Table 1 Findings on the integration dimensions from the case studies

a) Inclusion of all areas of topics into assessments

Broader set of topics is already included. More data integration not recommended

A majority of assessments includes a broad set of topics

Social issues lacking in assessments

Many assessments include a broad set of topics but within distinct scientific perspectives

b) Inclusion of values into assessments

Better inclusion of values in assessments is needed

Ethical issues are addressed in the corpus as a whole

Generally lack of explicit values and ethical discussion

Generally low level of reflection on values

c) Inclusion of narratives into assessments

Narratives not included

Not considered much, though some scenarios are addressed

Generally not included

Although hype narratives play a great role in assessments, narratives are not explicated as such

d) Not isolating one topic at the expense of the whole

More topic focused assessments needed taking practical complexity into account

When SB matures and specific applications are developed, this form of integration may become more important

Call for increased consideration of alternatives

Focusing specifically on cloud computing may explain why wider ICT-related issues (e.g. Big Data) are not discussed

e) Explicating assessment framing

Transparency of framing should be increased

Explicit reflection on framing is lacking

Problem framing is generally not clear

Explicit reflection on framing is lacking

f) Anticipation

Systematic anticipation and scrutiny of alternative technology paths is needed

Anticipation is appropriately addressed

Many biofuels assessments are anticipatory

Most assessments have a short-term anticipatory focus but do not investigate longer term implications

g) Targeted use of methods in assessment

In general not much reflection on methods

In general not much reflection on methods

Lack of transparency on methods, in particular concerning Life Cycle Analysis

Some assessments use methods in a business-as-usual manner, others design methods to produce certain types of outcomes

h) Integration of stakeholders/the public into assessments

Less use of participatory approaches over time

Although stakeholder and lay people participation is lacking, how, and to what extent more participation is required is not clear

Much more participation is called for

Very little, more is called for

i) Integration among assessments

More systematic learning is needed

Currently not much integration

An integration institution was called for

The integrating effect is in policy-making, not among the assessments themselves

j) Integration of governance concerns into assessments

Reflection on impacts of governance trends not included in assessments in a systematic way

Not systematically done, though there is reflection on current biotech. governance and regulation and to what extent this suits the (future) field of SB

Governance concerns are well integrated except for the social dimension of sustainability

Due to many assessments being commissioned, in general governance concerns are well integrated in the assessments

k) Better integration of assessments into governance

No information available on how assessments are integrated into governance

Apparently low impact of the assessments on governance

There appears to be a potential better integration, at the expense of consultants

Some assessments seem designed to support policies, not the other way around