Genome editing: the dynamics of continuity, convergence, and change in the engineering of life

Martin, Paul; Morrison, Michael; Turkmendag, Ilke; Nerlich, Brigitte; McMahon, Aisling; Saille, Stevienna de; Bartlett, Andrew

doi:10.1080/14636778.2020.1730166

Cited by 21 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A brief history of biotechnology First generation' genetic modification is an important antecedent of contemporary genome editing technologies like CRISPR (Martin et al, 2019). Recombinant DNA (rDNA), in which sequences of DNA are cut out of, or added to the 'host' DNA in the living cells of an organism, was invented in the early 1970s by researchers working at Stanford University and the University of California, San Francisco.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CRISPR in context: towards a socially responsible debate on embryo editing

Morrison

Saille

2019

Palgrave Commun

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following the birth in 2018 of two babies from embryos altered using CRISPR-Cas9, human germline gene editing (GGE) moved from abstract concern to reality. He Jiankui, the scientist responsible, has been roundly condemned by most scientific, legal and ethical commentators. However, opinions remain divided on whether GGE could be acceptably used in the future, and how, or if it should be prohibited entirely. The many reviews, summits, positions statements and high-level meetings that have accompanied the emergence of CRISPR technology acknowledge this, calling for greater public engagement to help reach a consensus on how to proceed. These calls are laudable but far from unproblematic. Consensus is not only hugely challenging to reach, but difficult to measure and to know when it might be achieved. Engagement is clearly desirable, but engagement strategies need to avoid the limitations of previous encounters between publics and biotechnology. Here we set CRISPR in the context of the biotechnology and fertility industries to illustrate the lessons to be learned. In particular we demonstrate the importance of avoiding a 'deficit mode' in which resistance is attributed to a lack of public understanding of science, addressing the separation of technical safety criteria from ethical and social matters, and ensuring the scope of the debate includes the political-economic context in which science is conducted and new products and services are brought to market. Through this history, we draw on Mary Douglas' classic anthropological notion of 'matter out of place' to explain why biotechnologies evoke feelings of unease and anxiety, and recommend this as a model for rehabilitating lay apprehension about novel biological technologies as legitimate matters of concern in future engagement exercises about GGE.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CRISPR in context: towards a socially responsible debate on embryo editing

Morrison

Saille

2019

Palgrave Commun

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The expansion has been particularly impressive for gene editing, especially after 2012 when Crispr, a gene editing technique that would gain rapid diffusion, was invented, as we described elsewhere. 30 As seen in Chart 1, bioprinting has had relatively modest performance. Indeed, the generation of patentable bioprinting products and techniques has been slower due to two main factors.…”

Section: Patent Licensing and The Principle Of Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patent power in biomedical innovation: Technology governance in biomodifying technologies

Bicudo

Morrison

et al. 2022

World Intellectual Property

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomedical innovation is often rewarded by exclusive proprietary rights such as patents. In the case of gene editing, induced pluripotent stem cells, and three‐dimensional (3D) bioprinting (here described as biomodifying technologies), the limitations of the patent system come into stark relief, generating both technical and political doubts. Generally, political and technological limitations are supposed to be solved with so‐called good governance, based on some principles. We focus on three of such governance principles (participation, accountability, and transparency) to show how they have been weakened, instead of strengthened, by the current patent system. We demonstrate that although patent applications are submitted by both public and private players, the latter have imposed a growing dominance in gene editing, induced pluripotent stem cells, and 3D bioprinting, disseminating their aggressive and exclusive strategies. As a consequence, a logic of experimentality tends to prevail where the three fundamental governance principles fail to be enacted.

show abstract

“…Given its impact and importance, genome editing is an outstanding case from a technology and innovation management point of view that is disrupting its own technological regime ( Martin et al, 2020 ). Here, genome editing can be defined as an emerging technology as it fulfills the five criteria radical novelty, relatively fast growth, coherence, prominent impact, and uncertainty and ambiguity developed by Rotolo et al (2015) ; Rotolo et al, 2015 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Emergence of Genome Editing—Innovation Network Dynamics of Academic Publications, Patents, and Business Activities

Laibach

Bröring

2022

Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transformative societal change can both be triggered and influenced by both macro-level political means and the emergence of technologies. Key enabling technologies and therein biotechnology hold the power to drive those changes forward, evolving from breakthrough academic discoveries into business activities. Due to its increasing empirical relevance, we picked genome editing as an example for an emerging technology and extracted publication, patent, and company data from the years 2000 to 2020. By drawing upon social network analysis, we identify major networks and clusters that are dominating the respective time and layer. Based on these networks, we draw vertical connections between scientific knowledge, patented technologies, and business activities to visualize the interlevel relationships between actors through technological development. Thereby, we identify network dynamics of the emergence of genome editing, the most important actors and clusters evolving, and its spread into different areas.

show abstract

Genome editing: the dynamics of continuity, convergence, and change in the engineering of life

Cited by 21 publications

References 34 publications

CRISPR in context: towards a socially responsible debate on embryo editing

CRISPR in context: towards a socially responsible debate on embryo editing

Patent power in biomedical innovation: Technology governance in biomodifying technologies

The Emergence of Genome Editing—Innovation Network Dynamics of Academic Publications, Patents, and Business Activities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About