• norsk
    • English
  • English 
    • norsk
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Senter for velferds- og arbeidslivsforskning (SVA)
  • SVA - Work Research Institute (AFI)
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Senter for velferds- og arbeidslivsforskning (SVA)
  • SVA - Work Research Institute (AFI)
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Assessments of emerging science and technologies: Mapping the landscape

Forsberg, Ellen-Marie; Thorstensen, Erik; Nielsen, Rasmund Øjvind; De Bakker, Erik
Journal article, Peer reviewed
This is a pre-copy-editing, author-produced p d f of an article accepted for publication in science and public policy following peer review. the definitive publisher-authenticated version forsberg, e. m., thorstensen, e., nielsen, r. Ø., & de bakker, e. (2014). assessments of emerging science and technologies: mapping the landscape. science and public policy, 41(3), 306-316 is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu025
Thumbnail
View/Open
Embargo 2016-05-23. Postprint (638.8Kb)
URI
https://hdl.handle.net/10642/2390
Date
2014-05-23
Metadata
Show full item record
Collections
  • SVA - Work Research Institute (AFI) [351]
Original version
Forsberg, E. M., Thorstensen, E., Nielsen, R. Ø., & de Bakker, E. (2014). Assessments of emerging science and technologies: Mapping the landscape. Science and Public Policy, 41(3), 306-316.   http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu025
Abstract
This paper presents comparative work from the EST-Frame project on technology appraisal. It focuses on studies of ‘advisory domains’ (more or less distinct traditions for assessment of technologies, such as risk analysis, foresight and ethical assessments). The purpose of the study was to increase the understanding of current assessments in order to identify whether more integrated approaches were needed. We present an analytic approach for studying assessments across advisory domains and present findings from our analytic studies, showing differences in methodological characteristics across the domains. We discuss how the domains partially overlap and identify gaps. We show how most of the selected assessments address technology trajectories and science, technology and innovation policies, and few address specific applications. Finally, we argue that quality control is important for the legitimacy of advice on emerging science and technologies and that the domains are important in this respect.
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Series
Science and Public Policy;41(3)

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit
 

 

Browse

ArchiveCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournalsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit