Meet Jarno Hoekman
5 questions to Open Science Platform member Dr Jarno Hoekman.
Who is Jarno Hoekman?
Associate Professor of Innovation Studies at the Copernicus Institute for Sustainable Development, and member of the Utrecht Young Academy. I studied Social Geography before earning my PhD in Science, Technology and Innovation Studies. My research focuses on the organisation and dynamics of scientific knowledge development, especially in contexts where science is instrumental for innovation, regulatory and political decision-making, and approaches to social challenges. In my research, I’m interested in things like what the movements towards Open Science, Team Science and Science for Society mean for the orientation, quality and utility of scientific knowledge. I also study how the use of scientific knowledge and methods in regulatory decision-making changes, for example regarding the accelerated approval of medications, replacing animal testing with digital innovations, and the rise of new fields like regenerative medicine.
How did you get involved in Open Science?
I’ve always been interested in questions about the value of science for society. The transition towards Open Science is a natural fit with that interest. Originally, I was mainly interested in research aspects, but the urge to make knowledge useful outside of the university has grown as well. Of course, it’s not always easy to apply research in policy and real-world practice. For example, in the Utrecht Young Academy committee for interdisciplinary research we’re working on that by developing knowledge and entering into dialogue about the benefits and limitations of interdisciplinary research for young researchers. At the Faculty of Geosciences, I try to integrate the Open Science concept into the curriculum, for example in the new Responsible Conduct of Research course for PhD candidates.
What specific aspect of Open Science would you like people to be more aware of?
The distributive effects of the transition towards Open Science. In the area of sustainability transitions, people are starting to pay more attention to ‘just transitions’. How are the benefits, risks and attendant uncertainties of a transition distributed within a community? You can start from core values such as equal opportunities and inclusivity, and then think about the effects of the transition on issues such as accessibility and affordability. That perspective can be applied at several levels of scale. What are the benefits, risks and uncertainties for young UU researchers who want to practice Open Science, and how are they related to more established scientists? What are the positive and negative consequences for scientists who are Open Science ‘first movers’ within their own field? What influence do Open Science and the FAIR movement have on the access, quality and utility of scientific knowledge at the global level? The ‘just transition’ perspective also emphasises the importance of how problems are discussed and how they lead to possible solutions. How much emphasis do we place on developing infrastructure, providing stimuli, competency development and dialogue, and participation in decision-making in the dialogue and in policy?
What are the main challenges UYA faces in the area of Open Science?
Connecting Open Science practices to principles of recognition and rewards at work. The new vision for recognition and rewards (the TRIPLE model) has put the issue high on the university’s agenda. I expect that will continue for the next decade or so. To me, the main challenges will lie in the implementation: bringing the TRIPLE model to the shop floor. That’s especially important for young scientists. They often work ‘locally’, and are highly dependent on a small number of colleagues and supervisors. Knowledge, expertise and widespread support in the work environment are needed to enable young scientists to practice Open Science. That requires attention to competency development and leadership at every level of the organisation.
What are you most proud of yourself in relation to Open Science?
Open Science is a broad concept, and touches on fundamental questions about what science is and what is should become in the future. We shouldn’t avoid that discussion, and I’m proud to be able to contribute to it. I also believe it’s vital for a university to focus on competency development. The university has a huge pool of talent, but compared to businesses and government organisations we can sometimes be too inflexible about how talent develops and how we can support it. So it gives me a lot of satisfaction to work on that issue within the organisation.