Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36882674›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2023

Exploring the Impact of Tensions in Stakeholder Norms on Designing for Value Change: The Case of Biosafety in Industrial Biotechnology.

Enrique Asin-Garcia, Zoë Robaey, Linde F C Kampers, Vitor A P Martins Dos Santos

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. GenoMine: a CRISPR-Cas9-based kill switch for biocontainment ofFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Enrique Asin-GarciaLaboratory of Systems and Synthetic Biology, Wageningen University & Research, 6708, WE, Wageningen, The Netherlands. enrique.asingarcia@wur.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5568-345X
Zoë RobaeyDepartment of Social Sciences, Wageningen University & Research, 6708, WE, Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0501-2030
Linde F C KampersLaboratory of Systems and Synthetic Biology, Wageningen University & Research, 6708, WE, Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3479-3593
Vitor A P Martins Dos SantosLaboratory of Systems and Synthetic Biology, Wageningen University & Research, 6708, WE, Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2352-9017

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Synthetic biologists design and engineer organisms for a better and more sustainable future. While the manifold prospects are encouraging, concerns about the uncertain risks of genome editing affect public opinion as well as local regulations. As a consequence, biosafety and associated concepts, such as the Safe-by-design framework and genetic safeguard technologies, have gained notoriety and occupy a central position in the conversation about genetically modified organisms. Yet, as regulatory interest and academic research in genetic safeguard technologies advance, the implementation in industrial biotechnology, a sector that is already employing engineered microorganisms, lags behind. The main goal of this work is to explore the utilization of genetic safeguard technologies for designing biosafety in industrial biotechnology. Based on our results, we posit that biosafety is a case of a changing value, by means of further specification of how to realize biosafety. Our investigation is inspired by the Value Sensitive Design framework, to investigate scientific and technological choices in their appropriate social context. Our findings discuss stakeholder norms for biosafety, reasonings about genetic safeguards, and how these impact the practice of designing for biosafety. We show that tensions between stakeholders occur at the level of norms, and that prior stakeholder alignment is crucial for value specification to happen in practice. Finally, we elaborate in different reasonings about genetic safeguards for biosafety and conclude that, in absence of a common multi-stakeholder effort, the differences in informal biosafety norms and the disparity in biosafety thinking could end up leading to design requirements for compliance instead of for safety.

Indexed as

BiotechnologyContainment of BiohazardsCommunicationEngineeringFenbendazoleHumansFenbendazoleBiosafetyGenetic safeguardsIndustrial biotechnologyMultistakeholder approachSafe-by-design frameworkValue sensitive design

Identifiers

PMID36882674
PMCPMC9992083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.