Stretching and Challenging the Boundaries of Law: Varieties of Knowledge in Biotechnologies Regulation

Abstract

The paper addresses the question of adaptation of existing regulatory frameworks in the face of innovation in biotechnologies, and specifically the roles played in this by various expert knowledge practices. We identify two overlapping ideal types of adaptation, first the stretching and maintenance of a pre-existing legal framework, and second a breaking of existing classifications and establishment of a novel regime. We approach this issue by focusing on varieties of regulatory knowledge which, contributing to and parting of political legitimacy, in principle enable the making of legally binding decisions about risks and benefits of technologies. We base the discussion around two case studies, one of animal biotechnology ethical regulation, the other of 'advanced therapy' medicinal product regulation, both in the context of European Union frameworks. Specifically we explore the knowledge configurations constituting expert committees and other institutional formations of expert regulatory knowledge in their political context. We show that where sectoral and moral boundaries are challenged, different modes of regulatory knowledge beyond scientific forms-legal, procedural, moral, economic and industrial-can shape regulatory innovations either by maintenance of regimes through commensuration and stretching, or through differentiation and separation creating new frameworks. We conclude that establishing an essential techno-scientific difference between pre-existing and novel technologies does not in itself require new regulatory structures, and that the regulatory strategy that is followed will be determined by a combination of different forms of knowledge.

Human Rights and Freedoms in the Science and Technology Field: Systemic Relations And Implementation Aspects

“…The freedom of scientific and technical creative activities contributes to the progress of society. However, the effectiveness of this freedom depends on the whole complex of human rights and freedoms exercised in the science and technology field, based on generally accepted criteria and individual attitudes [6]. For example, the freedom of scientific and technical creative activities allows the researcher to go beyond the generally accepted framework, in particular, to draw a scientific conclusion that does not correlate with general ideas about reality.…”

Accelerating Innovation: Complexity, Regulation, and Temporality

“…It is this last point that I want to focus on here. Novel technologies pose a challenge to extant regulatory (and legal) knowledge and practice: two responses are seen, either an attempt to accommodate novelty via stretching existing regulations or developing new approaches that break with such conventions (Faulkner and Poort, 2017 ). Both are seen especially, though not exclusively, in the field of biomedicine (Faulkner, 2017 ).…”

Global Regulatory Differences for Gene‐ and Cell‐Based Therapies: Consequences and Implications for Patient Access and Therapeutic Innovation

“…When innovative biotechnology such as GCTs emerge, legal boundaries of existing frameworks can either be stretched to incorporate new technology or they can be challenged to form a new specific regime . The enactment of the ATMP regulation and the PMD Act installed parallel access pathways and expedited regulatory pathways in the EU and Japan, respectively.…”