In recent years ‘Responsible AI’ (R-AI) has been applied to a number of contexts and research applications (Dignum, 2019; Zhu, 2019; De Laat, 2021). On the surface this seems a good thing, as of course we want the development, deployment, and use of AI-systems to be in line with certain normative principles, and it seems the ‘responsible’ frame can give us just that. R-AI can ensure that AI-systems respect human rights and are aligned with democratic values. However, just what exactly R-AI means is contested, and often undefined. 

This paper contributes a novel perspective to this debate by outlining the major historical disciplinary orientations of what would eventually become ‘R-AI’. By tracing the history of reflections on technology and responsibility from the 1960s, through STS, computer ethics and roboethics, to the present day, I will present important lessons from each phase of our reflection on technology and responsibility.

I will provide a chronology of the emergence of the R-AI ecosystem, which has come to be understood as simultaneously consisting of 4 major features: 
1. An interdisciplinary field of academic/industry research
2. A stated corporate governance ambition
3. A desired type of AI product
4. A broad community or ecosystem of stakeholders
By tracing the history of these features of R-AI, we map the ‘ecosystem’ of R-AI, answering the following questions in the process:
1. Who are the different communities and interests that constitute the R-AI ecosystem?
2. What does ‘Responsible’ AI mean, and what concept(s) of ‘responsibility’ anchor it?
3. Why do we need R-AI - what are the ends/goals/aims that a flourishing R-AI ecosystem/community would realise?

The key takeaway from this study is that ‘Responsible AI’ is not a label that has to do with some specific set of principles and values. More than that, it remains unclear whether there is one group of practitioners that we can call ‘the’ Responsible AI community. Instead, what we observe is that R-AI consists of many overlapping and intersecting communities, with diverse, contested, and evolving bodies of practice.