A Double-Edged Sword: Globalization and Biosecurity

Hoyt, Kendall; Brooks, Stephen G.

doi:10.1162/016228803773100093

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fidler (2006-2007) argue that to be a concern within the realm of biosecurity, a natural or intentionally released epidemic must have the potential to disrupt the normal functioning of societies (p. 438). They also note that 2 For background and primers on biosecurity and biodefense, see Hoyt andBrooks (2003-2004), Koblentz (2003-2004), and Tucker (2006. communicable diseases represent one of the most significant burdens of morbidity and mortality globally (Gostin & Fidler, 2006-2007.…”

Section: Biosecuritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Human security as biosecurity

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research within security studies has struggled to determine whether infectious disease (ID) represents an existential threat to national and international security. With the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), it is imperative to reexamine the relationship between ID and global security. This article addresses the specific threat to security from COVID-19, asking, “Is COVID-19 a threat to national and international security?” To investigate this question, this article uses two theoretical approaches: human security and biosecurity. It argues that COVID-19 is a threat to global security by the ontological crisis posed to individuals through human security theory and through high politics, as evidenced by biosecurity. By viewing security threats through the lens of the individual and the state, it becomes clear that ID should be considered an international security threat. This article examines the relevant literature and applies the theoretical framework to a case study analysis focused on the United States.

show abstract

Section: Biosecuritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Human security as biosecurity

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…46 Taking advantage of its close ties with biologists, the ISU organizes, co-organizes, and participates in major international conferences and other activities in the life science research field to successfully improve scientists’ awareness of the potential risks of abuse and intentional injury, and promote scientists’ participation in the implementation of responsible science behavior. However, the effectiveness of the BTWC is currently restricted by the “mismatch between the rapid progress of technological change and slower, multilateral negotiations.” 47 With biotechnology research and application continuing to progress quickly and rapidly at a global scale, it has become necessary to carry out international coordination of governance measures through or under the auspices of the UN or other multilateral agencies. 42 Therefore, to address the effective implementation of a code of conduct for biologists in the life science research field, practicing them under the framework of the BTWC seems a viable solution.…”

Section: Why Should An Ethical Code Of Conduct For Biologists Be Formulated and Implemented Under The Framework Of The Btwc?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Building and implementing a multi-level system of ethical code for biologists under the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC) of the United Nations

Xue

Liu

Zhang

2021

Journal of Biosafety and Biosecurity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recent global COVID-19 pandemic has had profound economic and social impacts on the world. It has highlighted an urgent need to strengthen existing international biosecurity governance mechanisms to prevent the misuse and malicious abuse of life science research and maintain international biological arms control norms. Biologists are at the front line of biotechnology development and are key to maintaining biosecurity awareness and moral self-discipline. As an important first step, biologists need to actively participate in the formulation and implementation of relevant biosecurity policies and measures to ensure their effectiveness and sustainability. Furthermore, efforts should be made to advocate for and promote the establishment of an ethical code of conduct for biologists to share safety responsibilities for global biosecurity. To maximize the impact of this ethical code of conduct, an effective approach to implementing codes of conduct for biologists at both national and international levels should be established under the framework of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC).

show abstract

“…15 The globalisation of biotechnology is being driven not only by national decisions, but also by biotechnology firms' growing use of international subcontracting and technological cooperation agreements to further their research -including their biodefence-related research, such as vaccine development for potential bio-terrorist agents. 16 …”

Section: Downloaded By [University Of California Santa Cruz] At 17:24mentioning

confidence: 99%