There are different perceptions of gene technology in the global salmon farming industry, and these perceptions influence approaches to innovation. For example, genetically modified soy is considered unacceptable as feed for companies in Norway but is sought after by companies in Chile. Norway, as does much of Europe, follows the Precautionary Principle, emphasizing caution in adopting new technologies when there is limited data or experience (Reber, 2018). In contrast, Chile and the United States follow the Proactionary Principle, advocating for the use of new technologies despite limited experience, provided they have the potential to solve urgent problems (More, 2013). This divergence stems from differing perceptions of risk in gene technology innovation, despite the presence of many of the same companies operating in both countries.

It is important to develop a better understanding of how the direction of technological innovation evolves within a global landscape influenced by actors operating at different places. Diverse local perceptions across different contexts can shape innovations along different development pathways, which in turn influence how sustainability is defined and pursued. In this regard, risk perception is particularly relevant because it reflects the fundamental factors that shape how innovation is perceived and implemented in a given context (Bennink, 2020). In the context of responsible innovation, risk perception refers to beliefs about potential harm or loss resulting from an innovation. It can serve as an indicator of the trajectory an innovation system is likely to take (Chatfield et al., 2017). There is therefore a stretch relation between the directionality of an innovation and the type of risk perception that is formed by actors participating in it. Accordingly, the research question posed herein is: How does risk perception shape the direction of gene technology innovation in the salmon farming industries in Chile and Norway?

This paper first explains the concept of directionality and its relation to innovation systems. The directionality of an innovation system depends on how risks are perceived within it. To examine this, the paper applies Socio-Technical Configuration Analysis (STCA) to construct network maps identifying key concepts related to the risk perception of gene technology among actors in each country. Next, the analysis develops an actor network map of the innovation systems in Chile and Norway, distinguishing between actors generating persistent cultural valuations and those producing Science, Technology, and Innovation (STI) knowledge. This approach aims to demonstrate that an innovation system's directionality can be analyzed by mapping risk perception concepts and differentiating actors shaping sticky valuations from those producing STI knowledge.