Search

Understanding the human brain is a "Grand Challenge" for 21st century research. Computational approaches enable large and complex datasets to be addressed efficiently, supported by artificial neural networks, modeling and simulation. Dynamic generative multiscale models, which enable the investigation of causation across scales and are guided by principles and theories of brain function, are instrumental for linking brain structure and function. An example of a resource enabling such an integrated approach to neuroscientific discovery is the BigBrain, which spatially anchors tissue models and data across different scales and ensures that multiscale models are supported by the data, making the bridge to both basic neuroscience and medicine. Research at the intersection of neuroscience, computing and robotics has the potential to advance neuro-inspired technologies by taking advantage of a growing body of insights into perception, plasticity and learning. To render data, tools and methods, theories, basic principles and concepts interoperable, the Human Brain Project (HBP) has launched EBRAINS, a digital neuroscience research infrastructure, which brings together a transdisciplinary community of researchers united by the quest to understand the brain, with fascinating insights and perspectives for societal benefits.

In a transition to a bio-based economy new ways of monitoring waste-streams and water quality can then contribute to sustainable production processes. As niche innovation, new ways of monitoring face systemic barriers. The present article examines how barriers to change manifest in discursive practices with differing normative attachments and implications. A frame analysis revealed two competing frames: (1) the dominant ‘norm water’ frame in which thresholds of chemical compounds are used to set policy targets; and (2) the contesting ‘living water’ frame, which entails innovative continuous monitoring tools that take into account the ecological effects of chemical compounds. We introduce the concept of interactive reflectivity, as a discursive tool, to collaboratively visualize, scrutinize and overcome discursive barriers to innovations. The stakeholder dialogue shows how systemic barriers are uttered discursively in niches – or other forms of responsible research and innovation – and may hinder change even at the niche-level.

This article concerns the transformative potential of medical genomics for common disease research. We analysed 13 review articles in asthma research in the period 1999 to 2008. Our aim was to understand how genomics has emerged in this research field, and the attendant changes. Motivated by Lippman’s geneticisation thesis, we use the concept of an ‘innovation journey’ to trace how expectations of improved understanding, prevention, diagnosis and treatment structure a dynamic co-evolutionary process through which a genome-based discourse emerges. We show how the asthma researchers involved continuously struggle to define their contribution to asthma research, as well as to clinical practice. Along the way, the researchers propose changes to both the definition and the aetiological model of asthma, thus highlighting gene–gene and gene–environment interactions. It is, however, difficult to characterise this discourse as one of geneticisation. With increasing attention being given to epigenetics, metabolomics, proteomics and systems biology, the emerging picture suggests an important, but much less deterministic, role for genes

With “Horizon Europe”, the European Commission sets out the framework for research and innovation in Europe over the next seven years. The proposal outlines the contours of an innovative science policy that is open and responsive to societal needs, and where societal actors jointly undertake missions to discover sustainable solutions to present-day and future challenges. In our commentary we point to a number of modifications needed to strengthen the cross-cutting implementation of activities for societal engagement and responsible research and innovation.

This article concerns the transformative potential of medical genomics for common disease research. We analysed 13 review articles in asthma research in the period 1999 to 2008. Our aim was to understand how genomics has emerged in this research field, and the attendant changes. Motivated by Lippman's geneticisation thesis, we use the concept of an 'innovation journey' to trace how expectations of improved understanding, prevention, diagnosis and treatment structure a dynamic co-evolutionary process through which a genome-based discourse emerges. We show how the asthma researchers involved continuously struggle to define their contribution to asthma research, as well as to clinical practice. Along the way, the researchers propose changes to both the definition and the aetiological model of asthma, thus highlighting gene-gene and gene-environment interactions. It is, however, difficult to characterise this discourse as one of geneticisation. With increasing attention being given to epigenetics, metabolomics, proteomics and systems biology, the emerging picture suggests an important, but much less deterministic, role for genes.

Genomics was introduced with big promises and expectations of its future contribution to our society. Medical genomics was introduced as that which would lay the foundation for a revolution in our management of common diseases. Genomics would lead the way towards a future of personalised medicine. Doctors would be able to offer diagnosis, advice and medicine tailored to the individual and individuals would be given a tool to take charge of their own health. Research on common disease like asthma, cancer, Alzheimer’s and mental diseases are characterised by a heterogeneous mix of disciplines. There is therefore a complex historically developed configuration of actors and disciplines in place for understanding and researching these conditions. Each research area has developed a dominant storyline that describes how the disease as well as their research should be understood. With the introduction of genomics, researchers of common disease are therefore presented with the challenge of how to evaluate the promises and expectations of genomics for their area of research. How does genomics fit into their storyline? The researchers, who take on the task of integrating the promises and expectations of genomics in their research area, become travellers on an innovation journey. As they evaluate the potential of genomics, they create spaces of genomics. Within these spaces, storylines on the contribution of genomics develop. In my PhD thesis I analyse the emergence of such spaces and their storylines in asthma and cardiovascular disease research. I show how the promises of individualized prevention, diagnosis and treatment are influenced by the specific storylines of these research fields.