These massive data sets challenge the traditional knowledge production and design paradigms.
But the significance of its incipient paradigm of knowledge production is not limited to the DIY-Bio movement.
Although the movement is still in its infancy, and it is even unclear whether it will ever reach maturity, the contours of a new paradigm of knowledge production are already becoming visible.
The question is therefore whether such overlapping features as transparency and openness, participation and sharing, co-production of experts and lay people, grassroots entrepreneurship et cetera add up to something like a novel, alternative paradigm of knowledge production outside of the academia and industry walls.
During the last decades, however, traditional evidence-based science ('Mode 1') has been losing its autonomy and is now gradually complemented by a 'new paradigm of knowledge production ('Mode 2') ' that is 'socially distributed, application-oriented, trans-disciplinary, and subject to multiple accountabilities' [ 4].
Mode 1 and Mode 2 may be characterized as 'knowledge paradigms' that underlie the knowledge production (to a certain extent also the knowledge application) of higher education institutions and university systems.
As Hammersley and Traianou [ 18] pointed out, there are a range of perspectives in relation to ethical review; here we outline a framework for comparing two very different 'ideal type' paradigms of, and approaches to, ethics in social research in relation to both the processes of knowledge production and methodology.
Emphasizing again a more systemic perspective for the Mode 3 knowledge production, a focused conceptual definition may be as follows (Carayannis and Campbell [2012], p. 49): Mode 3 '… allows and emphasizes the co-existence and co-evolution of different knowledge and innovation paradigms.
An interrelation between production conceptual models, organizational approaches to production, and production paradigms is illustrated.
