resumo O artigo recupera momentos-chave do debate sobre as relações entre ciência e política, expertise e democracia, concentrando-se em diversos autores e disciplinas das ciências humanas. O objetivo é esclarecer as origens e a substância dos atuais debates sobre a "democratização da expertise", assim como discutir alternativas para se lidar com o problema da aparente incompatibilidade entre as demandas por maior participação pública nas sociedades democráticas contemporâneas e a crescente importância da técnica e do conhecimento especializado para seu funcionamento. Enfatiza-se, especialmente, a forma como esse problema tem sido pensado no que diz respeito a temas da ciência e da tecnologia.
This paper analyzes the regulation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in Brazil, focusing on the debates that preceded the enactment in 2005 of the current Biosafety Law and the factors (both domestic and international) that influenced the policy‐making process. More specifically, it identifies the social and governmental actors that influenced the congressional debates, showing how their interests and agenda were translated into two different institutional frameworks. Here, the policy outcome was what we call a “hybrid” and “conciliatory” regulatory model, which formally acknowledges the importance of both technical/scientific and social/political considerations in the evaluation of GMO biosafety and engages most of the stakeholders in the regulatory process. The new policy regime also establishes a middle ground between the conflicting demands of promoting agricultural development and protecting the country's biodiversity.
This case study deals with the regulation of human embryonic stem-cell (hESC) research in Brazil. It aims to analyze the process that led to the authorization, in 2005, of the use of stem cells obtained from so-called supernumerary embryos for purposes of research and therapy. We argue that the pro-research lobby in Brazil had considerable success because it framed the issue by referring to Brazil's peculiar policy background in the fields of assisted reproduction and embryo research. Moreover, this group of actors strategically avoided associating hESC research with abortion, highlighting the humanitarian aspects of this kind of research, rather than the motto of freedom of scientific research. Finally, it was able to rely on the judgment of a fairly progressive Supreme Court, which was also sensitive to public opinion at a time of 'court activism' or the 'judicialization of politics' in Brazil.
RésuméL'article est une étude de cas qui concerne la régulation de la recherche sur les cellules souches embryonnaires humaines (hESC) au Brésil. Les auteurs tentent d'analyser le processus qui a conduit à autoriser en 2005 l'utilisation des cellules-souches obtenues à
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.