Literature
- Akrich, M. (1992) ‘The De-Scription of Technical Objects’, in: Bijker, W.E. and J. Law (eds) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, London: MIT Press, pp. 205–224
- Akrich, M. (1995) ‘User representations: practices, methods and sociology’, in: Rip, A., T.J. Misa and J. Schot, (eds) Managing Technology in Society: The approach of constructive technology assessment, London/New York: Pinter Publishers, pp. 167–184
- Bolt, L.L.E., J.J.M. van Delden, H.J. Derijks, A. Kalis and H.G.M. Leufkens (2002), ‘Tailor-made pharmacy: Future developments and ethical challenges in the field of pharmacogenomics’, essay for the N.W.O. programme on the Societal Component of Genomics, Utrecht University.
- Bijker, W.E. (1995) On Bikes, Bicycles and Bakelite. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
- Bijman, J.W. and C.M. Enzing (1995) ‘Biostechnology and vertical coordination in the agrofood chain: A Case study of the Dutch Potato Chain’, in: Science and Public Policy, vol. 22, no.6, December 1995, pp. 391–398.
- Brom, F.WA., N.Cohen, K. Waelbers and L.F.M. van Zutphen (2002), ‘Towards an integrated network on Genomics and Society in the Netherlands’, essay for the N.W.O. programme on the Societal Component of Genomics, Utrecht University.
- Chen, Z. and A. McDermott (1998) ‘International comparisons of biotechnology policies’, Journal of Consumer Policy, vol. 21, pp. 527–550.
- Commission of European Communities (2001) ‘Towards a strategic vision of life sciences and biotechnology’, consultation document, EU, Brussels.
- Coombs, R., K. Green, A. Richards, and V. Walsh (eds.) (2001) Technology and the Market. DemaneZ Users and Innovation. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.
- Cowan, R.S. (1987) ‘The Consumption Junction: A Proposal for Research Strategies in the Sociology of Technology’, in Bijker, WE., T.P. Hughes and T.J. Pinch (eds) The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 261–280.
- Duyndam, A.(2002) Leeg. Redactioneel 27 juli 2002 Chemisch Weekblad, vol.15, pp.3.
- Enzing, C.M. (1995) Overzicht van wetgeving maatregelen en activiteiten betreffende biotechnologie activiteiten van bedrzjven, Achtergrondstudie in opdracht van het Rathenau Instituut, TNO-STB, Apeldoorn.
- Enzing, C.M. (2000) Dossier Biotechnologie. Bijlage 2 bij de: Integrale Nota Biotechnologie van de ministers van EZ, OCW, LNV, VWS en VROM, Den Haag, ook verschenen als TNO-rapport STB-00–52.
- Enzing, C.M. and L. Sterrenberg (1988) Eenzijdig beleid: Pleidooi voor een integraal (bio)technologie beleid (Unidirectional Policy: Plea for an integral (bio)technology policy), in: Intermediair, vol. 24 (1988) no. 25.
- Enzing, C.M. and A.M. van der Giessen (2002) Voedingsgenomicsonderzoek: ontwikkelingen en maatschappelijke impact, TNO-STB, studie voor Rathenau Instituut, Juni 2002.
- Everdingen, J.J.E. van, A.F. Cohen and G.T. Feenstra (eds) (1999) Ziekten maken en breken. Over farmacogenomie. Amsterdam: Boom/Belvedere.
- Featherstone, M. (1991) Consumer Culture and Postmodernism, London: Sage Publications.
- Gezondheidsraad (2000) Farmacogenetica, Den Haag, 2000, publication no. 2000/19
- Habermeyer, K.F. (1990) ‘Product use and product improvement’, Research Policy, no.19, pp.271–283.
- Hanssen, L., J.M. Gutteling, L. Lagerwerf, J. Bartels and W. Roeterdink (2001) In de marge van het publiek debat Eten en Genen. Flankerend onderzoek in opdracht van de Commissie Biotechnologie en Voedsel. Aspect 69. Enschede: Universiteit Twente.
- Hanssen, L. R. van Est, C. Enzing (2002) Het participatieve gen. Participatieve instrumenten in het omgaan met maatschappelijke vraagstukken over ontwikkelingen in voedingsgenomics, Esay geschreven in het kader van het NWO programma `Maatschappelijke Component Genomics’. Nijmegen/Den Haag/Delft.
- Herstatt, C. and E. von Hippel, (1992) ‘Developing New Product Concepts via the Lead User Methods: A Case Study in Low-Tech Field’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol. 9, pp. 213–221
- Hoogma, R. (2000) Exploiting Technological Niches. Thesis, Enschede: Twente University Press.
- Hoogma, R. and J.W. Schot (2001) ‘How innovative are users? A critique of learning by-doing and -using’, in: Coombs, R., K. Green, A. Richards and V. Walsh (eds.): Technology and the Market. Demands, Users and Innovation, Edward Elgar, 2001, pp.216–233.
- Howells, J. (2000) ‘Innovation & Services: New Conceptual Frameworks’, CRIC Discussion Paper, no. 38, CRIC, The University of Manchester & UMIST, pp. 1–29.
- INRA (Europe) — ECOSA (2000) The Europeans and biotechnology — Eurobarometer 52.1, Report for the Research Directorate-General and the Education and Culture Directorate-General, http://europa.eu.int/comm /research/pdf/eurobarometer-en.pdf
- Kemp, R., J. Schot, and R. Hoogma (1998) ’Regime Shifts to Sustainability Through Processes of Niche Formation’, Technology Analysis 6. Strategic Management, vol.10, no. 2, pp. 175–195.
- Kern, S. and C.M Enzing, (2002) ‘The Dutch Biotechnology Innovation System: An inventory and assessment of the major developments since 1994ʹ, TNO-STB, January 2002
- Lang, J. and S.C. Wood (1999) ‘Development of orphan vaccines: an industry perspective’, Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 5, pp.749–757.
- Leufkens, H.G.M. (2001) ‘De betekenis van ‘genomics’ voor de toekomst van de farmacotherapie’, in: Timmerman, H. et al. (eds) Geneesmiddelen nu en in de toekomst:
- Volksgezondheid Toekomst Verkenning 2002, Houten, RIVM, Bilthoven, pp.491–504.
- Leonard-Barton D. (1988) ‘Implementation as a Mutual Adaptation of Technology and Organisation’, Research Policy, no.17, pp.251–267.
- Lundvall, B.A. (1988) ‘Innovation as an Interactive Process: From User—Producer Interaction to the National System of Innovation’, in: Dosi, G., C. Freeman, R. Nelson et al. (eds), Technical Change and Economic Theory, London: Pinter, pp.349–369.
- Lundvall, B.A. (1992) National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.
- Massoud, M., H. Ragozin and G. Schmid (2001) ‘The Future of Nutrition: Consumers Engage with Science’, Institute for the Future New Consumer, New Genetics Programme
- Maussen, L.J. (2001) Economic Evaluation of Pharmacogenomics, Scriptie Universiteit Utrecht, Faculteit Farmacie
- Michaut, A.M.K., H.C.M. Van Trijp and J.E.M. Steenkamp (2000) What’s new? A multi- dimensional approach to product newness’, Work in Progress for the Mansholt Multidisciplinary Seminar, 20 December 2000
- Moors, E.H.M., J. Faber, M. Hekkert and M. Meeus (2002a), ‘Innovation Systems Barriers in Orphan Drugs Development in the Netherlands. An Exploratory Analysis’, paper GIN Conference, Gothenborg, June 2002.
- Moors, E.H.M. and R.E.H.M. Smits, (2002b) ‘Innovations in the biotech industry: Threats and challenges’, paper for 9th Netherlands Biotechnology Congress, March 14–15 2002, Ede, The Netherlands.
- NIABA (2001) Brief aan Commissie Terlouw over bijdrage NIABA aan debat Eten en Genen, 21 december 2001
- Nefarma (2002) Annual Report 2001
- Nelson, R. R. and S. G. Winter (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change, Belknap Press.
- Oudshoorn, N and T.J. Pinch (eds) (2003) How Users Matter. The co-construction of users and technologies, forthcoming at MIT Press.
- Phost, D.R., M.T. Boyle-Jacino and D.M. Grant (2000) ‘A SNPshot: pharmacogenetics and the future of drug therapy’, Trends in Biotechnology, vol. 18, pp. 334–338
- Pinch, T.J. and WE. Bijker (1984) ‘The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other’, Social Studies of Science, 14, pp. 399–431.
- Raad voor Gezondheidsonderzoek RGO (1998) Advies Orphan Drugs (weesgeneesmiddelen), advies nr. 16, Rijswijk.
- Raad voor Landelijk Gebied (2001) Agribusiness: steeds meer business, steeds minder agri, advies over de vestigingsvoorwaarden voor intemationale agribusiness
- Rogers, E.M. (1971) Communication of Innovations. A Cross-Cultural Approach, London: The Free Press.
- Rosenberg, N. (1976) Perspectives on Technology, Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press.
- Rosenberg, N. (1982) Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics, Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press.
- Sabatier, P.A. (1987) ‘Knowledge, Policy-Oriented Learning and Policy Change. And Advocacy Coalitions Framework’, Knowledge, no. 8, pp.17–50.
- Schellekens, H., P.H. van Bragt, W. Olijve and C.N. van der Weele (2001), Medische Biotechnologie, Maarssen: Elsevier Gezondheidszorg.
- Schot, J. (2001), ‘Towards New Forms of Participatory Technology Development’, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, vol. 13, no. 1, pp.39–52.
- Schot, J. and A.A. De La Bruheze (2002) ‘The Mediated Design of Products, Consumption and Consumers in the Twentieth Century’, in Oudshoom, N. and T.J. Pinch (eds), How Users Matter: The Co-Construction of Users and Technology, forthcoming at MIT Press.
- Schumpeter, J.A. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
- Schumpeter, J.A. (1943), Capitalism, Socialism & Democracy, Allen & Unwin, London, 5th edition, 1976.
- Sciona (2002) www.sciona.com
- Silverstone, R. and E. Hirsch (1992) Consuming technologies: media and information in domestic spaces, London: Routledge
- Silverstone, R. and L. Haddon, (1996) ‘Design and the Domestication of Information and Communication Technologies: Technical Changes in Everyday Life, in: Mansell, R. and R. Silverstone, (eds) Communication by Design: The Politics of Information and Communication Technologies, Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 47–77
- Slaughter, S. (1993) ‘Innovation and learning during implementation: a comparison of user and manufacturer innovations’, Research Policy, no.22, pp.81–95.
- Smits R., A. Leyten and P. den Hertog (1995) ‘Technology Assessment and technology policy in Europe: new concepts, new goals, new infrastructures.’, Policy Sciences, 28, pp. 272–299.
- Smits, R. (2002) ‘Innovation Studies in the 21st Century: Questions from a user’s perspective’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, forthcoming.
- Smits, R. and S. Kuhlmann (2002) Strengthening Interfaces in Innovation Systems: rationale, concepts and (new) instruments, report prepared for EC STRATA Workshop, Brussels, 22–23 April 2002.
- Stichting Merkartikel SMA (2002) SMA Jaarbericht 2001
- Stroeken, J. (2001) ‘Het waarom van succes of falen’, EYE innovatiespecial, januari 2001
- Van Lente, H., M. Hekkert, R. Smits & B. van Waveren (2002) ‘Roles of Strategic Intermediaries in Transition Processes: The Case of Energy Innovation Systems’, paper presented at the Workshop ‘Transitions to Sustainability through Systems Innovations’,University of Twente, 4–6 july 2002.
- Von Hippel, E. (1976) ‘The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process’, Research Policy, vol. 5, pp. 212–239
- Von Hippel, E. (1986) ‘Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts’, Management Science, vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 791–805
- Von Hippel, E. (1988), The Sources of Innovation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Von Hippel, E. and M. Tyre (1995) ‘How Learning by Doing is Done: Problem Identification in Novel Process Equipment’, Research Policy, no.24, pp. 1–12.
- Von Hippel, E. (2001) ‘Perspective: User toolkits for innovation’, Journal of Product Innovation Management, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 247–257
- Waarlo, A.J. et al. (2002) ‘Competence-oriented genomics and education’, essay for the N.W.O. Programme on the Societal Component of Genomics, Utrecht University.
- Walsh, V. (1993) ‘Demand, Public Markets and Innovation in Biotechnology’, SPP Science and Public Policy, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 138–156
- Woolgar, S. (1991) ‘Configuring the User: The Case of Usability Trials,’ in Law, J. (ed.) A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination, London: Routledge.
URLs:
- BioFarmInd: www.biofarmind.n1
- Nefarma: www.nefarma.n1
- Sciona: www.sciona.com