How Competing Sociotechnical Imaginaries Shape Trust and Governance of Gene Editing in Agriculture and Food

相互竞争的社会技术想象如何塑造农业和食品领域基因编辑的信任和治理

• 批准号: 2020893
• 负责人: Carmen Bain
• 金额: $ 8.96万
• 依托单位: Iowa State University
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2020
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2020-09-01 至 2024-08-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2020893&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: How; Competing; Sociotechnical; Imaginaries; Shape

New gene editing techniques promise significant benefits within the agricultural sector. However, realizing the full potential of these technologies will depend on how it is governed, and whether the public accepts it. Gene editing for agriculture and food poses public acceptance challenges due to its association with genetically modified organisms, scientific complexity, and social and ethical concerns. New governance forms for gene editing for agriculture and food will be necessary since existing regulatory instruments cannot deal with its complexity and novel risks, but it is unclear what those governance forms should be and if they would enhance public trust in the technology. To address these gaps, this project analyzes how key actors use competing collective visions of the future and the role of science within it to shape public trust and governance approaches for gene editing for agriculture and food. Findings will be broadly disseminated to key publics through a policy panel, digital storytelling projects, high school lesson plans, and in online publications. These innovative digital and online educational resources will advance public literacy and engagement with the scientific, social, and ethical issues surrounding gene editing for agriculture and food. Knowledge generated by this project will benefit a wide range of stakeholders, influencers, and publics who are engaged in governance efforts for gene editing for agriculture and food.This is a comparative investigation of how the ways in which actors from key social groups imagine their technoscientific futures matter for the use and governance of gene editing technologies for agriculture and food. Multiple social science methods, including media content analysis, in-depth stakeholder interviews, deliberative workshops, and interpretive comparative methods, are used to investigate this emerging scientific controversy and develop ways to create more inclusive governance processes for decision making related to controversial and emergent technologies. Project goals include: (1) Identifying key visions for technoscientific futures and their proponents; 2) Assessing how key actors develop and use particular visions of the future to stabilize or disrupt public trust in gene editing technologies and their governance; 3) Comparing visions of the futures across cases; and 4) Engaging key actors in deliberative workshops to provide an assessment of findings and deliberate on inclusive governance approaches. Overall, the project will contribute to the theory and practice of Responsible Research and Innovation, and to scholarship in Science and Technology Studies on governance of emerging technologies.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.

新的基因编辑技术有望在农业部门带来重大利益。然而，实现这些技术的全部潜力将取决于如何管理，以及公众是否接受它。农业和食品基因编辑由于其与转基因生物的关联，科学复杂性以及社会和伦理问题而面临公众接受的挑战。农业和食品基因编辑的新治理形式将是必要的，因为现有的监管工具无法应对其复杂性和新风险，但目前尚不清楚这些治理形式应该是什么，以及它们是否会增强公众对该技术的信任。为了解决这些差距，该项目分析了关键参与者如何利用对未来的竞争性集体愿景以及科学在其中的作用来塑造农业和食品基因编辑的公众信任和治理方法。调查结果将通过政策小组、数字讲故事项目、高中课程计划和在线出版物广泛传播给主要公众。这些创新的数字和在线教育资源将促进公众扫盲，并参与围绕农业和食品基因编辑的科学，社会和伦理问题。本项目所产生的知识将使参与农业和食品基因编辑治理工作的广泛利益相关者、影响者和公众受益。这是一项比较研究，旨在研究来自主要社会群体的行为者如何想象他们的科技未来对农业和食品基因编辑技术的使用和治理产生影响。多种社会科学方法，包括媒体内容分析，深入的利益相关者访谈，审议研讨会和解释性比较方法，被用来调查这一新兴的科学争议，并制定方法来创建更具包容性的治理过程，为有争议的和新兴的技术相关的决策。项目目标包括：（1）确定技术科学未来的关键愿景及其支持者;（2）评估关键行为者如何制定和使用特定的未来愿景来稳定或破坏公众对基因编辑技术及其治理的信任;（3）比较不同案例的未来愿景;以及（4）让关键行为者参与审议研讨会，以提供对调查结果的评估并审议包容性治理方法。总的来说，该项目将有助于负责任的研究和创新的理论和实践，并在科学和技术研究的新兴技术的治理奖学金。这个奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并已被认为是值得通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估的支持。