Democratising Science? The Politics of Promoting Biomedicine in Singapore's Developmental State

Abstract

Drawing on Jasanoff's concept of coproduction [2004 States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and Social Order (Routledge, London) and Ong's notion of ‘graduated’ sovereignty [2000 Theory, Culture and Society 17(4) 55–75], we analyse Singapore's promotion of the biomedical industry. To secure its place in the knowledge-based economy, Singapore's developmental state is determined to change the mind-set of its population and inculcate the individual creativity and entrepreneurialism needed for scientific innovation. It is also rolling out an internationally accepted framework of bioethics regulation. We explore the liberal values implicit in these two projects for promoting biomedicine and their implications both for the civic norms of Singapore's developmental state and for the wider relationships between science and liberal democracy.

Stem cell research in Asia: A critical view

“…In other countries as well, the impetus behind the funding of stem cell research (and biotechnology in general) has been provided by the urgent sense of need to make the transition from manufacturing to knowledge or innovation-based economies [Sipp, 2007]. The priority placed on the presumed economic value of stem cell research has translated into governance structures and practices that can be heavy-handed, intrusive and wonkish [Holden and Demeritt, 2008], making them to some extent incompatible with the mindset cultivated in academe. Problems of governance and intellectual infrastructure lie at the heart of many of the difficulties that confront stem cell scientists in Asian countries.…”

Stem Cell Science and Its Public: The Case of Singapore

“…In a paper that discusses Singapore's initiative to promote the biomedical industry, Holden and Demeritt (2008) presented a critical view of the country's "developmental state" political culture which stood in contradiction to a climate of liberal democracy within which the scientific enterprise is said to have thrived. Whilst observing that "good science" now also depends on being seen to observe certain ethical terms and conditions, they suggest that "the practice of ethical review was not driven by much consideration for the ethical concerns that the Singaporean people may have about biomedical research.…”

Singapore Biopolis: Bare Life in the City-State

“…The actual protection of individual autonomy afforded to patients by these bioethical endeavors is arguably a secondary consideration, particularly given the apparent clash between the local communitarian discourse and the emphasis on individual autonomy enshrined in western bioethics (Holden and Demeritt 2008). At the same time, it is arguable that the function of bioethical deliberation around stem cell research globally has been to facilitate the science and coordinate public attitudes accordingly, rather than engage in a fully articulated and democratic public debate (Gottweis et al 2009).…”