Public Deliberation about Gene Editing in the Wild
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20334201 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michael K Gusmano (0000-0002-2337-3067), Gregory E Kaebnick, Karen J Maschke (0009-0009-1069-0053), Carolyn P Neuhaus (0000-0002-8563-5632), Ben Curran Wills (0000-0002-3131-6951) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 51 |
| Issue | S2 |
| Pages | S2-S10 |
| Publication date | 2021-11-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Hastings Center Report (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0093-0334 • E-ISSN: 1552-146X |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1002/hast.1314 |
| PMID | 34905246 |
| OpenAlex | W4200383423 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 33 |
Genetic editing technologies have long been used to modify domesticated nonhuman animals and plants. Recently, attention and funding have also been directed toward projects for modifying nonhuman organisms in the shared environment—that is, in the “wild.” Interest in gene editing nonhuman organisms for wild release is motivated by a variety of goals, and such releases hold the possibility of significant, potentially transformative benefit. The technologies also pose risks and are often surrounded by a high uncertainty. Given the stakes, scientists and advisory bodies have called for public engagement in the science, ethics, and governance of gene editing research in nonhuman organisms. Most calls for public engagement lack details about how to design a broad public deliberation, including questions about participation, how to structure the conversations, how to report on the content, and how to link the deliberations to policy. We summarize the key design elements that can improve broad public deliberations about gene editing in the wild
Biology · Business · Corporate governance · Deliberation · Domestication · Engineering ethics · Environmental ethics · Gene · Gene drive · Genome · Genome editing · Political science · Politics · Public engagement · Public participation · Public relations · Sociology · Transformative learning · Variety (cybernetics) · Animal and Plant Science Education · Computer Science · CRISPR and Genetic Engineering · Engineering · Genetically Modified Organisms Research · Genetics · Law
Taking the Goals of Deliberation Seriously
Giving Voice to the Voiceless in Environmental Gene Editing
Restructuring Deliberation Using a Cultural Theory Lens
Behavioral Economics and the Public Acceptance of Synthetic Biology
Empowering Indigenous Knowledge in Deliberations on Gene Editing in the Wild
Why and When Should We Use Public Deliberation
CBA and Precaution
Decisions and Authority
Does Gene Editing in the Wild Require Broad Public Deliberation
The Author Replies
Deficits of Public Deliberation in U.S. Oversight for Gene Edited Organisms
FDA Decisions and Public Deliberation
Participatory Democracy Revisited
Citizen Participation and Environmental Risk
A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms
The Meaning and Measure of Policy Metaphors
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,8 |
| Citation span | 2021 - 2025 (5) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |