Community involvement in biotechnology policy?: The Australian experience

Science Communication

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 429-445

  Schibeci, Renato ^a   Harwood, Jeff ^a   Dietrich, Heather ^a  

^a MURDOCH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Biotechnology; Citizenship; Government; Participation; Policy

Indexed keywords

EID: 32944482425     PISSN: 10755470     EISSN: 15528545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1075547005285066     Document Type: Review

References (38)

1. Australian Museum. 1999. Lay panel report of the first Australian consensus conference on gene technology in the food chain. http://www.austmus. gov.au/pdf/layreport.pdf.
2. Biotechnology Australia. 1999. Public attitudes towards biotechnology. http://www.biotechnology.gov.au/library/content_library/BA_pYCHW.pdf.
3. Biotechnology Australia. 2001. Biotechnology public awareness survey: Final report. http://www.biotechnology.gov.au/library/content_library/ BA_Final_Report_Summary_31_July_2001.pdf.
4. Biotechnology Australia. 2003. Biotechnology public awareness survey: Final report. http://www.biotechnology.gov.au/library/content_library/ BA_MB2003_Final_Report.pdf.
5. Carson, L., S. White, C. Hendriks, and J. Palmer. 2002. Community consultation in environmental policy making. The Drawing Board: An Australian Review of Public Affairs 3 (1). 1-13.
6. Commonwealth of Australia. 2000. Gene Technology Act 2000. http://scaletext.law.gov.au/html/pasteact/3/3428/top.htm.
7. Commonwealth of Australia. 2001. Gene technology agreement. http://www.comlaw.gov.au/comlaw/Legislation/ActCompilation1.nsf/0/ BAB75AB3A74EC18ACA256F710054D3A3/file/GeneTechnology2000.pdf.
8. Danish Board of Technology. 2001. Final document of the consensus conference on genetically-modified foods. http://www.tekno.dk/subpage.php3? article=512&language=uk&category=11&toppic=kategori11.
9. Dietrich, H., and R. Schibeci. 2003. Beyond public perceptions of gene technology: Community participation in public policy in Australia. Public Understanding of Science 12: 381-401.
10. Hendriks, C. 2002. Institutions of deliberative democratic processes and interest groups: Roles, tensions and incentives. Australian Journal of Public Administration 61 (1). 64-75.
11. Jasanoff, S. 2004. Science and citizenship: A new synergy. Science and Public Policy 31: 90-94.
12. Korean National Commission for UNESCO. 1998. Korean consensus on the safety and ethics of genetically modified foods. Seoul: Korean National Commission for UNESCO. http://www.unesco.or.kr/cc/98_CC_Report.doc.
13. Korean National Commission for UNESCO. 1999. Korean consensus on cloning. Seoul: Korean National Commission for UNESCO. http://www.unesco.or.kr/cc/eng. html.
14. Kymlicka, W., and W. Norman. 1994. Return of the citizen: A survey of recent works on citizenship theory. Ethics 104: 352-381.
15. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2001. New gene technology regulator takes up position. OGTR media release GTR05/01. http://www.ogtr.gov. au/pdf/media/regcom.pdf.
16. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2002a. Gene technology regulator issues the first license under new laws. OGTR media release GTR05/02. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/media/dir005.pdf.
17. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2002b. GTCCC meeting communiqué. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/committee/12commgtccc.pdf
18. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2002c. GTCCC meeting communiqué. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/3rdcommgtccc.pdf.
19. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2002d. GTCCC operating procedures. Canberra, Australia: Office of the Gene Technology Regulator.
20. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2002e. Quarterly report of the gene technology regulator for the period 1 April to 30 June 2002. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/public/jun2002qrpt.pdf.
21. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2002f. Quarterly report of the gene technology regulator for the period 1 January to 31 March 2002. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/public/mar2002qrpt.pdf.
22. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2002g. Quarterly report of the gene technology regulator for the period 1 July to 30 September 2002. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/public/sept2002qrpt.pdf.
23. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2003a. Gene technology regulator releases Bayer GM canola risk management plan for public comment. OGTR media release GTR01/03. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/media/bayercanola.pdf.
24. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2003b. Quarterly report of the gene technology regulator for the period 1 April to 30 June 2003. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/public/jun2003qrpt.pdf.
25. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2003c. Quarterly report of the gene technology regulator for the period 1 January to 31 March 2003. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/public/mar2003qrpt.pdf.
26. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2003d. Quarterly report of the gene technology regulator for the period 1 July to 30 September 2003. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/public/sept2003qrpt.pdf.
27. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2003e. Quarterly report of the gene technology regulator for the period 1 October to 31 December 2002. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/public/dec2002qrpt.pdf. (accessed July 25, 2004)
28. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2003f. Rigorous assessment confirms GM Invigor® canola safe as non-GM canola. OGTR media release GTR02/03. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/media/canola.pdf.
29. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2004a. GTCCC meeting communiqué. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/7thcommgtccc.pdf.
30. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. 2004b. Quarterly report of the gene technology regulator for the period 1 October to 31 December 2003. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/pdf/public/dec2003qrpt.pdf.
31. O'Riordan, T., J. Burgess, and B. Szerszynski, eds. 1999. Deliberative and inclusionary processes: A report from two seminars. CSERGE working paper PA 99-06. http://www.uea.ac.uk/env/cserge/pub/wp/pa/pa_1999_06.pdf.
32. Pimbert, M., and T. Wakeford. 2001. Overview: Deliberative democracy and citizen empowerment. PLA Notes 40. http://www.iied.org/sarl/planotes/ pla_backissues/40.html.
33. Schibeci, R., and H. Dietrich. 2000. Consumer behaviour in relation to biotechnology products: A report for Biotechnology Australia. Perth, Australia: Murdoch University.
34. Shafir, G., ed. 1998. The citizenship debates: A reader. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
35. Shaw, J. 1995. Public perceptions of genetic engineering: Australia. Canberra: Biotechnology Section, Australian Department of Industry, Science and Technology.
36. Stein, J. A. 2003. Making public consultation more "user- friendly" by turning "technology foresight" into just "foresight": But who are the users? In Optimising public understanding of science and technology: Final report, edited by U. Felt, 100-108. http://www.univie.ac.at/virusss/OPUSReport/OPUS%2520Report%2520Final.pdf.
37. Winner, L. 1986. The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in an age of high technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38. Winner, L. 1992. Citizen virtues in a technological order. Inquiry 35: 341-361.