Upstream engagement and the governance of science
Upstream engagement and the governance of science
复制标题
上游参与和科学治理
作者：
J. Tait
合成生物学代表了实用主义和理想主义的融合，其动机是更好地理解生物过程，以及提供科学似乎承诺的社会和商业利益的愿望(Tait，2009)。在大学和商业公司工作的大多数科学家都受到这些动机的综合影响。然而，在背景中，许多生命科学的阴影笼罩着，指向一个复杂且可能困难的未来--公众对科学技术的接受问题。与这种紧张关系相呼应的是，许多欧洲政府，包括欧洲联盟(EU)本身，在促进创新的愿望和满足广泛的公共利益团体对环境和健康问题的预防性担忧的政治需要之间左右为难。
>；…阴影笼罩着许多生命科学，指向一个复杂且可能困难的未来？？公众对科学和技术的接受问题。
在转基因作物的背景下，生命科学的阴影是最实质性的--科学家和政策制定者之间关于未来发展的任何讨论，最终都是为了避免重复欧洲关于转基因作物及其结果的辩论。尽管这场争论在1998年至2002年期间最为激烈，但在任何关于转基因作物的积极甚至中性的新闻报道后，它很快就会重新浮出水面。
公共利益团体对转基因作物的这种反对的影响不应被低估。不站在反转基因角度的出版物和报道经常受到攻击。最近对一系列转基因作物问题的解释性审查(《关于科学的感觉》，2009年)导致了与做出贡献的科学家的独立性有关的挑战(科尔宾，2009年)。一份报告的发布表明转基因作物技术是…
Synthetic biology represents a fusion of the pragmatic and the idealistic, which is motivated by the drive for a better understanding of biological processes, and the desire to deliver the social and commercial benefits that the science seems to promise (Tait, 2009). Most scientists working in universities and commercial companies are guided by a mixture of these motivations. However, in the background, a shadow looms over many of the life sciences, pointing to a complex and possibly difficult future—the question of public acceptance of the science and technology. Echoing this tension, many European governments, including the European Union (EU) itself, are caught between a desire to promote innovation, and the political need to accommodate a wide range of public‐interest groups with precautionary concerns about environmental and health issues.
> …a shadow looms over many of the life sciences, pointing to a complex and possibly difficult future—the question of public acceptance of the science and technology
The shadow over the life sciences is most substantive in the context of genetically modified (GM) crops—any discussion among scientists and policy‐makers about future developments comes around, eventually, to the need to avoid a repetition of the European debate on GM crops and its outcome. Although this controversy was most virulent during the period from 1998 to 2002, it rapidly resurfaces in response to any positive or even neutral news item about GM crops.
The effect of this opposition to GM crops by public‐interest groups should not be underestimated. Publications and reports that do not take an anti‐GM perspective regularly come under attack. A recent explanatory review of a range of GM crop issues (Sense about Science, 2009) led to challenges related to the independence of the scientists who had contributed to it (Corbyn, 2009). The publication of a report showing that GM crop technology is …