A number of new governance frameworks for Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) are already in existence, or are being developed and proposed imminently. But, our paper argues, before embarking on the construction of new frameworks there is a need to appreciate, from a historical perspective de-facto governance (Rip 2010) of responsible research and innovation (rri). We argue that the different ways actors already frame ‘responsibility’, and the different normative orientations which sit behind those framings, is non-trivial from the point of view of governance, because different normativities pose correspondingly different governance challenges, which have implications for the design and implementation of governance mechanisms, techniques and instruments. The paper presents 5 ‘grand narratives’ representing the ‘divided worlds’ of responsible research and innovation spanning a wide range of research and innovation settings. It traces each historically, highlighting the implications of each in terms of corresponding governance challenges. The paper posits that historical empirical analysis of this type is helpful to conceptualising responsibility as it poses questions and reflections as to the undergirding conditioning factors that necessarily inform attempts to construct societally acceptable and legitimate over-arching RRI governance framework(s). The paper is complementary to Tanciogne et al (2014, presented at this conference) which addresses the same question through scientometric analysis. Discussion and analysis of the emergence and construction of governance mechanisms and initiatives and the relationship between this construction process and the resulting effectiveness and legitimacy.