The synthetic biology puzzle: a qualitative study on public reflections towards a governance framework

Starkbaum, Johannes; Braun, Matthias

doi:10.1007/s11693-015-9182-x

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the same time, interest in what the public will think continues [e.g. Starkbaum, Braun and Dabrock, 2015;Pauwels, 2009;Pauwels, 2013;Torgersen and Schmidt, 2013]. And policy meetings continue to be held on behalf of public safety [Cho and Relman, 2010;Kuiken, 2015].…”

Section: Ethical Question and Public Awarenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

The story is that there is no story: media framing of synthetic biology and its ethical implications in the New York Times (2005–2015)

Giordano¹,

Chung²

2018

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite low public knowledge of synthetic biology, it is the focus of prominent government and academic ethics debates. We examine the NY Times media coverage of synthetic biology. Our results suggest that the story about synthetic biology remains ambiguous. We found this in four areas -1) on the question of whether the field raises ethical concerns, 2) on its relationship to genetic engineering, 3) on whether or not it threatens 'nature', and 4) on the temporality of these concerns. We suggest that this ambiguity creates conditions in which there becomes no reason for the public at large to become involved. AbstractPublic perception of science and technology; Science and media Keywords https://doi.org/10.22323/2.17030202 DOI IntroductionOn February 11, 2005, The New York Times published the op-ed "Biology's New Forbidden Fruit," its first piece engaging directly with the emerging field of synthetic biology (SB). The title, ripe with religious metaphor, foreshadows what became one of the most prevalent aspects of media-reported public debate -whether or not this new science was "playing god." Most interesting for the purposes of our study, in this first article, Morton [2005] calls for wide public engagement. However, in the decade following this inaugural article, there were few publications on this topic in The New York Times and other major media outlets, while SB and the ethics surrounding it became a major topic in research and policy arenas. In this study we analyze news articles about synthetic biology in the first decade of The New York Times reporting on the field. We focus on the curious relationship between the low volume of reporting on the field, low public knowledge of the field along with the high level of attention to ethical, moral and political implications of the field by the practitioners and the government. We know from media studies that media plays a large role in how public understands science. Hence, we are interested in how SB is presented in the media. In this study, we asked the broader research question: "How is synthetic biology being reported in the media?" Emerging from the central question is a set of 'problems' concerning potential issues, relationships to nature, relationship to genetic engineering, and the temporality of synthetic biology.

show abstract

Section: Ethical Question and Public Awarenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

The story is that there is no story: media framing of synthetic biology and its ethical implications in the New York Times (2005–2015)

Giordano¹,

Chung²

2018

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Loans are instances where certain claims are being suspended and can be reclaimed at the conclusion of the loan (on the significance of this picture for understanding public attitudes towards scientific research, cf. Starkbaum et al 2015;Braun and Dabrock 2016b). Other claims can remain in place throughout, e.g., when there are expectations about the purpose of the loan.…”

Section: Observation IImentioning

confidence: 99%

Data Donations as Exercises of Sovereignty

Hummel

Braun

Dabrock

2019

Philosophical Studies Series

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose that the notion of individual sovereignty encompasses more than having the power to exclude others from one's personal space. Instead, sovereignty is realized at least in part along outward-reaching, interactive and participatory dimensions. On the basis of reflections from gift theory, we argue that donations can generate social bonds, convey recognition and open up new options in social space. By virtue of these features, donations offer the potential to advance individual sovereignty. We go on to highlight distinctive benefits of data donations, before articulating several difficulties and puzzles: data donors are bound to have a limited grip on future uses of their data and the people affected by their decision to share. Further characteristic traits of data donations come from the invasive and comprehensive character of state-of-the-art data gathering and processing tools, and the fact that the relevant sense of data ownership is far from straightforward. In order to minimize tensions with negative, protective aspects of sovereignty, we argue that thoughtful mechanisms at the level of consent procedures, the representation of data subjects in governance structures, and organizational-level constraints are necessary. Along the way, we will devote particular attention to challenges and opportunities within big data contexts.

show abstract

“…This highlighted low certainty of these participants' attitudes, partly due to a lack of information and media attention (Fischer et al , 2013). In research into specific applications, it has been reported that applications for medical and environmental use tended to be more in line with public preference than agricultural and food products (Ineichen et al , 2017; Starkbaum et al , 2015; Steurer, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social dimensions of synthetic biology in the agrifood sector: the perspective of Chinese and EU scientists

Jin

Clark

et al. 2021

BFJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeScientists' perceptions of societal needs and priorities will shape the innovation trajectories of synthetic biology (SB). In turn, these will be shaped by the funding and regulatory environments in which their research is conducted. This study intends to investigate scientists' perspectives on co-innovation with the public regarding implementation of pathways associated with SB including its agrifood applications.Design/methodology/approachSemi-structured interviews were conducted with Chinese and EU scientists (N = 9 and 13, respectively). Six prominent themes emerged from the data based on thematic analysis method.FindingsBoth Chinese and EU scientists regarded SB as being high-benefit, low-risk and ethically acceptable, and predicted its rejection by the general public and attributed this to the public's knowledge deficit and irrationality. They endorsed the deficit model of science communication, independent of greater emphasis on responsible research and innovation (RRI) in EU research projects. The findings raised concerns that public fears might intensify once they have learned about scientists' biased risk perceptions of SB; this calls for better involvement of broader stakeholders.Research limitations/implicationsAs the sample size is relatively small, the generalisation of research findings needs to be cautious. However, the authors believe the findings have provided some insights that support increasingly RRI associated with SB.Originality/valueThis study has presented scientists' misunderstandings of societal responses to SB and science communication. It has also provided information to understand how SB-related issues and agenda can be better shaped in future.

show abstract

The synthetic biology puzzle: a qualitative study on public reflections towards a governance framework

Cited by 12 publications

References 29 publications

The story is that there is no story: media framing of synthetic biology and its ethical implications in the New York Times (2005–2015)

The story is that there is no story: media framing of synthetic biology and its ethical implications in the New York Times (2005–2015)

Data Donations as Exercises of Sovereignty

Social dimensions of synthetic biology in the agrifood sector: the perspective of Chinese and EU scientists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About