Reconfiguring Social Value in Health Research Through the Lens of Liminality

Abstract

Despite the growing importance of 'social value' as a central feature of research ethics, the term remains both conceptually vague and to a certain extent operationally rigid. And yet, perhaps because the rhetorical appeal of social value appears immediate and self-evident, the concept has not been put to rigorous investigation in terms of its definition, strength, function, and scope. In this article, we discuss how the anthropological concept of liminality can illuminate social value and differentiate and reconfigure its variegated approaches. Employing liminality as a heuristic encourages a reassessment of how we understand the mobilization of 'social value' in bioethics. We argue that social value as seen through the lens of liminality can provide greater clarity of its function and scope for health research. Building on calls to understand social value as a dynamic, rather than a static, concept, we emphasize the need to appraise social value iteratively throughout the entire research as something that transforms over multiple times and across multiple spaces occupied by a range of actors.

Co-production and Managing Uncertainty in Health Research Regulation: A Delphi Study

“…This highlights crucial questions about the stages in the research lifecycle at which assessments of proportionality are carried out. As we have argued elsewhere, the timeframes involved in realising the social value of human health research are often extremely attenuated, and the range of actors involved in these processes are diverse and often unconnected [13]. This has implications for regulatory pathways and the-perhaps repeated-role for proportionality therein.…”

Biomedicine, self and society: An agenda for collaboration and engagement

“…However, such perceptions fail to recognise that law also plays a constitutive role in biomedical research and practice ( Cloatre & Pickersgill, 2014). This is not least through helping to establish norms and standards for scientific knowledge production, material and intellectual exchange, constructive participation, and effective ethical review that lead to social value ( Ganguli-Mitra et al ., 2017). For instance, regulatory impasse may be overcome through interdisciplinary, iterative engagement with scientific communities to design and deliver adaptable systems of research governance ( Laurie et al , 2012).…”

Charting Regulatory Stewardship in Health Research: Making the Invisible Visible

“…We have argued elsewhere that the realization of social value from health research is a processual endeavor; that is, that it occurs over time and across numerous regulatory thresholds, from initial ethics review and approval to subsequent publication of research findings and their uptake into practice. 43 This in itself presents considerable challenges for any stewardship role, because the regulatory landscapes and actors are multiple, overlapping, often disconnected, and sometimes entirely bespoke (as in the context of complex research protocols that involve a range of regulatory objects such as data, tissue, or embryos). The need for proportionality within each of these regulatory silos is now well recognized, but what is less clear and far less appreciated is the unmet need for proportionality across regulatory silos and sectors.…”