Social sciences, risks and synthetic biology: A review of the literature
Keywords:
Synthetic Biology, Risks, Controversies, Regulation, GovernanceAbstract
The article presents a review of the research social science on the risks related to synthetic biology, identifying the main lines of research, their problems and the most relevant challenges, which their own researchers and promoters have described as being of high importance and incidence in the profound social consequences it could have. The review covers 50 articles indexed in Web of Science (WoS) and SCOPUS, published between 2009 and April 2020. The work identified four areas of research on the risks of synthetic biology: risks, regulation, governance, and controversies, recognizing the challenges and opportunities in each of them.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Aghaei Chadegani, A.; Salehi, H., Md Yunus, M. M.; Farhadi, H.; Fooladi, M.; Farhadi, M.; Ale Ebrahim, N. (2013). A comparison between two main academic literature collections: Web of science and scopus databases. Asian Social Science, 9 (5), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v9n5p18
Ahteensuu, M. (2017). Synthetic Biology, Genome Editing, and the Risk of Bioterrorism. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23 (6), 1541–1561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9868-9
Akin, H.; Rose, K. M.; Scheufele, D. A.; Simis-Wilkinson, M.; Brossard, D.; Xenos, M. A.; Corley, E. A. (2017). Mapping the landscape of public attitudes on synthetic biology. BioScience, 67 (3), 290–300. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw171
Ancillotti, M.; Rerimassie, V.; Seitz, S. B.; Steurer, W. (2016). An Update of Public Perceptions of Synthetic Biology: Still Undecided? NanoEthics, 10 (3), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-016-0256-3
Bauer, A.; Bogner, A. (2020). Let’s (not) talk about synthetic biology: Framing an emerging technology in public and stakeholder dialogues. Public Understanding of Science, 29 (5), 492–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520907255
Bogner, A.; Torgersen, H. (2015). Different ways of problematising biotechnology – and what it means for technology governance. Public Understanding of Science, 24 (5), 516–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662514539074
Cummings, C. L.; Kuzma, J. (2017). Societal Risk Evaluation Scheme (SRES): Scenario-based multi-criteria evaluation of synthetic biology applications. PLoS ONE, 12 (1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168564
Delborne, J. A.; Kokotovich, A. E.; Lunshof, J. E. (2020). Social license and synthetic biology: the trouble with mining terms. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 0 (0), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2020.1738023
Di Paola, L.; Giuliani, A. (2018). Multiscale synthetic biology: from molecules to ecosystems. En Piemonte, V.; Basile, A.; Ito, T.; Marrelli, L. (Eds.), Biomedical engineering challenges: a chemical engineering insight (pp. 97-117) Chichister: Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org./10.1002/9781119296034.ch6
Diéguez, A. (2017). Transhumanismo. La búsqueda tecnológica del mejoramiento humano. Herder.
Diéguez, A. (2020). Edición genética en humanos y la necesaria pregunta por los fines. Encuentros En La Biología, 12 (170), 11–15.
Ditlevsen, K.; Glerup, C.; Sandøe, P.; Lassen, J. (2020). Synthetic livestock vaccines as risky interference with nature? Lay and expert arguments and understandings of “naturalness.” Public Understanding of Science, 29 (3), 289–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520906083
Douglas, C. M. W.; Stemerding, D. (2014). Challenges for the European governance of synthetic biology for human health. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 10 (1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-014-0006-7
Faunce, T. A. (2011). Will international trade law inhibit or promote global artificial photosynthesis? Asian Journal of WTO and International Health Law and Policy, 6 (2), 313–347.
Ferry, L. (2017). La revolución transhumanista. madrid: Alianza.
Forsberg, E. M.; Ribeiro, B.; Heyen, N. B.; Nielsen, R. Ø.; Thorstensen, E.; de Bakker, E.; Klüver, L.; Reiss, T.; Beekman, V.; Millar, K. (2016). Integrated assessment of emerging science and technologies as creating learning processes among assessment communities. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 12 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-016-0042-6
Funk, M.; Steizinger, J.; Falkner, D.; Eichinger, T. (2019). From Buzz to Burst—Critical Remarks on the Term ‘Life’ and Its Ethical Implications in Synthetic Biology. NanoEthics, 13 (3), 173–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-019-00361-4
Greer, S. L.; Trump, B. (2019). Regulation and regime: the comparative politics of adaptive regulation in synthetic biology. Policy Sciences, 52 (4), 505–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-019-09356-0
Gronvall, G. (2018). The security implications of synthetic biology. Survival, 60 (4), 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2018.1495443
Gschmeidler, B.; Seiringer, A. (2012). “knight in shining armour” or “frankenstein’s creation”? the coverage of synthetic biology in German-language media. Public Understanding of Science, 21 (2), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662511403876
Hagen, K. (2016). Science Policy and Concomitant Research in Synthetic Biology—Some Critical Thoughts. NanoEthics, 10 (2), 201–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-016-0267-0
Hilgartner, S. (2012). Novel constitutions? New regimes of openness in synthetic biology. BioSocieties, 7 (2), 188–207. https://doi.org/10.1057/biosoc.2012.5
Holm, S. (2019). Deciding in the Dark: The Precautionary Principle and the Regulation of Synthetic Biology. Ethics, Policy and Environment, 22 (1), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2019.1581419
Ineichen, C., Biller-Andorno, N.; Deplazes-Zemp, A. (2017). Image of synthetic biology and nanotechnology: A survey among university students. Frontiers in Genetics, 8 (SEP), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2017.00122
Katz, L.; Chen, Y. Y.; Gonzalez, R.; Peterson, T. C.; Zhao, H.; Baltz, R. H. (2018). Synthetic biology advances and applications in the biotechnology industry: a perspective. Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology, 45 (7), 449–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10295-018-2056-y
Keshava, R.; Mitra, R.; Gope, M.; Gope, R. (2018). Synthetic biology: overview and applications. En Barh, D.; Azevedo, V. (Eds.), Omics technologies and bio-engineering. Towards improving quality of life (pp. 63–93). Cambridge: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804659-3.00004-X
König, H.; Frank, D.; Heil, R.; Coenen, C. (2016). Synthetic biology’s multiple dimensions of benefits and risks: Implications for governance and policies. En Boldt, J. (Ed.), Synthetic Biology (pp. 217–232). Wiesbaden: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-10988-2_14
Kuiken, T.; Dana, G.; Oye, K.; Rejeski, D. (2014). Shaping ecological risk research for synthetic biology. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 4 (3), 191–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-014-0171-2
Kuzma, J.; Tanji, T. (2010). Unpackaging synthetic biology: Identification of oversight policy problems and options. Regulation and Governance, 4 (1), 92–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01071.x
Lai, H. E.; Canavan, C.; Cameron, L.; Moore, S.; Danchenko, M.; Kuiken, T.; Sekeyová, Z.; Freemont, P. S. (2019). Synthetic Biology and the United Nations. Trends in Biotechnology, 37 (11), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.05.011
Lentzos, F. (2009). Synthetic Biology in the Social Context: The UK Debate to Date. BioSocieties, 4 (2–3), 303–315. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1745855209990172
Luhmann, N. (1992). Sociología del riesgo. México DF: Universidad Iberoamericana y Universidad de Guadalajara.
Mali, F.; Kramberger, A. (2014). Recent challenges in the social regulation of new emerging technologies: The case of synthetic biology franc Mali, Anton kramberger. Teorija in Praksa, 51 (5), 850–865.
Mandel, G. N.; Marchant, G. E. (2014). The living regulatory challenges of synthetic biology. Iowa Law Review, 100 (1), 155–200. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2410179
Marris, C. (2015). The Construction of Imaginaries of the Public as a Threat to Synthetic Biology. Science as Culture, 24 (1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2014.986320
Marris, C.; Calvert, J. (2020). Science and Technology Studies in Policy: The UK Synthetic Biology Roadmap. Science Technology and Human Values, 45 (1), 34–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243919828107
Marris, C.; Jefferson, C.; Lentzos, F. (2014). Negotiating the dynamics of uncomfortable knowledge: The case of dual use and synthetic biology. BioSocieties, 9 (4), 393–420. https://doi.org/10.1057/biosoc.2014.32
Maurer, S. M.; Von Engelhardt, S. (2013). Industry self-governance: A new way to manage dangerous technologies. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 69 (3), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0096340213486126
Meyer, M. (2013). Assembling, governing, and debating an emerging science: The rise of synthetic biology in France. BioScience, 63 (5), 373–379. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2013.63.5.10
Meyer, M. (2017). “Participating means accepting”: debating and contesting synthetic biology. New Genetics and Society, 36 (2), 118–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2017.1320942
Miller, C. A. (2015). Modeling risk in complex bioeconomies. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2 (1), 124–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.1002060
Mukunda, G.; Oye, K. A.; Mohr, S. C. (2009). What rough beast? Synthetic biology, uncertainty, and the future of biosecurity. Politics and the Life Sciences, 28 (2), 2–26. https://doi.org/10.2990/28_2_2
Nesbeth, D. (2016). Introduction. En Nesbeth, D. Synthetic Biology Handbook (pp. ix–xiv). New Wales: CRC Press.
Nordberg, A.; Minssen, T.; Holm, S.; Horst, M.; Mortensen, K.; Møller, B. L. (2018). Cutting edges and weaving threads in the gene editing (ya{cyrillic})evolution: Reconciling scientific progress with legal, ethical, and social concerns. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 5 (1), 35–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsx043
Oliver, A. (2018). Behavioral Economics and the Public Acceptance of Synthetic Biology. Hastings Center Report, 48 (February), S50–S55. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.819
Pauwels, E. (2012). A reflection on the notion of cohabitation within and beyond the walls of life sciences. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 3 (2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/jsesd.2012040101
Pei, L.; Gaisser, S.; Schmidt, M. (2012). Synthetic biology in the view of european public funding organisations. Public Understanding of Science, 21 (2), 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510393624
Rabitz, F. (2019). Institutional Drift in International Biotechnology Regulation. Global Policy, 10 (2), 227–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12652
Rager-Zisman, B. (2012). Ethical and regulatory challenges posed by synthetic biology. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 55 (4), 590–607. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2012.0043
Rerimassie, V. (2016). Exploring Political Views on Synthetic Biology in the Netherlands. NanoEthics, 10 (3), 289–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-016-0257-2
Ribeiro, B.; Shapira, P. (2019). Anticipating governance challenges in synthetic biology: Insights from biosynthetic menthol. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 139 (May 2018), 311–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.11.020
Rose, K. M.; Howell, E. L.; Scheufele, D. A.; Brossard, D.; Xenos, M. A.; Shapira, P.; Youtie, J.; Kwon, S. (2018). The values of synthetic biology: Researcher views of their field and participation in public engagement. BioScience, 68 (10), 782–791. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy077
Shapira, P.; Youtie, J.; Li, Y. (2015). Social science contributions compared in synthetic biology and nanotechnology. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2 (1), 143–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.1002123
Sinden, A. (2018). Lessons from Environmental Regulation. Hastings Center Report, 48 (February), S56–S64. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.820
Stemerding, D.; Betten, W.; Rerimassie, V.; Robaey, Z.; Kupper, F. (2019). Future making and responsible governance of innovation in synthetic biology. Futures, 109, 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2018.11.005
Su, L. Y. F.; Scheufele, D. A.; Brossard, D.; Xenos, M. A. (2020). Political and personality predispositions and topical contexts matter: Effects of uncivil comments on science news engagement intentions. New Media and Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820904365
Tait, J.; Wield, D. (2019). Policy support for disruptive innovation in the life sciences. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 0 (0), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1631449
Torgersen, H.; Hampel, J. (2012). Calling controversy: Assessing synthetic biology’s conflict potential. Public Understanding of Science, 21 (2), 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510389266
Torgersen, H.; Schmidt, M. (2013). Frames and comparators: How might a debate on synthetic biology evolve? Futures, 48, 44–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2013.02.002
Trump, B. D.; Cummings, C.; Kuzma, J.; Linkov, I. (2018). A decision analytic model to guide early-stage government regulatory action: Applications for synthetic biology. Regulation and Governance, 12 (1), 88–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12142
Trump, B. D. (2017). Synthetic biology regulation and governance: Lessons from TAPIC for the United States, European Union, and Singapore. Health Policy, 121 (11), 1139–1146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.07.010
Trump, B. D.; Cegan, J.; Wells, E.; Poinsatte-Jones, K.; Rycroft, T.; Warner, C.; Martin, D.; Perkins, E.; Wood, M. D.; Linkov, I. (2019). Co-evolution of physical and social sciences in synthetic biology. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 39 (3), 351–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2019.1566203
Trump, B., Cummings, C., Galaitsi, S.E., Kuzma, J. and Linkov, I. (2020). Synthetic Biology: Perspectives on Risk Analysis, Governance, Communication, and ELSI. In Trump, B., Cummings, C., Kuzma, J. and Linkov. I. (Eds), Synthetic Biology 2020. Frontiers in Risk Analysis and Governance (pp 1-18). Swirzerland: Springer.
van Doren, D.; Heyen, N. B. (2014). Synthetic biology: Too early for assessments? A review of synthetic biology assessments in Germany. Science and Public Policy, 41 (3), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu034
van Eck, N. J.; Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84 (2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Wallach, W.; Saner, M.; Marchant, G. (2018). Beyond Cost-Benefit Analysis in the Governance of Synthetic Biology. Hastings Center Report, 48 (February), S70–S77. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.822
Walsh, P. F. (2020). Improving ‘Five Eyes’ health security intelligence capabilities: leadership and governance challenges. Intelligence and National Security, 00 (00), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/02684527.2020.1750156
Wiek, A.; Guston, D.; Frow, E.; Calvert, J. (2012). Sustainability and anticipatory governance in synthetic biology. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 3 (2), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.4018/jsesd.2012040103
Ahteensuu, M. (2017). Synthetic Biology, Genome Editing, and the Risk of Bioterrorism. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23 (6), 1541–1561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9868-9
Akin, H.; Rose, K. M.; Scheufele, D. A.; Simis-Wilkinson, M.; Brossard, D.; Xenos, M. A.; Corley, E. A. (2017). Mapping the landscape of public attitudes on synthetic biology. BioScience, 67 (3), 290–300. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw171
Ancillotti, M.; Rerimassie, V.; Seitz, S. B.; Steurer, W. (2016). An Update of Public Perceptions of Synthetic Biology: Still Undecided? NanoEthics, 10 (3), 309–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-016-0256-3
Bauer, A.; Bogner, A. (2020). Let’s (not) talk about synthetic biology: Framing an emerging technology in public and stakeholder dialogues. Public Understanding of Science, 29 (5), 492–507. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520907255
Bogner, A.; Torgersen, H. (2015). Different ways of problematising biotechnology – and what it means for technology governance. Public Understanding of Science, 24 (5), 516–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662514539074
Cummings, C. L.; Kuzma, J. (2017). Societal Risk Evaluation Scheme (SRES): Scenario-based multi-criteria evaluation of synthetic biology applications. PLoS ONE, 12 (1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168564
Delborne, J. A.; Kokotovich, A. E.; Lunshof, J. E. (2020). Social license and synthetic biology: the trouble with mining terms. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 0 (0), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2020.1738023
Di Paola, L.; Giuliani, A. (2018). Multiscale synthetic biology: from molecules to ecosystems. En Piemonte, V.; Basile, A.; Ito, T.; Marrelli, L. (Eds.), Biomedical engineering challenges: a chemical engineering insight (pp. 97-117) Chichister: Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org./10.1002/9781119296034.ch6
Diéguez, A. (2017). Transhumanismo. La búsqueda tecnológica del mejoramiento humano. Herder.
Diéguez, A. (2020). Edición genética en humanos y la necesaria pregunta por los fines. Encuentros En La Biología, 12 (170), 11–15.
Ditlevsen, K.; Glerup, C.; Sandøe, P.; Lassen, J. (2020). Synthetic livestock vaccines as risky interference with nature? Lay and expert arguments and understandings of “naturalness.” Public Understanding of Science, 29 (3), 289–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662520906083
Douglas, C. M. W.; Stemerding, D. (2014). Challenges for the European governance of synthetic biology for human health. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 10 (1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-014-0006-7
Faunce, T. A. (2011). Will international trade law inhibit or promote global artificial photosynthesis? Asian Journal of WTO and International Health Law and Policy, 6 (2), 313–347.
Ferry, L. (2017). La revolución transhumanista. madrid: Alianza.
Forsberg, E. M.; Ribeiro, B.; Heyen, N. B.; Nielsen, R. Ø.; Thorstensen, E.; de Bakker, E.; Klüver, L.; Reiss, T.; Beekman, V.; Millar, K. (2016). Integrated assessment of emerging science and technologies as creating learning processes among assessment communities. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 12 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40504-016-0042-6
Funk, M.; Steizinger, J.; Falkner, D.; Eichinger, T. (2019). From Buzz to Burst—Critical Remarks on the Term ‘Life’ and Its Ethical Implications in Synthetic Biology. NanoEthics, 13 (3), 173–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-019-00361-4
Greer, S. L.; Trump, B. (2019). Regulation and regime: the comparative politics of adaptive regulation in synthetic biology. Policy Sciences, 52 (4), 505–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-019-09356-0
Gronvall, G. (2018). The security implications of synthetic biology. Survival, 60 (4), 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2018.1495443
Gschmeidler, B.; Seiringer, A. (2012). “knight in shining armour” or “frankenstein’s creation”? the coverage of synthetic biology in German-language media. Public Understanding of Science, 21 (2), 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662511403876
Hagen, K. (2016). Science Policy and Concomitant Research in Synthetic Biology—Some Critical Thoughts. NanoEthics, 10 (2), 201–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-016-0267-0
Hilgartner, S. (2012). Novel constitutions? New regimes of openness in synthetic biology. BioSocieties, 7 (2), 188–207. https://doi.org/10.1057/biosoc.2012.5
Holm, S. (2019). Deciding in the Dark: The Precautionary Principle and the Regulation of Synthetic Biology. Ethics, Policy and Environment, 22 (1), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2019.1581419
Ineichen, C., Biller-Andorno, N.; Deplazes-Zemp, A. (2017). Image of synthetic biology and nanotechnology: A survey among university students. Frontiers in Genetics, 8 (SEP), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2017.00122
Katz, L.; Chen, Y. Y.; Gonzalez, R.; Peterson, T. C.; Zhao, H.; Baltz, R. H. (2018). Synthetic biology advances and applications in the biotechnology industry: a perspective. Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology, 45 (7), 449–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10295-018-2056-y
Keshava, R.; Mitra, R.; Gope, M.; Gope, R. (2018). Synthetic biology: overview and applications. En Barh, D.; Azevedo, V. (Eds.), Omics technologies and bio-engineering. Towards improving quality of life (pp. 63–93). Cambridge: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804659-3.00004-X
König, H.; Frank, D.; Heil, R.; Coenen, C. (2016). Synthetic biology’s multiple dimensions of benefits and risks: Implications for governance and policies. En Boldt, J. (Ed.), Synthetic Biology (pp. 217–232). Wiesbaden: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-10988-2_14
Kuiken, T.; Dana, G.; Oye, K.; Rejeski, D. (2014). Shaping ecological risk research for synthetic biology. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 4 (3), 191–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-014-0171-2
Kuzma, J.; Tanji, T. (2010). Unpackaging synthetic biology: Identification of oversight policy problems and options. Regulation and Governance, 4 (1), 92–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01071.x
Lai, H. E.; Canavan, C.; Cameron, L.; Moore, S.; Danchenko, M.; Kuiken, T.; Sekeyová, Z.; Freemont, P. S. (2019). Synthetic Biology and the United Nations. Trends in Biotechnology, 37 (11), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.05.011
Lentzos, F. (2009). Synthetic Biology in the Social Context: The UK Debate to Date. BioSocieties, 4 (2–3), 303–315. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1745855209990172
Luhmann, N. (1992). Sociología del riesgo. México DF: Universidad Iberoamericana y Universidad de Guadalajara.
Mali, F.; Kramberger, A. (2014). Recent challenges in the social regulation of new emerging technologies: The case of synthetic biology franc Mali, Anton kramberger. Teorija in Praksa, 51 (5), 850–865.
Mandel, G. N.; Marchant, G. E. (2014). The living regulatory challenges of synthetic biology. Iowa Law Review, 100 (1), 155–200. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2410179
Marris, C. (2015). The Construction of Imaginaries of the Public as a Threat to Synthetic Biology. Science as Culture, 24 (1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2014.986320
Marris, C.; Calvert, J. (2020). Science and Technology Studies in Policy: The UK Synthetic Biology Roadmap. Science Technology and Human Values, 45 (1), 34–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243919828107
Marris, C.; Jefferson, C.; Lentzos, F. (2014). Negotiating the dynamics of uncomfortable knowledge: The case of dual use and synthetic biology. BioSocieties, 9 (4), 393–420. https://doi.org/10.1057/biosoc.2014.32
Maurer, S. M.; Von Engelhardt, S. (2013). Industry self-governance: A new way to manage dangerous technologies. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 69 (3), 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0096340213486126
Meyer, M. (2013). Assembling, governing, and debating an emerging science: The rise of synthetic biology in France. BioScience, 63 (5), 373–379. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2013.63.5.10
Meyer, M. (2017). “Participating means accepting”: debating and contesting synthetic biology. New Genetics and Society, 36 (2), 118–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2017.1320942
Miller, C. A. (2015). Modeling risk in complex bioeconomies. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2 (1), 124–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.1002060
Mukunda, G.; Oye, K. A.; Mohr, S. C. (2009). What rough beast? Synthetic biology, uncertainty, and the future of biosecurity. Politics and the Life Sciences, 28 (2), 2–26. https://doi.org/10.2990/28_2_2
Nesbeth, D. (2016). Introduction. En Nesbeth, D. Synthetic Biology Handbook (pp. ix–xiv). New Wales: CRC Press.
Nordberg, A.; Minssen, T.; Holm, S.; Horst, M.; Mortensen, K.; Møller, B. L. (2018). Cutting edges and weaving threads in the gene editing (ya{cyrillic})evolution: Reconciling scientific progress with legal, ethical, and social concerns. Journal of Law and the Biosciences, 5 (1), 35–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsx043
Oliver, A. (2018). Behavioral Economics and the Public Acceptance of Synthetic Biology. Hastings Center Report, 48 (February), S50–S55. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.819
Pauwels, E. (2012). A reflection on the notion of cohabitation within and beyond the walls of life sciences. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 3 (2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/jsesd.2012040101
Pei, L.; Gaisser, S.; Schmidt, M. (2012). Synthetic biology in the view of european public funding organisations. Public Understanding of Science, 21 (2), 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510393624
Rabitz, F. (2019). Institutional Drift in International Biotechnology Regulation. Global Policy, 10 (2), 227–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12652
Rager-Zisman, B. (2012). Ethical and regulatory challenges posed by synthetic biology. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 55 (4), 590–607. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2012.0043
Rerimassie, V. (2016). Exploring Political Views on Synthetic Biology in the Netherlands. NanoEthics, 10 (3), 289–308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-016-0257-2
Ribeiro, B.; Shapira, P. (2019). Anticipating governance challenges in synthetic biology: Insights from biosynthetic menthol. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 139 (May 2018), 311–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.11.020
Rose, K. M.; Howell, E. L.; Scheufele, D. A.; Brossard, D.; Xenos, M. A.; Shapira, P.; Youtie, J.; Kwon, S. (2018). The values of synthetic biology: Researcher views of their field and participation in public engagement. BioScience, 68 (10), 782–791. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy077
Shapira, P.; Youtie, J.; Li, Y. (2015). Social science contributions compared in synthetic biology and nanotechnology. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2 (1), 143–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.1002123
Sinden, A. (2018). Lessons from Environmental Regulation. Hastings Center Report, 48 (February), S56–S64. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.820
Stemerding, D.; Betten, W.; Rerimassie, V.; Robaey, Z.; Kupper, F. (2019). Future making and responsible governance of innovation in synthetic biology. Futures, 109, 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2018.11.005
Su, L. Y. F.; Scheufele, D. A.; Brossard, D.; Xenos, M. A. (2020). Political and personality predispositions and topical contexts matter: Effects of uncivil comments on science news engagement intentions. New Media and Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820904365
Tait, J.; Wield, D. (2019). Policy support for disruptive innovation in the life sciences. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 0 (0), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1631449
Torgersen, H.; Hampel, J. (2012). Calling controversy: Assessing synthetic biology’s conflict potential. Public Understanding of Science, 21 (2), 134–148. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662510389266
Torgersen, H.; Schmidt, M. (2013). Frames and comparators: How might a debate on synthetic biology evolve? Futures, 48, 44–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2013.02.002
Trump, B. D.; Cummings, C.; Kuzma, J.; Linkov, I. (2018). A decision analytic model to guide early-stage government regulatory action: Applications for synthetic biology. Regulation and Governance, 12 (1), 88–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12142
Trump, B. D. (2017). Synthetic biology regulation and governance: Lessons from TAPIC for the United States, European Union, and Singapore. Health Policy, 121 (11), 1139–1146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2017.07.010
Trump, B. D.; Cegan, J.; Wells, E.; Poinsatte-Jones, K.; Rycroft, T.; Warner, C.; Martin, D.; Perkins, E.; Wood, M. D.; Linkov, I. (2019). Co-evolution of physical and social sciences in synthetic biology. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 39 (3), 351–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2019.1566203
Trump, B., Cummings, C., Galaitsi, S.E., Kuzma, J. and Linkov, I. (2020). Synthetic Biology: Perspectives on Risk Analysis, Governance, Communication, and ELSI. In Trump, B., Cummings, C., Kuzma, J. and Linkov. I. (Eds), Synthetic Biology 2020. Frontiers in Risk Analysis and Governance (pp 1-18). Swirzerland: Springer.
van Doren, D.; Heyen, N. B. (2014). Synthetic biology: Too early for assessments? A review of synthetic biology assessments in Germany. Science and Public Policy, 41 (3), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu034
van Eck, N. J.; Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84 (2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Wallach, W.; Saner, M.; Marchant, G. (2018). Beyond Cost-Benefit Analysis in the Governance of Synthetic Biology. Hastings Center Report, 48 (February), S70–S77. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.822
Walsh, P. F. (2020). Improving ‘Five Eyes’ health security intelligence capabilities: leadership and governance challenges. Intelligence and National Security, 00 (00), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/02684527.2020.1750156
Wiek, A.; Guston, D.; Frow, E.; Calvert, J. (2012). Sustainability and anticipatory governance in synthetic biology. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 3 (2), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.4018/jsesd.2012040103
Downloads
Published
11/10/2021
How to Cite
Vallejos-Romero, A., Cisternas Irarrazabal, C., Rodríguez, I., Cordovés-Sánchez, M., & Padilla, P. (2021). Social sciences, risks and synthetic biology: A review of the literature. Sociología Y Tecnociencia, 11(Extra_2), 213–239. Retrieved from https://revistas.uva.es/index.php/sociotecno/article/view/5298
Issue
Section
Articles
License
Sociología y tecnociencia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
The journal allows the authors to retain publishing rights. Authors may reprint their articles in other media without having to request authorization, provided they indicate that the article was originally published in Sociología y Tecnociencia.
