Considerations for the governance of gene drive organisms

Abstract

Governance is a broader and more flexible concept than statute-driven regulations as it incorporates components outside the latter's remit. Considerations of governance are critical in the development of emerging biotechnologies such as gene drive organisms. These have been proposed or are being developed to address public and environmental health issues not addressed easily by conventional means. Here, we consider how the concept of governance differs from statute-driven regulation with reference to the role each may play in the development of gene drive organisms. First, we discuss existing statute-based regulatory systems. Second, we consider whether novel risks or different concerns derive from gene drive organisms, concentrating on characteristics that contribute to public health or environmental risk and uncertainties that may affect risk perceptions. Third, we consider public engagement, outlining how existing statute-driven regulatory systems and other governance mechanisms may provide opportunities for constructive interactions. Finally, we provide some observations that may help address science- and values-based concerns in a governance space larger than that of statute-driven regulatory systems.

A typology of community and stakeholder engagement based on documented examples in the field of novel vector control

“…CSE is often called for as a form of decision-making [4–6, 22, 26, 27], but the suggested typology clarifies why this is problematic. Engagement to inquire and engagement to influence each may inform decision-making by providing information to empowered decision-makers, but the CSE itself is not a decision-making process.…”

“…CSE is expected to educate stakeholders or members of the public [2, 5, 22], identify the interests of relevant groups [2, 3, 8, 23], and contribute to site research in preparation for field trials [1, 2, 24]. But many commentators also see CSE as a way to build relationships, trust, and legitimacy for a technology [1, 5, 7, 24, 25], or as a means to more democratic governance by informing or constituting part of the decision-making processes that shape the technology [4–6, 22, 26, 27]. Some also argue that CSE is critical to obtaining community authorization for field trials [4, 28].…”

George Lucas : Prophète du transhumanisme ?

“…Bien entendu de telles expériences ne sont pas autorisées à ce jour dans l'espèce humaine. En revanche, elles sont conçues et effectuées pour éliminer des espèces nuisibles pour l'homme (les moustiques, par exemple) et pour améliorer des végétaux [37]. La technique est maîtrisée.…”

Two unresolved issues in community engagement for field trials of genetically modified mosquitoes

“…There is an emerging consensus among scientists, ethicists, and public health officials that substantive and effective public and community engagement is required prior to releasing genetically modified (GM) mosquitoes into the environment [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. Public and community engagement helps to promote deliberative democracy and support from local populations and the wider public [1][2][3][4][5][6][7].…”

“…Public and community engagement helps to promote deliberative democracy and support from local populations and the wider public [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. Public and community engagement is also often required by local or national laws [10][11][12][13][14]. While there is little disagreement about the need for public and community engagement prior to releasing GM mosquitoes into the environment, two important issues 1 have not been resolved, namely: defining the community and dealing with potential conflicts between the community and the public.…”