Genomics as a new research regime? Evidence from the Netherlands

Roel Nahuis, Dirk Stemerding

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Social scientists commenting on developments in the life sciences have suggested that the rise of genomics in the field of human genetics does not only involve a shift in the research agenda from relatively rare monogenetic disorders to multifactorial, common diseases, but also involves a transformation on the institutional level of research regimes. In the (Dutch) genomics landscape, in which such research regimes are embedded, increasingly dominant values and objectives exert pressures on researchers to collaborate with industrial partners and to valorize knowledge results. To assess how these pressures are actually taken up and transforming research regimes, a multi-level approach is developed and applied in two case studies in which regimes are characterized in terms of the identities of actors, the knowledge and products exchanged and the principles that coordinate these exchanges. We describe the dominant regime in a typical genomics research field (Alzheimer's disease) as compared to the regime in a typical clinical genetics research field (Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) and show whether and how these research regimes are transforming in response to landscape pressures. The analysis shows that the AD regime has not been transformed against the background of changing landscape expectations and that the DMD regime did change, but under the condition of maturation. Developments on the level of genomics research regimes follow a dynamics of their own more than reflecting a changing genomics landscape.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)676-687
Number of pages12
JournalResearch policy
Volume42
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 18 Jan 2013

Fingerprint

The Netherlands
Genomics
Genetics
Field research
Research agenda
Life sciences
Regime change
Multilevel approach
Maturation
Alzheimer's disease

Keywords

  • IR-83053
  • Genomics
  • METIS-292514
  • Multi-level approach
  • Research regime
  • University–industry relations

Cite this

Nahuis, Roel ; Stemerding, Dirk. / Genomics as a new research regime? Evidence from the Netherlands. In: Research policy. 2013 ; Vol. 42, No. 3. pp. 676-687.
@article{5c41f0294e7f4312b57c4d9df6a334d6,
title = "Genomics as a new research regime? Evidence from the Netherlands",
abstract = "Social scientists commenting on developments in the life sciences have suggested that the rise of genomics in the field of human genetics does not only involve a shift in the research agenda from relatively rare monogenetic disorders to multifactorial, common diseases, but also involves a transformation on the institutional level of research regimes. In the (Dutch) genomics landscape, in which such research regimes are embedded, increasingly dominant values and objectives exert pressures on researchers to collaborate with industrial partners and to valorize knowledge results. To assess how these pressures are actually taken up and transforming research regimes, a multi-level approach is developed and applied in two case studies in which regimes are characterized in terms of the identities of actors, the knowledge and products exchanged and the principles that coordinate these exchanges. We describe the dominant regime in a typical genomics research field (Alzheimer's disease) as compared to the regime in a typical clinical genetics research field (Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) and show whether and how these research regimes are transforming in response to landscape pressures. The analysis shows that the AD regime has not been transformed against the background of changing landscape expectations and that the DMD regime did change, but under the condition of maturation. Developments on the level of genomics research regimes follow a dynamics of their own more than reflecting a changing genomics landscape.",
keywords = "IR-83053, Genomics, METIS-292514, Multi-level approach, Research regime, University–industry relations",
author = "Roel Nahuis and Dirk Stemerding",
year = "2013",
month = "1",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1016/j.respol.2012.11.001",
language = "English",
volume = "42",
pages = "676--687",
journal = "Research policy",
issn = "0048-7333",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "3",

}

Genomics as a new research regime? Evidence from the Netherlands. / Nahuis, Roel; Stemerding, Dirk.

In: Research policy, Vol. 42, No. 3, 18.01.2013, p. 676-687.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Genomics as a new research regime? Evidence from the Netherlands

AU - Nahuis, Roel

AU - Stemerding, Dirk

PY - 2013/1/18

Y1 - 2013/1/18

N2 - Social scientists commenting on developments in the life sciences have suggested that the rise of genomics in the field of human genetics does not only involve a shift in the research agenda from relatively rare monogenetic disorders to multifactorial, common diseases, but also involves a transformation on the institutional level of research regimes. In the (Dutch) genomics landscape, in which such research regimes are embedded, increasingly dominant values and objectives exert pressures on researchers to collaborate with industrial partners and to valorize knowledge results. To assess how these pressures are actually taken up and transforming research regimes, a multi-level approach is developed and applied in two case studies in which regimes are characterized in terms of the identities of actors, the knowledge and products exchanged and the principles that coordinate these exchanges. We describe the dominant regime in a typical genomics research field (Alzheimer's disease) as compared to the regime in a typical clinical genetics research field (Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) and show whether and how these research regimes are transforming in response to landscape pressures. The analysis shows that the AD regime has not been transformed against the background of changing landscape expectations and that the DMD regime did change, but under the condition of maturation. Developments on the level of genomics research regimes follow a dynamics of their own more than reflecting a changing genomics landscape.

AB - Social scientists commenting on developments in the life sciences have suggested that the rise of genomics in the field of human genetics does not only involve a shift in the research agenda from relatively rare monogenetic disorders to multifactorial, common diseases, but also involves a transformation on the institutional level of research regimes. In the (Dutch) genomics landscape, in which such research regimes are embedded, increasingly dominant values and objectives exert pressures on researchers to collaborate with industrial partners and to valorize knowledge results. To assess how these pressures are actually taken up and transforming research regimes, a multi-level approach is developed and applied in two case studies in which regimes are characterized in terms of the identities of actors, the knowledge and products exchanged and the principles that coordinate these exchanges. We describe the dominant regime in a typical genomics research field (Alzheimer's disease) as compared to the regime in a typical clinical genetics research field (Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy) and show whether and how these research regimes are transforming in response to landscape pressures. The analysis shows that the AD regime has not been transformed against the background of changing landscape expectations and that the DMD regime did change, but under the condition of maturation. Developments on the level of genomics research regimes follow a dynamics of their own more than reflecting a changing genomics landscape.

KW - IR-83053

KW - Genomics

KW - METIS-292514

KW - Multi-level approach

KW - Research regime

KW - University–industry relations

U2 - 10.1016/j.respol.2012.11.001

DO - 10.1016/j.respol.2012.11.001

M3 - Article

VL - 42

SP - 676

EP - 687

JO - Research policy

JF - Research policy

SN - 0048-7333

IS - 3

ER -