. For the selection of stakeholders following methods are adop­
ted - the firstly desk-based research was conducted to reviewgovernment
policy documents and newspaper articles related to E-rickshaw. On the
basis of this secondary literature review, stakeholders (Ministry of Road
Transport and Highway, Ministry of Heavy Industry and Public Enter­
prises, Ministry of Environment Forest and Climate Change, Transport
Department of Delhi, Municipal Corporation, Police, High Court of
Delhi, Supreme Court of India, Non-Government Organizations (NGOs),
Political parties, Centre for Science and Environment, International
Centre for Automotive Technology (ICAT), The Energy and Research
Institute (TERI)) were identified for this study. We also traced certain
stakeholders such as charging facility providers, manufacturers and
battery dealers through snowball sampling with the help of previously
selected stakeholders. After passing of the Motor Vehicle Amendment
Act-2015 implementation, management, regulation and control of
E-rickshaw comes under the transport department of Delhi (Transport
Department Delhi, 2015) making it as a stakeholder in the study.
Various instruments were deployed to gather responses from the select
stakeholders of the study. Structured questionnaire and focus group
discussions were the main instruments used for collecting responses; and
data obtained from the survey and transcribed voice recording coupled
with secondary literature reviews were used to analyse the findings. In
socio-technical system as in case of E-rickshaw, the dichotomy of
‘problem ownership’ and ‘solution ownership’ cannot be established as
the roles of problem owner and solution owner are shared between the
stakeholders. Problem owners, majorly, are defined as ‘he or she is the
one affected by the issues to be solved or those who would benefit from
the solution’ (What Is Problem Owner | IGI Global, 2021) while the
solution owner can be considered ‘the group or organisation involved in
the implementation of the solution (Brock, 2013). In case of the
E-rickshaw, the problem is co-owned by the government agencies like
the Ministry of Road Transport and Highway, Transport Department
Delhi and the E-rickshaw drivers. The aforementioned government
agencies are dealing with the problems pertaining to the adoption of
new technologies to curb environmental pollution and persuading
people to accept these adopted technologies as occupations and me­
diums of transport. Additionally they also provide for implementation,
standardisation and formulation of rules for new technologies. Hence,
they are acting as problem owner as well as the solution owner.
Consequently, these govt agencies play crucial part in implementation of
E-rickshaw adoption, its regulation and related management. The
E-rickshaw drivers as problem owners are at the receiving end of the
current crisis as the absence of standardisation and regulation of the
safety and security concerns could cause lose of their live­
lihood/employment. The problem owner and solution owner have
different values priority but it is crucial to incorporate concerns of both
for embedding values in technology (Brock, 2013). For this case study
table-1 depicts values that are relevant for different stakeholders.
Table. 1 lists various stakeholders along with their respective func­
tions, interests and values that they aspire as participants of the E-
rickshaw innovation process. For instance, Union Ministry of Road
D.R. Singh et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908

Table. 1 Table. 1 (continued )

Functions and interest of stakeholders involved. Stakeholders Functions Interests Values for
Stakeholders Functions Interests Values for Stakeholders
Stakeholders
commuters,
Ministry of Road Formulation of To combat air Non- polluting enhance the living
Transport and standards and pollution Safety standard of E-
Highway regulations for To boost E- Employability rickshaw drivers,
electric vehicles rickshaws on roads Accessibility violence and
(E-rickshaw). Employment Last-mile crime-free
To Establish generation, to connectivity environment
Testing and enhance last-mile Centre for Research and Pollution control, Non -Polluting
research connectivity Science and advocacy, the safety of Safety
institution Environment lobbying, commuters, Employability
To Provide dissemination of employability of E- Social Equity
Incentive on knowledge rickshaw drivers, Happiness
charging promotion of
infrastructure. social equity
Ministry of Production and To make country Non -Polluting International Testing of this To enhance the Non -Polluting
Heavy Industry operation of an manufacturing Self-reliance Centre for innovation E- development of Safety
and Public electric vehicle hub of electric Employability Automotive rickshaw green technology. Reliability
Enterprises vehicles Profitability Technology
Competitiveness (ICAT)
Ministry of Preparation of To check air Non -polluting Government Assessment and To enhance Non -Polluting
Environment, guidelines for safe pollution by Healthiness research development of E- research and Safety
Forest and disposal, and promoting electric institute (The rickshaw development on Reliability
Climate recycling of vehicle like E- Energy and technology green vehicle
Change battery rickshaw Research
Prevention of soil Institute
and water (TERI))
contamination by Manufacturers Assembly and To sell the green Non -Polluting
the disposal of manufacturing the vehicle (E- Safety
battery E-rickshaw rickshaw) by Reliability
Transport Preparation of To control air Non -Polluting earning a profit, Employability
Department of mandates, pollution by Safety the opportunity to Profitability
Delhi investment in promoting safe, Employability show their Competitiveness
charging secure, reliable Accessibility creativity Creativity
infrastructure, and accessible Last-mile Charging Service Charging services Earning profit by Non -Polluting
instruction for transport connectivity, Providers selling electricity Employability
vehicle mediums. Equity to the non- Profitability
registration and polluting vehicle
license E-rickshaw Driving the vehicle Earning by driving Non -Polluting
Municipal Movement and To control air Non -Polluting drivers a green vehicle (E- Employability
Corporation control of local pollution by Safety rickshaw) in Profitability
traffic in the city promoting safe, Social justice, comfortable Comfortability
secure, reliable Equity condition by Happiness
transport applying less force Gender
mediums. Possession of empowerment
To enhance last- Property (E- Affordability
mile connectivity rickshaw), Ownership
Traffic Police Management of To maintain Non -Polluting Dignified life Good Standard of
operation of congestion-free Safety Protection from Living
electric vehicle on road by promoting Violence and sunlight and rain Protection
the road green vehicle(E- crime-free Public The utilisation of A comfortable ride Non- Polluting
rickshaw) environment (Commuters) E-rickshaw on non-polluting Affordability
Judiciary of India Adjudication for Pollution control, Non-Polluting, services vehicle Safety
electric vehicle (E- Safety of Justic, Equity Cheap fare Trust
rickshaw) Commuters, Safety Easily accessible Reliability
Employability of Employability and Last mile Comfortability
E-rickshaw drivers connectivity Accessibility
Non-Government Safeguarding the Safety of Non -Polluting Ministry of Provision of power Promotion of non- Non -Polluting
Organization interest of E- commuters, Safety power for E-rickshaw polluting vehicle
(NGO) rickshaw drivers Employability of Employability Ministry of new Future demand for Promotion of non- Non -Polluting
and passengers E-rickshaw Social Equity and renewable renewable energy polluting vehicle
drivers, promotion Happiness energy for E-rickshaw
of social equity, charging
pollution control
Source – Authors’ compilation based on secondary literature and fieldwork.
Political Parties Support for policy Pollution control Non -Polluting
formulation for E- Safety of Employability
rickshaw in this commuters and Safety Transport and Highways is the apex governing body of the transport
manifesto women safety, (Commuters, sector in the country and is vested with the task of rules and regulation
employability of E- especially woman
rickshaw drivers, safety)
formulation relating to e-vehicles, along with providing testing and
Profitability of E- Gender charging incentives. The ministry focuses on providing last-mile con­
rickshaw drivers Empowerment nectivity, employment generation and combating air pollution through
and manufactures, Happiness deploying E-rickshaw. Hence it can be inferred that the values targeted
Last mile Social Equity
by the Ministry concerning E-rickshaw are non- polluting, safety,
connectivity for
employability, accessibility, last-mile connectivity. On the same lines,
the Supreme Court of India by acting as an adjudicating body for E-

5
D.R. Singh et al.
rickshaw was concerned with the pollution control (non-polluting), the
safety of the commuters and the employability of E-rickshaw. The
findings are analysed in the next section.
5. Findings: results and analysis
The issue of E-rickshaw in Delhi can be considered a classic case of
emerging innovations in the present context in a developing country. A
‘ubiquitous lag’ between the introduction of an emerging innovative
Idea based innovation (E-rickshaw) and formulation of the commensu­
rate governing instruments (rules, regulations and guidelines) to ensure
accountability and sustainability of the innovation in consideration
jeopardised the adoption of E-rickshaw. Additionally, during the initial
stage of introduction of innovation, the innovators did not pay many
concerns to the aspect of accountability of the vehicle in case of negative
events. The events and consequences of events such as accidents and
mishaps with E-rickshaw raised the key questions of accountability and
responsibility of unregulated and risky innovations in the society in
India. The society was not well prepared for an innovation which was
not recognised as a motorised vehicle with all the standards and regu­
lations. This triggered a knee-jerk reaction which resulted in a High
Court order for complete ban on the operation or driving of the E-rick­
shaw on roads in India. This order enforcement resulted in locked all the
Frugal Machine (E-rickshaw) inside garages or houses, huge losses of
investments made on these vehicles or innovation, 200,000 people lost
jobs or livelihood and last mile transportation connectivity vanished.
This resulted in defeating all the objectives which it was supposed to
achieve as a component of the public transport systems in Delhi. How­
ever, this has created new opportunities for the process of innovation to
revisit and recreate the minimum viable product for the market with a
regulatory framework. As this innovation had many positive features
which had motivated the stakeholders to revisit the concept of the E-
rickshaw as motorised vehicle and bring back it in the market. The
newfound opportunities found to be visible through the dimension of
participation and deliberation about the new emerging innovation to
bring it in the market and the society in India.
The stakeholders as shown in Table 1 got engaged in participation
and deliberation amongst themselves and actors. Since the dimentions of
participation and deliberation are methods or tools of innovation pro­
cess to identify, evaluate and embed the Values in the product or service.
The values are outcome of engaging in process of innovation through RI
dimensions, participation and deliberation. The process of participation
and deliberation resulted in making the E-rickshaw, a motorised vehicle,
a successful innovation re-introduced as a motorised vehicle in India.
This new emerging innovation becomes a key component of public
transport systems in India. Further, the research results show that how
the deliberation and participation panned out as part of innovation
process for the E–rickshaw to inculcate the aspect of accountability and
sustainability in the innovation.
Though well structured and standardised techniques of deliberation
are largely absent but various ‘unorganised overlapping consensus’
rooted in enriched deliberations within and amongst the community
could be identified (Levine et al., 2005). Levine et al. have discussed
various features of ‘successful deliberative initiatives’ as to be incorpo­
rative of i) a direct communication with tthe decision-makers; ii)
bringing stakeholders and general public together via a representative
and inclusive process; iii) informative and elaborate discussion to
establish common ground or consensus; iv) neutral umpiring of a fair
agenda by professional staff and the process conducted to achieve public
support and to prove sustainable over time. (Levine et al., 2005). In the
present study, these features are present in the various methods of
deliberation elaborated in the forth coming sections.
In this case study, through deliberation participants presented ar­
guments, expressed and exchanged views and posed certain questions on
E-Rickshaw as an idea, artefact, a concept, product, technology and
innovation in form of what, why, whom, how, when. further,
6
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908
deliberation allowed a group of actors to receive and exchange infor­
mation, to critically examine issues, and to come to agreements with
informed decision making (Fearon, 1998) on the features, consequences,
standardisation and legislation of E-rickshaw. Several debates and cri­
tiques explored the different aspect of the E-rickshaw. It provided op­
portunities to give considerable attention and focus to all negative and
adverse impacts along with positives to make innovation acceptable and
workable. The process reflects views of the actors in decision making so
that principles of deliberative democracy would be ensured as part of
innovation (Singh & Kroesen, 2012).
In the Participation dimension, it is important to see if the views of
stakeholders have their presence or not in the decision-making process.
It is found that the participation process has been inclusive for the E-
rickshaw. It is crucial to note that without inclusion, participation does
not occur. Participation has providedopportunities to stakeholders and
different actors to express themselves. In other words ‘to take part’
(Kenny, 1997) in the process means everyone was participating at some
level in every action. Participation was ensured bythe involvement of
people for discussions, debates, arguments and representations related
to the adoption of e-rickshaw. Findings suggest that taking part in or
being part of a certain process were the key participatory ways. The
involvement of stakeholder of innovation and the desired innovation
(Singh & Kroesen, 2012) resulted in managing and shaping the unde­
sired and unacceptable outcomes into desirable and acceptable ones at
different stages of the innovation process.
The main finding on the basis of secondary literature review suggests
that predominant methods or means or tools of deliberation were
committees, collaboration and work projects, judicial hearing, political
parties’ manifesto and focused group discussions in the media and
Parliament debate, where participation from all stakeholders and actors
took place at varying degrees For the analysis of these methods and their
existance, various secondary data sources as- newspaper analysis, pro­
ceedings of case hearing, youtube video on parliamentary debate and
stakeholders debate by using keywords like ‘E-rickshaw, E-rickshaw
adoption in Delhi and operation of E-rickshaw in Delhi’ were analysed
followed by transcription of the secondary data.
5.1. Committees
When E-rickshaw was launched in Delhi, there was a lot of confusion
about it. Delhi Municipal Corporation, Delhi Transport Department and
Delhi Traffic Police were not able to determine whether the E-rickshaw
should be considered as a motorized vehicle or not. If it is a motorised
vehicle then does it ensure safety, pollution-free, and healthy values.
Issues of social and economic sustainability were cropped up in such
puzzling stage of the innovation process. Due to these uncertainties, the
Delhi Transport Department decided on banning E-Rickshaw for
violating the Motor Vehicle Act. Following this, other actors objected to
the ban stating the fact that the E-rickshaw should not be considered a
motorized vehicle as its power is 250 W (Hindu, 2013; Shandilya et al.,
2019). It was established that E-rickshaw would not fall under the motor
vehicle act and hence they do not need registration, insurance and
driving licenses (Hindu, 2013; Shandilya et al., 2019). This, however,
was the cause of differences between Delhi Municipal Corporation, Delhi
Transport Department, Delhi Traffic Police, E-rickshaw manufacturers
and E- rickshaw drivers forcing the government of the day to constitute a
committee to devise opportunities for evolving the recommendations.
The committee had to identify the stakeholders and their interests. So,
the committee got the representatives from all the prominent actors to
be part of the process of participation and deliberation on issues of
E-rickshaw. Later, TERI (The Energy and Research Institute) was also
included in this committee (TERI, 2014). The committee deliberated
around these issues such as: which government body can regulate
E-rickshaw? why E-rickshaw should be a motorised vehicle? how the
differences with other motorised acceptable? how to regulate based on
the standards for vehicle and motorisation technology? how and why
D.R. Singh et al.
safety, environment, emission, energy, health standards are different for
E-rickshaw? How to address the issues of movement of the vehicle on
road vis a vis another motorised vehicle? How to address issues on
speed, weight, power, and loading capacity of the E-rickshaw as a
motorized vehicle? The committee created opportunities for stake­
holders to find out ways to address the issues and questions. Deliberation
in the committee elicited collaboration and work project method. The
E-rickshaw as innovation is found to be creating many values has
mentioned in Table 1.
5.2. Collaboration and project work
Participatory and deliberative process is found to be prominently
present through two more ways, viz collaboration and work project.
Both the ways found to be focussed on the exploration of answers for
many issues and questions raised in the committees too. But, some of the
specific questions such as what is/should be the power of the motor of E-
rickshaw, what is/should be the speed of an E-rickshaw, is there any
common standards in its design and shape? Multiple partners steered the
process of participation and deliberation by preparing questions and
feedback tool for different stakeholders. In this process, the information
related to technical characteristics and efficiency of the vehicle (Har­
ding, 2014) was collected. It was found that the E-Rickshaw operating in
Delhi use an engine powered by over 250-watt batteries, hence exceeds
the speed limit of 25 km per hour for the non-motorised vehicle (Har­
ding, 2014; Kant, 2014; Shandilya et al., 2019). This info was shared
with the stakeholders for their feedback. Some of the key facts were also
shared with stakeholders such as most of the components of E-rickshaw
were imported from China and assembled in the city and as such there
was no authority to certify the imported parts, consequently, there was
no guarantee of their safety (Chakravarty, 2015; Shandilya et al., 2019;
TERI, 2014) The results were finalised through responses to the findings
of the project work. This process of participation and deliberation
revealed that there were many gaps in regulatory, design, tracing, cer­
tification, quality, supply chain, responsibility, safety and cost aspects. It
was observed that if any innovation is found with so many shortcomings
which do not reflect the values for economic, social and environmental
sustainability, majorly curtailed its acceptability as an emerging inno­
vation in India.
5.3. Judicial hearing
Before the committee constituted by the Delhi government could
take any decision, a social activist filed a petition in the Delhi High Court
against the operation of E-rickshaw on the roads of Delhi (Shanawaz
Khan vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi and … on 9 September 2014,
2014). In this petition following requests were made: it pleaded the
court to issue a direction to the respondent to stop the plying of
E-rickshaw in areas falling under the Government of National Capital
Territory of Delhi because E-rickshaws were not registered, certified and
insured (Harding, 2014). It also requested that E-rickshaw should not be
allowed to carry more than 2 to 3 passengers given the safety of pas­
sengers (Harding, 2014). In this judicial hearing, representatives of all
actors were present. But the main arguments were put by the Delhi
Municipal Corporation and Delhi Transport Department. The court
asked who could regulate the E-Rickshaw on the roads? Then the rep­
resentatives of Delhi municipal corporation and Delhi transport
department expressed their constraints for the regulation of E-rickshaw.
The court hearing process had the participation of views representing
different stakeholders. This led the court decision to ban vehicle till
legislative changes in the Motor Vehicle Act for the regulation of
E-rickshaw (Harding, 2014; Shandilya et al., 2019). it is found that the
judicial process too had raised questions raised in committees and
project work.
7
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908
5.4. Political parties manifesto
The issues like the environment and civil rights are not initiated by
the political parties but large public consensus influence them to take a
position on these issues (Heller and Rao, 2015). In this case, the inter­
esting process of deliberation and participation are found in the way
political parties designed, developed and presented their manifesto on
E-rickshaw and its re-introduction in Delhi. Political parties’ manifesto
preparing exercise provided opportunities to include the views of
different stakeholders and to raise questions on safety, employability,
standards, regulation, legislation, non-polluting transport system, health
and women-friendly vehicle. Different political parties submitted
diversified views in a memorandum to the Lt. Governor, an executive
head of Delhi Govt. They claimed that ‘E-rickshaw are operating
worldwide as a feeder to the urban transport system’ (Economic Times,
2014) ‘Although their operations are not controlled by any law, they
provide a cheap feeder system to the metro rail facility. It has also helped
the poor people of the city in getting self-employment on a large scale’
(Economic Times, 2014). There was an argument for the promulgation
of an ordinance for ensuring the job security of around 200,000
E-rickshaw drivers (Economic Times, 2014). One political party mani­
festo promised to bring the issue under the Municipal Corporation of
Delhi for their operational convenience (Bharatiya Janata Party, 2013).
Another political party in its manifesto proposed e-rickshaw as a me­
dium of last-mile connectivity that can help reduce the number of crimes
against women and it was promised by the party to keep the E-rickshaw
under Unified Transport authority (Aam Aadmi Party, 2015). A fair
policy for E-rickshaw was proposed by the party. The party also prom­
ised to formulate clear policy and standard for the ownership and
operation of e-rickshaw, keeping in mind the safety aspects (Aam Aadmi
Party, 2015).
5.5. Focused group discussion in media
Media (both print and electronic) covered the issue of E-rickshaw
extensively during these deliberations. This method of deliberation
created a significant impact on the perception of commuters for E-
rickshaw. In this deliberation, representatives from E-rickshaw manu­
facturers said that they are ready to comply with any guidelines. Polit­
ical parties’ leaders said that they want a new rule and regulation for e-
rickshaw because employment of a large number of people was at stake.
The views of environmentalists and experts of urban transport came into
the public domain through the newspapers. Hereafter a quote is repro­
duced for reference,
“E-rickshaw could help reduce pollution if appropriate regulatory mech­
anisms are put in place for charging and disposal of batteries, there is a
need to ensure the safety of passengers in this E-rickshaw by dedicated
lanes for non-motorized vehicle-rickshaw can be less polluting, but where
are they charging the batteries from? A lot of them are plugging into coal-
based sources of power and this, not a simple equation whether they are
reducing air pollution or not” (Yadav, 2014). The arguments of the
drivers in favour of e-rickshaw (Bhasin, 2014) were also considered
in the alignment of views of commuters.
5.6. Parliamentary debate
The deliberation in committee, collaboration work projects, judicial
hiring, political parties’ manifesto and focused group discussion in the
media prepared the strong ground for deliberation in parliament. The
leaders of political parties participated in the deliberation process in
parliamentary debate. A bill regarding the E-rickshaw was introduced in
both houses of Indian Parliament Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha which
discussed positive impacts of E-rickshaw. The E- rickshaw is a green
technology and it can be an important medium to achieve sustainable
D.R. Singh et al.
goals. It is a good option for last-mile connectivity and women feel safe
in this vehicle. Employability to a large number of poor individuals by
their smooth transition from manual cycle rickshaw to E-rickshaw.
Gender equity and livelihood for women by providing opportunities to
drive this vehicle (Lok Sabha, 2015). A better infrastructure as charging
stations should be created in addition to financing and load facilities for
E-rickshaw drivers (Lok Sabha, 2015; Rajya Sabha, 2015).
In the parliamentary deliberation process, other important issues
raised- what are the characteristics of this technology (like the power of
the motor, the voltage of the battery, and speed of the vehicle)? Is there
any standard definition for this vehicle? Which agency could decide the
standard of a model for E-rickshaw? Is its non-polluting vehicle? What
are the charging sources of batteries? How could it be charged through
renewable energy? What are the provisions for battery disposal? How
the safety of the public could be ensured? Who would decide the skills of
E-rickshaw drivers? How the ownership and responsibility of E-rickshaw
drivers could be ensured through the law? Has it really created
employment? Has it empowered the women? How could it help to
achieve social equity? How could subsidy help E-rickshaw drivers? It
can be inferred from these questions that parliament during its delib­
eration on the issue was looking for certain values in E-rickshaw as
innovation while emphasising on social, economic and environmental
sustainability. The process revealed that participants were searching for
the values for instance safety, reliability, accountability, non-polluting,
employability, transparency, ownership, equity, poverty alleviation
amongst others.
It is clear from the above findings and analysis that in the adoption of
e-rickshaw, extensive deliberation and participation led to successful
legislation in parliament.
The Union government framed the rules for the E-rickshaw through
the amendment of central motor vehicle rules 1989, and it was pub­
lished in the Official Gazette on 8th October 2014. This amendment has
adopted E-rickshaw with standard definition (Transport Department
Delhi, 2015).
‘E-rickshaw means a special purpose battery operated vehicle having three
wheels and intended to provide last-mile connectivity for the transport of
passengers for hire or reward provided. Such a vehicle is constructed or
adapted to carry not more than four passengers, excluding the driver and
more than forty kilograms of luggage in total. The net power of its motor is
not more than 2000 w. The maximum speed of the vehicle is not more
than 25 Km/hr’ (Transport Department Delhi, 2015).
Apart from the definition of e-rickshaw, ‘amendment has also listed
the rules for driving license. Every driving license issued or renewed by a
licensing authority for E-rickshaw shall be valid for not more than three
years from the date of issue as the case may be or till the validity,
whichever is earlier’ (Transport Department Delhi, 2015). The Gazette
stated further that in case of the e-rickshaw, renewal of fitness certificate
shall be made only after carrying out the test and checking the maximum
speed. ‘Vehicle shall be driven in un-laden condition (with a full charge
and a full accelerator position) on straight or flat roads when the vehicle
attains full speed, shall be calculated by measuring the time taken to
travel a fixed distance (50 m)’ (Transport Department Delhi, 2015). The
government of NCT of Delhi Transport Department has issued a circular
which stated that ‘all manufactures of e-rickshaw has been informed to
sell the vehicle to only those persons who own an effective learner’s
license to drive e-rickshaw to avoid multiple ownership of e-rickshaw
and ensuring owner cum driver policy’ (Ministry of Law and Justice,
2015). To deploy the rule of the central government, the government of
Delhi issued another circular that states:
‘Type of approval certificate issued by the designated testing agency
ICAT Manesar complies to the central motor vehicle rules 1989. The
approval is accorded subject to the responsibility of the manufacturer/
importer for ensuring the fitting of the same components’ part /assem­
blies. The details of which are given in detailed specifications endorsed
8
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908
by the ICAT before submission of the vehicle for registration’(Ministry
Of Road Transport and Highways, 2014)
The adoption of these standards and definitions make this innovation
development process responsible (Von Schomberg, 2013). New laws and
rules formulated by governing authority are not always meant for con­
straining freedom but they also provide choice, in this way regulations
can be an ally of freedom. The standards, certifications and accredita­
tions are a tool for a new form of governance (Von Schomberg, 2013).
Hence, we can infer, based on the above discussion, a democratic and
inclusive governance mechanism emerges in the adoption process of
E-rickshaw. It addressed the aspect of accountability employing these
institutional interventions via formulation and amendment of the laws
and regulations about the E-rickshaw.
Deliberation and participation conducted through discussions and
public debates induce creation of values (Heller and Rao, 2015) and
facilitate derivation of ‘intrinsic values’ by the observers (Levine et al.,
2005). This study has indicated that the process of deliberation and
participation help to reach a balanced decision by embedding values in
technology and imparts sustainability (Fig. 1).
The Fig. 1 indicates that linkages between deliberation and partici­
pation dimensions are adhered to the values targeted by the participants
in the deliberation methods. In other words, aspiration of certain values
as outcomes prompts the stakeholders to participate actively in the
deliberation process. Different set of deliberation methods employed
during the process allow a wide array of stakeholders from varied fields
to voice their priorities, apprehensions and potential outlook of the
innovation which could be materialised and gauged in terms of the
universal and culture-specific values. So far, the paper has traced two
dimensions of responsible innovation and deliberation in the adoption of
E-rickshaw. In the preceeding section, the focus is to analyse the values
that could be traced in the case study.
6. Discussion and conclusions
In the present case, the values like safety, protection, reliability,
comfortability, competitiveness, profitability, affordability, employ­
ment, non-polluting, last-mile connectivity, accountability, non-
polluting are considered as universal values. Social equity, gender
equality, quality of life, the standard of living, and ownership are highly
important values for developing countries like India hence are culture-
specific values. Values can be incorporated by the following way: first,
values incorporated by the design of the technology itself in society,
institute, and for stakeholders; second, institute, society, and stake­
holders also embed values in technology; third, engineers of design
incorporate (Correljé et al., 2015)
In Section 3 of the paper, we have mentioned that analysis of values
have been done on the basis of a questionnaire based survey in addition
to the literature review. The responses of the questionnaire were coded
in the form of a percentage. Reliability is embedded in E-rickshaw
through the adoption of standards framed by the government for the
operations. Reliability value has a close relation with the value of trust.
Reliability helps to achieve the trust of users for technology (Nickel,
2015). After the amendments of the Motor Vehicle Act and adoption of a
standard definition of vehicle trust of commuters was built towards the
vehicle (Shandilya et al., 2019). Based on the previous discussion, it is
clear that E-rickshaw as technology has reliability value which creates
trust amongst E-rickshaw users. Safety of commuters determined by
various factors like size and shape of the vehicle, skills of drivers, speed
of the vehicle are now being regulated by the Motor Vehicle Amendment
Act ensuring the safety of commuters (Marwah and Bawa, 2016). Hence,
E-rickshaw is a safe mode of transport (Kokate et al., 2019; Rajvanshi,
2002). In this way, it is concluded that the E-rickshaw safety value is
present and this value incorporated in it by vehicle designers according
to the institution guideline.
Comfortability is witnessed by more ease for the drivers compared to
cycle-rickshaws; protection from sunlight and rain. This makes it easy to
D.R. Singh et al.
Fig. 1. Relation between deliberation and participation dimensions vis-a-vis values.
drive even for elderly drivers (Harding, 2014). Hence it is evident in the
E-rickshaw, comfortability value is embedded in it for e-rickshaw
drivers and commuters through designers.
Tri-Cycle-rickshaws are available only on daily rent which often re­
sults in exploitation of the drivers by the contractors. But, in the case of
the E-rickshaw, only a person having a driving license can drive hence
the ownership is secured by the law (Bryer, 2018; Harding, 2014). Based
on the previous discussion, it is evident that ownership value is incor­
porated in E-rickshaw by the institution for E-rickshaw drivers.
Being a low cost of ownership and fare, this vehicle is affordable for
both commuters as well as drivers (Khanna et al., 2018). In this way, it is
clear that the affordability value is embedded in e-rickshaws by the
institution for e-rickshaw drivers and drivers also have included this
value for the users.
Profitability is also an important value that is embedded by this
innovation and has further motivated more people for its adoption. E-
rickshaw drivers’ earnings vary from ₹200 to ₹1000 per day. Profit­
ability of manufacturers is also high in terms of vehicle sales because the
manufacturing of E-rickshaw has emerged as a small-scale industry
(Marwah & Bawa, 2016). In an instance, a company manufacturer re­
ported having sold 500 e-rickshaws in a month. So, this value is also
embedded in this innovation.
The value of employability for Tricycle rickshaw pullers and E-
rickshaw manufacturers is also ensured in this innovation (Marwah and
Bawa, 2016). Value of being non-polluting is very significant in the case
of E-rickshaws. The government has adopted E-rickshaw in Delhi as it is
environmentally friendly and does not emit air pollutants and also does
not cause noise pollution (Marwah and Bawa, 2016). It has low energy
consumption 53.76 kJ/ passenger-km and low CO2 emission 19.129
gm/passenger-km (Majumdar and Jash, 2015). The regulating authority
9
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908
has also ensured through the law that used lead-acid batteries should be
disposed of by the authorized disposal agency. In the survey and focused
group discussion, E-rickshaw drivers said that they sell used batteries to
authorized companies for recycling purposes (Shandilya et al., 2019).
Based on this discussion, it is clear that the value of being non-polluting
has been included by designers in E- rickshaws. Although E-rickshaw has
been conceptualised as a non-polluting vehicle, the concern lies
regarding energy used for charging its batteries. 61.5 per cent of the
total electricity production in India is attributed to thermal power plants
(of which coal based is 53.1 per cent and renewable is 24.5 percent
(Ministry of Power, 2021). Sourcing non-renewable energy for the
vehicle could prompt questions about its own environmental sustain­
ability. However, the share of renewable energy source (9.12 per cent
(2019–2020 and 6.23 per cent (2020–2021)is increasing faster than
conventional sources (0.12per cent (2019–2020) and − 3.74 per cent
(2020–2021) (Ministry of Power, 2021). Now solar powered-rickshaws
are also emerging as alternative for E-rickshaw.
Though we have metro and buses as mainstream transport, the main
problem is to reach and access these means of mobility. Now E-rick­
shaws are providing door to door services and helping to access these
transportation facilities (Kokate et al., 2019). Hence, the value of
last-mile connectivity or access is embedded by the E-rickshaw itself in
society. As stated earlier, in the case of E-rickshaw, accountability of
different stakeholders is ensured through proper laws and regulations.
Hence the value of accountability for users is incorporated in this
technology by the institutions.
The value of Social equality is also very much evident in the case of
the e-rickshaw. The share of people belonging from the lower strata of
the economy amongst the total number of commuters is the largest,
including domestic helpers and labourers that need to commute daily to
D.R. Singh et al.
their workplace. ‘E-rickshaw is also a great convenience for medium and
low-income groups’(Marwah and Bawa, 2016). Women can also drive
the e-rickshaw with convenience (Jituri, 2018). Therefore E-rickshaw
has also contributed towards gender equality.
Happiness is a broad term, as it is not only related to high income but
also dignity, the standard of living, health, violence and crime-free
environment. Today the existence of manual rickshaws is quite inhu­
mane. Technology (e-rickshaw) helps Tri-cycle rickshaw pullers to shift
from this inhuman occupation. This technology enables them to live a
dignified, healthy life and also empowered them (Chandran and Brah­
machari, 2015; Marwah and Bawa, 2016). During focused group dis­
cussion, E-Rickshaw drivers revealed that now they are living a more
healthy and happy life. The E-Rickshaw drivers also shared that in areas
(MajnukaTila, Malka Ganj, Gokalpuri) near the Vishwavidyalaya, many
people who now have taken up driving E-Rickshaws were unable to find
a dignified occupation. Therefore, this technology has helped a large
number of people to start a new happy life. The value of solidarity
(community development) is also being reflected in the case of E-Rick­
shaws. Tricycle rickshaw pullers do not have any association or union;
hence the government does not provide them insurance, subsidy and
other social support; the contrary, E-rickshaw drivers have their unions.
Due to the voice of these unions, the government provides them with
social services as a subsidy, and insurance amongst others (Shandilya
et al., 2019). E-rickshaw drivers see each other as members of a com­
munity and support each other’s needs.
By tracing deliberation and participation dimensions of responsible
innovation approach, we can conclude that E-rickshaw as an emerging
innovation consists following values in society: reliability, safety,
ownership, solidarity (community development), competitiveness,
affordability, last-mile connectivity, accessibility, social equity or fair­
ness, happiness, gender equity, non-polluting, and comfortability. These
values make E-rickshaw innovation economically, environmentally and
socially sustainable transport medium(Pooja et al., 2013; Singh &
Kroesen, 2012).
The process of deliberation and participation that underwent for
ensuring the acceptability and adoption of E-rickshaw in Delhi has been
dissected using responsible innovations dimensions in the research. The
deliberation dimension of the RI framework was deployed to understand
the interactions amongst the stakeholders. Participation of a large
number of stakeholders has indicated the purview of influence of the E-
rickshaw as an innovation. It shows how an emerging innovation can
have both explicit and implicit impacts on a large number of direct and
indirect participants in a socio-technical system. It is noteworthy that
given the above-mentioned scenario, the deliberation and participation
amongst the relevant stakeholders are imperative for ensuring accept­
ability of an innovation which we have seen in the case of E-rickshaw in
Delhi.
Though the positive impacts of an emerging innovation are always
desirable, the negative impacts are more than often not taken into ac­
count given the uncertainty involved with them. Responsible innovation
approach, however, attempts to minimise the component of uncertainty
and confusion regarding an emerging innovation by ensuring a
comprehensive and inclusive process of innovation starting from idea­
tion to market level.
Emerging innovation has to be socially, environmentally and
economically sustainable to ensure its successful introduction and
adoption which is assessed by the values created by it. The case study
here clearly has demonstrated that for E-rickshaw to be accepted as a
means of public transport in Delhi, it needed to incorporate these values.
Tracing the deliberation process by using RI framework shows that all
mediums and issues discussed can be seen culminating into the universal
and cultural values which facilitate greater acceptability of the con­
cerned innovation by making it accountable and sustainable. Hence the
case of E-rickshaw is a brilliant example of responsible innovation in a
developing country. It also highlights that effective participation of the
innovators, policymakers, government bodies, entrepreneurs and users
10
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908
of the innovation ensures the incorporation of their respective interests,
concerns and aspirations in the resulting innovation. The underlying
deliberations and participation have a major impact on the acceptance
of the proposed innovation by the society, expedited and effective
governance and even the investments become more effective and useful
for the society. The paper provides an insight that a responsible inno­
vation approach should be deployed in innovating emerging technolo­
gies from the ideation phase itself.
The lag between the introduction of innovation and formulation of
commensurate governing instruments is always a crucial component
and has a direct bearing on the accountability of the emerging innova­
tion. Hence it is very significant for the policy formulating bodies to be a
part of the deliberation process relating to the innovation which can
hasten the process of providing appropriate institutional backing and
regulation to the innovation during its introduction and beyond.
Bridging this gap will impart accountability to the emerging innovation
and result in greater acceptability in society.
References
Aam Aadmi Party, 2015. AAP 70 Point Action Plan Delhi Assembly Election. https://aam
aadmiparty.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/AAP-Manifesto-2015_70-Pt-Action-
Plan.compressed.pdf.
2 Bharatiya Janata Party, 2013. Bharatiya Janata Party Delhi Pradesh MANIFESTO for
the Delhi Vidhan Sabha Elections 2013.. http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.
in/files/file/Bharatiya%20Janata%20Party%20-%20manifesto.pdf.
Bhasin, R., 2014. In Delhi, It’s E-rickshaws vs Auto-rickshaws | Cities News,The Indian
Express. https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/e-rickshaws-vs-auto-ricksh
aws/.
4 Blok, V., Lemmens, P., 2015. The emerging concept of responsible innovation. three
reasons why it is questionable and calls for a radical transformation of the concept of
innovation. In: Koops, B.-J., Oosterlaken, I., Romijn, H., Swierstra, T., van den
Hoven, J. (Eds.), Responsible Innovation 2: Concepts, Approaches, and Applications.
Springer International Publishing, pp. 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
17308-5_2.
Brock, D. (2013, February 22). Are you dealing with the problem owner or the solution
owner? Follow: RSS email twitter partners in EXCELLENCE blog — Making a
difference. https://partnersinexcellenceblog.com.
Bryer, B. (2018). Karm hi pooja hai (work is worship)” the determinants that influence
the subjective health and well-being of cycle rickshaw Wallahs in Varanasi, India.
Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection. 2855.https://digitalcollections.sit.edu/
isp_collection/2855.
7 Burch, I., & Gilchrist, J. (2018). survey of global activity to phase out internal
combustion engine vehicles. Center for climate protection. https://theclimatecenter.
org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Survey-on-Global-Activities-to-Phase-Out-ICE-
Vehicles-FINAL.pdf.
Chakravarty, A., 2015. Last Mile Chaos. August 17. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/c
overage/last-mile-chaos-44033.
9 Chamuah, A., Singh, R., 2019. Securing sustainability in Indian agriculture through
civilian UAV: a responsible innovation perspective. SN Appl. Sci. 2 (1), 106. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-1901-6.
Chamuah, A., Singh, R., 2020. Responsibility and accountability in the governance of
civilian UAV for crop insurance applications in India. In: Avtar, R., Watanabe, T.
(Eds.), Unmanned Aerial Vehicle: Applications in Agriculture and Environment.
Springer International Publishing, pp. 189–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
030-27157-2_14.
Chandran, N., Brahmachari, S.K., 2015. Technology, knowledge and markets: connecting
the dots—electric rickshaw in India as a case study. J. Frugal Innov. 1 (1), 3.
12 Chesbrough, H.W., 2003. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and
Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business Press.
Correljé, A., Cuppen, E., Dignum, M., Pesch, U., Taebi, B., 2015. Responsible innovation
in energy projects: values in the design of technologies, institutions and stakeholder
interactions. Responsible Innovation 2. Springer, pp. 183–200.
Doloreux, D., Parto, S., 2005. Regional innovation systems: current discourse and
unresolved issues. Technol. Soc. 27 (2), 133–153.
Economic Times., 2014. BJP, Congress Meet Najeeb Jung Over E-Rickshaw Dispute.
January 8. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/bjp-c
ongress-meet-najeeb-jung-over-e-rickshaw-dispute/articleshow/39434639.cms?
from=mdr.
Fearon, J., 1998. Deliberation as Discussion” i Deliberative Democracy. ISBN.
Freeman, C., 1995. The ‘National System of Innovation’ in historical perspective.
Cambridge J. Econ. 19 (1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.
a035309.
18 Friedman, B., Kahn Jr, P.H., 2002. Human values, ethics, and design. The Human-
Computer Interaction Handbook. CRC Press, pp. 1209–1233.
Genus, A., Coles, A.-.M., 2008. Rethinking the multi-level perspective of technological
transitions. Res. Policy 37 (9), 1436–1445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
respol.2008.05.006.
D.R. Singh et al.
20 Ghate, T., Suneja, D., 2018. The E-rickshaw story: Was the Advent of Electric
Mobility in India Planned. January 2. https://www.teriin.org/blog/e-rickshaw-st
ory-was-advent-of-electric-mobility-in-India-planned.
Grimble, R., Wellard, K., 1997. Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource
management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agric.
Syst. 55 (2), 173–193.
Harding, S. (2014). The battery rickshaw ‘crisis’ in new delhi. 6(1), 74–88.
24 Harding, S., Kandlikar, M., 2017. Explaining the rapid emergence of battery-
rickshaws in New Delhi: supply-demand, regulation and political mobilisation.
World Dev. Perspect. (7–8), 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2017.11.001.
Heijs, W.J.M, 1994. The dependent variable in thermal comfort research some
psychological considerations. In: Thermal Comfort past Present and Future:
Proceedings of the Conference of June 1993, pp. 40–51.
26 Hekkert, M., Negro, S., Heimeriks, G., Harmsen, R., 2011. Technological innovation
system analysis. Technol. Innov. Syst. Anal.,(November) 16.
Heller, P., Rao, V., 2015. Deliberation and Development.
Hellström, T., 2007. Dimensions of environmentally sustainable innovation: the structure
of eco-innovation concepts. Sustain. Dev. 15 (3), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.1002/
sd.309.
29 Hindu. (2013, September 18). Committee on status of e-rickshaws in Delhi. The
Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/committee-on-status-of-eri
ckshaws-in-delhi/article5140942.ece.
Jituri, V.V. (2018). E-Rickshaw Trend in India. 8(7).
31 Johri, A., Nair, S., 2011. The role of design values in information system
development for human benefit. Inf. Technol. People 24 (3), 281–302.
Kant, V. (2014, March 10). Curb cartelisation of e-rickshaws, say Delhi operators. The
Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/curb-cartelisation-of-ericksh
aws-say-delhi-operators/article5769401.ece.
33 Kenny, M. (1997). Participation in development: the question, challenges and issues
a symposium background paper.
Khanna, R., Khan, A., Chahal, H., Goyal, A., 2018. Addressing the environmental
feasibility of electric rickshaws. In: Parmar, V.S., Malhotra, P., Mathur, D. (Eds.),
Green Chemistry in Environmental Sustainability and Chemical Education. Springer,
Singapore, pp. 139–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8390-7_14.
35 Kokate, V.L., Holmkhe, R.M., Bankar, D.S., & Karandikar, P.B. (2019, June). E-
rickshaw present past and future with reference to current transportation in India.
Ko, E., Kim, Y., 2020. Why do firms implement responsible innovation? The case of
emerging technologies in South Korea. Sci. Eng. Ethics 26, 2663–2692.
Kuo, T.-.C., Huang, S.H., Zhang, H.-.C., 2001. Design for manufacture and design for ‘X’:
concepts, applications, and perspectives. Comput. Ind. Eng. 41 (3), 241–260.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-8352(01)00045-6.
38 Lambert, F. (2017, October 10). The Dutch government confirms plan to ban new
petrol and diesel cars by 2030—electrek. https://electrek.co/2017/10/10/netherlan
ds-dutch-ban-petrol-diesel-cars-2030-electric-cars/.
Lee, R.G., Petts, J., 2013. Adaptive governance for responsible innovation. Responsible
Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in
Society, pp. 143–164.
Levine, P., Fung, A., & Gastil, J.W. (2005). Future directions for public deliberation.
Litman, T., Burwell, D., 2006. Issues in sustainable transportation. Int. J. Glob. Environ.
Issues 6 (4), 331–347.
Lok Sabha. (2015). Lok sabha synopsis of debates (Proceedings other than questions &
answer). http://loksabhaph.nic.in/Debates/Synopsis.aspx.
Majumdar, D., Jash, T., 2015. Merits and challenges of E-rickshaw as an alternative form
of public road transport system: a case study in the state of West Bengal in India.
Energy Procedia 79, 307–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.11.492.
Malerba, F., 2002. Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Res. Policy 31 (2),
247–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00139-1.
Mansbridge, J., 2015. A Minimalist Definition of Deliberation.
Markard, J., Truffer, B., 2008. Technological innovation systems and the multi-level
perspective: towards an integrated framework. Res. Policy 37 (4), 596–615. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.004.
Marwah, A., Bawa, D.S., 2016. E-rickshaws in Delhi - a green project: myth or reality.
IRA-Int. J. Manag. Soc. Sci. (ISSN 2455-2267) 5 (1), 17–20. https://doi.org/
10.21013/jmss.v5.n1.p3.
Ministry of Law and Justice, 2015. The Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015.
Ministry Of Road Transport and Highways, 2014. The Gazette of India. http://www.
egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2014/161182.pdf.
Ministry of Power, 2021. Overview | Government of India | Ministry of Power. https://p
owermin.nic.in/en/content/overview.
Mishra, S., Singh, R., et al., 2018. Responsible innovation: a new approach to address the
theoretical gaps for innovating in emerging E-mobility sector. In: Ferri, F.,
Dwyer, N., Raicevich, S., Grifoni, P., Altiok, H., Andersen, H.T., et al. (Eds.),
Governance and Sustainability of Responsible Research and Innovation Processes:
Cases and Experiences. Springer International Publishing, pp. 93–99. https://doi.
org/10.1007/978-3-319-73105-6_12.
Nelson, R.R., 2013. National Innovation Systems: It is. Regional Innovation and Global.
December 19. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315066653-5.
Nickel, P.J., 2015. Design for the value of trust. Handb Ethics, Values, Technol. Des.:
Sources, Theory, Values Appl. Domains 551–567.
Nill, J., Kemp, R., 2009. Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies:
from niche to paradigm? Res. Policy 38 (4), 668–680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
respol.2009.01.011.
Owen, R., Jack, S., Macnaghten, P., Mile, G., fisher, E., Guston, D., 2013. A framework
for responsible innovation. Responsible Innovation:Managing the Resposible
Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society.
Parthasarathy, R., Rao, V., 2017. Deliberative Democracy in India.
11
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908
Pooja, S., Chani, P.S., Parida, M., 2013. Sustainable transport strategies: an approach
towards low carbon cities. J. Environ. Res. Dev. 7 (4), 1450.
Rajvanshi, A.K., 2002. Electric and improved cycle rickshaw as a sustainable transport
system for India. Curr. Sci. 83 (6), 703–707.
Rajya Sabha. (2015). Rajya sabha synopsis of debate (Proceedings other than questions
and answers). http://164.100.47.5/newsynopsis1/Englishsessionno/234/Synopsis%
20(E)%20dated%2011.03.2015.pdf.
Schomberg, R.V., 2013. A vision of responsible research and innovation. Respons. Innov.:
Manag. Respons. Emerg. Sci. Innov. Soc. 51–74.
Setiawan, A.D., Singh, R., 2015. Responsible innovation in practice: the adoption of solar
PV in telecom towers in Indonesia. In: Koops, B.-J., Oosterlaken, I., Romijn, H.,
Swierstra, T., van den Hoven, J. (Eds.), Responsible Innovation 2: Concepts,
Approaches, and Applications. Springer International Publishing, pp. 225–243.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17308-5_12.
Setiawan, A.D., Singh, R., Romijn, H., et al., 2017. Embedding accountability throughout
the innovation process in the green economy: the need for an innovative approach.
In: Taufik, T., Prabasari, I., Rineksane, I.A., Yaya, R., Widowati, R., S. A. Putra
Rosyidi, et al. (Eds.), ICoSI 2014. Springer, pp. 147–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-981-287-661-4_17.
Shanawaz Khan vs Municipal Corporation Of Delhi &... On 9 September 2014, 2014.
(Testimony of Badar Durrez Ahmed). https://indiankanoon.org/doc/13416117/?
type=print.
Shandilya, N., Saini, V., Rao Ghorpade, A., 2019. Handbook: E-Rickshaw Deployment in
Indian Cities. ICLEI- Local Governments for Sustainability, South Asia (ICLEI South
Asia). https://shaktifoundation.in/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Handbook-ERi
ckshaw-deployment-in-Indian-Cities.pdf.
Singh, R., Kroesen, O., 2012. Understanding responsible innovation from developing
countries perspectives. I. In: The 2nd Conference on Responesible Innovation.
Smith, A., Voß, J.-.P., Grin, J., 2010. Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: the
allure of the multi-level perspective and its challenges. Res. Policy 39 (4), 435–448.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.023.
Steg, L., Gifford, R., 2005. Sustainable transportation and quality of life. J. Transp.
Geogr. 13 (1), 59–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2004.11.003.
Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., Macnaghten, P., 2013. Developing a framework for responsible
innovation. Res. Policy 42 (9), 1568–1580.
TERI, 2014. TERI Undertakes a Study on E-Rickshaws Plying in Delhi. https://www.ter
iin.org/mailer/tuda/tuda_april2014.html.
Times of India, 2019. Delhi air pollution level: latest news on Delhi air pollution and air
quality index (AQI) in Delhi today. Times India. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.
com/topic/delhi-air-pollution.
Transport Department Delhi, 2015. Procedural Guidelines for Licensing /Registartion
/Fitness / Grant of Permit OF E-rickshaw.
van de Poel, I., 2015. Values in engineering and technology. New Perspectives on
Technology, Values, and Ethics. Springer, pp. 29–46.
74 Van den Hoven, J., 2013. Value sensitive design and responsible innovation.
Respons. Innov. 75–83.
Von Schomberg, R., 2013. A vision of responsible research and innovation. Respons.
Innov.: Manag. Respons. Emerg. Sci. Innov. Soc. 51–74.
Ward, J., Upadhyay, A., Bloomberg, 2018. With E-Rickshaws, India Speeds Ahead of
China in Electric-Vehicle Revolution. October 26. Https://Www.Livemint.Com. https
://www.livemint.com/Politics/UcKBJ1QUugrPlwvdDOAHVL/With-erickshaws-Ind
ia-speeds-ahead-of-China-in-electricve.html.
What is Problem Owner | IGI Global, 2021.
Wright, L., Fulton, L., 2005. Climate change mitigation and transport in developing
nations. Transp. Rev. 25 (6), 691–717. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01441640500360951.
79 Yadav, A. (2014, June 17). E-rickshaws could cut emissions but need new
regulations: environmentalists. The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/todays-pape
r/tp-national/tp-newdelhi/erickshaws-could-cut-emissions-but-need-new-regu
lations-environmentalists/article6121583.ece.
Zahinos, A., Singh, R., & González-Benítez, M. (2013). Moving toward responsible
innovation approach in the automotive industry: the SEAT case. 9.
Dr Rajbeer Singh He is trained as Technologist at undergraduate level along with Masters
in Science Policy. His-PhD in Science Policy had dealt with the Foresight on Innovations
and Technology Transfers. He is Postdoc from Technical University Delft, Netherlands. He
has worked as Senior Researcher and Assistant Professor in the Netherlands for 3 years. He
is working as Professor on Innovation, Technology Transfer, Foresight at center for Studies
in Science Policy, JNU, New Delhi. He has 12 years of experience and expertise in IPR,
Innovation, Strategy, Technology Transfer and Sustainability in areas of Renewable En­
ergy, E-Mobility, Agro-Food processing, Drones, and IT with Industry, Government and
Academia. He is engaged in developing and testing a new approach to Responsible
Innovation on new emerging technologies. He has written extensively on circular urban
systems, energy policy, innovation and foresight. He has contributed to designing and
developing new courses on IPR, Innovation management, new business models, technol­
ogy startup centre, and Foresight for post-graduate and undergraduate programs in
Netherlands and Asia. He has supervised 17PhDs on IPR, Technology Transfer and Inno­
vation in Europe and India. He has extensively published on technology foresight and
responsible innovation. He has undertaken 6 transdisciplinary consortiums (Industry-
Academia) based R & D international Projects. He has been invited to more than 30 In­
ternational conferences as an expert speaker. He is an expert trainer on the IPR,
(responsible) Innovation process, Smart Mobility, Business models, and Entrepreneurship.
He has mentored 5 startup companies. He teaches courses on IPR, Innovation, Policy and
Research Methodology to Engineering, Social Science and Management students at UG,
PG, MPhil and PhD level. His-key interests are on evolving the ways to deploy the
responsible innovation approach for effective technology transfer and innovation. He has
D.R. Singh et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 170 (2021) 120908

travelled to more than 35 countries world over for professional engagements. He has
taught and trained more than 80 Nationalities in his courses in Europe and India.

12