Anneloes Roelofsen
VU University Amsterdam
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Anneloes Roelofsen.
New Genetics and Society | 2010
Anneloes Roelofsen; Roy R. Kloet; J.E.W. Broerse; de J.T. Cock Buning
Ecological genomics (ecogenomics) is a relatively new area of research and innovation, positioned at the crossroads of molecular biology, biotechnology, ecology and soil and environmental sciences. For ecogenomics to contribute to solving complex societal problems, collaboration between scientific and non-scientific actors is crucial. Within the Dutch Ecogenomics Consortium this is addressed by developing and implementing a constructive technology assessment (CTA) approach. In the first step of this CTA approach, guiding visions in ecogenomics were identified. Technology developers were challenged to reflect on the practical implications of their research and the potential value for society. We present the guiding visions and argue that discussing these with other actors (e.g. policy makers and future users) contributes to the development of applications that address societal needs.
Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society | 2009
J.E.W. Broerse; Tjard de Cock Buning; Anneloes Roelofsen; Joske Bunders
Public engagement is increasingly advocated and applied in the development and implementation of technological innovations. However, initiatives so far are rarely considered effective. There is a need for more methodological rigor and insight into conducive conditions. The authors developed an evaluative framework and assessed accordingly the effectiveness of a project of the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport in which the application of interactive policy making was piloted in medical biotechnology, among others, to increase the legitimacy and quality of the policy agenda. Relevant societal actors, including citizens, were actively involved in an open-exchange, action and reflection process, integrating relevant knowledge. Although the project was overall evaluated as effective, some difficulties were faced. These were mostly related to the novel roles public engagement requires of principal actors. The article concludes that more research is needed on the position of the executing team and on overcoming tensions existing between different governance modes.
Science & Public Policy | 2010
Anneloes Roelofsen; J.E.W. Broerse; Tjard de Cock Buning; Joske Bunders
There is an increasing awareness that participatory processes should take place at an early phase of science and technology developments. However, involving the relevant publics at an early phase is challenging as concrete applications are absent and societal attention is rather weak. In this paper we reflect on a participatory process that aimed to facilitate groups of potential future users to reflect on developments in the emerging scientific field of ecological genomics. We explicate how we defined relevant publics, recruited participants, and facilitated them to reflect on technologies which did not yet exist. The results show different ways of framing developments in ecological genomics, and provide crucial contextualization for involving a broader range of publics and organizing a frame-reflective dialogue as a next step. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.
Responsible Innovation Volume 1: innovative solutions for global issues. | 2014
Marlous E. Arentshorst; J.E.W. Broerse; Anneloes Roelofsen; Tjard de Cock Buning
To develop responsible innovations, the potential impacts on society, both positive and negative, should be identified and incorporated into research, development and design of new technologies. In this research, neuroimaging applications in health care are subject to a constructive technology assessment (CTA) process which is combined with vision assessment that acknowledges the mechanisms and dynamics surrounding innovations. The ‘guiding visions’ of scientists and technology developers which are currently shaping the future of neuroimaging are presented. Results show that these experts expect that future advances in neuroimaging technologies will make it possible to obtain more insight into both the healthy brain and brain disorders. They consider that these advances will lead to improved prevention, diagnosis and treatment options. The barriers that need to be overcome to realize these guiding visions are identified. In addition, findings show which aspects need further exploration and follow-up activities in order to ensure that medical neuroimaging develops in a more responsible direction.
Responsible Innovation 2: Concepts, Approaches and Applications | 2015
Marije de Jong; Frank Kupper; Anneloes Roelofsen; J.E.W. Broerse
Although responsible innovation (RI) is to change the scientific system to meet the grand challenges of our time, its criteria are still unclear. This study explores meaning negotiation on RI by academic actors in both formal and informal discourse. In the formal discourse on RI, we identified characteristic shifts, including engagement of societal stakeholders, anticipation and adaptability, broadening, and new insights on impacts and regulation. However, the intended group of scientists themselves were not visibly involved in the formal discussion. Therefore, as a case study, we studied the informal discourse of Dutch scientists in the field of functional neuroimaging relevant to the domain of justice and security. Our findings show that RI is unfamiliar to scientists. We suggest that RI as a guiding concept is in need of operationalization within the specific context in which it is used. A point of entry for such a process is the role responsibility taken on by scientists. Resistance can be expected as RI can be equivocated with a limitation on the autonomy of science. To avoid evasive practices, extra efforts are needed to involve the scientists in a co-constructive process to operationalize RI.
Research Policy | 2011
Anneloes Roelofsen; Wouter Boon; Roy R. Kloet; J.E.W. Broerse
Responsible Innovation 1: Innovative Solutions for Global Issues | 2014
Marlous E. Arentshorst; J.E.W. Broerse; Anneloes Roelofsen; J.T. de Cock Buning
Science & Public Policy | 2009
Anneloes Roelofsen; J.E.W. Broerse; J.T. de Cock Buning; J.G.F. Bunders Aelen
Proceedings of PATH conference | 2006
Anneloes Roelofsen; J.E.W. Broerse; J.G.F. Bunders Aelen
Second CESAGen International Conference | 2005
Anneloes Roelofsen; J.E.W. Broerse; J.G.F. Bunders Aelen