The socio-legal implications of the new biotechnologies

Annual Review of Law and Social Science

Volumn 3, Issue , 2007, Pages 321-344

  Pottage, Alain ^a  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Biopower; Instrumentality; Legal form; Subjectivity

Indexed keywords

EID: 38149093478     PISSN: 15503585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.3.081806.112856     Document Type: Review

References (94)

1. Abbott FM. 2005. Managing the hydra: the Herculean task of ensuring access to essential medicines. See Maskus & Reichman 2005, pp. 393-424
2. Agamben G. 1998. Homo Sacer. Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Stanford, CA. Stanford Univ. Press
3. Austin JL. 1962. Sense and Sensibilia. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
4. Baldi P. 2001. The Shattered Self. The End of Natural Evolution. Cambridge MA: MIT Press
5. Berlan J-P, Lewontin RC. 1998. Cashing in on life: Operation Terminator. Le Monde Diplomatique. December. http://mondediplo.com/1998/12/ 02gen
6. Beyleveld D, Brownsword R. 1998. Human dignity, human rights, and human genetics. In Law and Human Genetics: Regulating a Revolution, ed. R Brownsword, WR Cornish, M Llewelyn, pp. 69-88. Oxford: Hart
7. Beyleveld D, Brownsword R. 2004. Human Dignity in Bioethics and Biolaw. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
8. Biagioli M. 2006. Patent republic: representing inventions, constructing rights and authors. Soc. Res. 73:1129-72
9. Brush S. 1999. Bioprospecting the public domain. Cult. Anthropol. 14:535-55
10. Burk D. 2002. Lex genetica: the law and ethics of programming biological code. Ethics Inf. Technol. 4:109-21
11. Canguilhem G. 1991. The Normal and the Pathological. New York: Zone Books
12. Cayla O, Thomas Y. 2002. Du Droit de ne pas Naître. Paris: Gallimard
13. Convention on Biological Diversity. 1996. Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising From the Use of Genetic Resources. Conf. Parties Conv. Biol. Divers., 3rd Meet., Nov. 4-15, Buenas Aires, Argent., Doc. UNEP/CBD/COP/3/Inf.53
14. Coombe R. 2003. Works in progress: traditional knowledge, biological diversity, and intellectual property in a neoliberal era. In Globalization Under Construction: Governmentality, Law and Identity, ed. RW Perry, B Maurer, pp. 273-313. Minneapolis: Univ. Minn. Press
15. Delmas-Marty M. 2003. Etudes Juridiques Comparatives et Internationales du Droit. Paris: Fayard Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980)
16. Dolgin JL. 2000. Choice, tradition, and the new genetics: the fragmentation of the ideology of the family. Conn. Law Rev. 32:523-66
17. Drahos P, Braithwaite J. 2002. Information Feudalism. Who Owns the Knowledge Economy? London: Earthscan
18. Dutfield G. 2003. Intellectual Property Rights and the Life Sciences. A Twentieth Century History. Aldershot: Ashgate
19. Edelman B. 1999. La Personne en Danger. Paris: Presses Univ. France
20. European Union. 1998. Directive 98/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 1998 on the Legal Protection of Biotechnological Inventions. Off. J. Eur. Union L 213, 30/07/1998 P. 0013-0021
21. European Union. 2001. Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001on the Deliberate Release into the Environment of Genetically Modified Organisms. Off. J. Eur. Union L 106/1:17/4/2001
22. Ewald F. 1990. Norms, discipline, and the law. Representations 30:138-61
23. Ewald F. 2002. The return of Descartes's malicious demon: an outline of a philosophy of precaution. In Embracing Risk: The Changing Culture of Insurance and Responsibility, ed. T Baker, J Simon, pp. 273-301. Chicago: Univ, Chicago Press
24. Ewald F. 2004a. 2004, une France précautionneuse? Les Echos. Jan. 8, pp. 85-86
25. Ewald F. 2004b. Non à l'etat d'urgence permanent. L'Express. March 29. http://www. lexpress.fr/info/sciences /dossier/precaution/dossier.asp?ida=427008
26. Fabre-Magnan M, Moullier P, eds. 2004. La Génétique, Science Humaine. Paris: Belin
27. Fischer-Lescano A, Teubner G. 2004. Regime collisions: the vain search for unity in the fragmentation of global law. Mich. J. Int. Law 25:999-1046
28. Foucault M. 1978. The History of Sexuality: The Will to Knowledge. London: Penguin
29. Foucault M. 1997. Il Faut Défendre la Société. Paris: Gallimard/Seuil
30. Franklin S. 2007. Dolly Mixtures. The Remaking of Genealogy. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press
31. Godard O, ed. 1997. Le Principe de Précaution dans la Conduite des Affaires Humaines. Paris: Maison des Sciences de l'Homme
32. Gottweis H. 1998. Governing Molecules. The Discursive Politics of Genetic Engineering in Europe and the United States. Cambridge, MA. MIT Press
33. Greene S. 2004. Indigenous people incorporated? Culture as politics, culture as property in pharmaceutical bioprospecting. Curr. Anthropol. 45:211-37
34. Habermas J. 2003. The Future of Human Nature. Cambridge, UK: Polity
35. Hardt M, Negri A. 2000. Empire. Cambridge MA: Harvard Univ. Press
36. Harvard College v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents), [2002] 4 S.C.R. 45, 2002 SCC 76
37. Hayden C. 2003a. From market to market: bioprospecting's idioms of inclusion. Am. Ethnol. 30:359-71
38. Hayden C. 2003b. When Nature Goes Public. The Making and Unmaking of Bioprospecting in Mexico. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
39. Helfer L. 2004. Regime shifting: the TRIPS agreement and new dynamics of international intellectual property lawmaking. Yale J. Int. Law 29:1-89
40. Hilgartner S. 1998. Data access in genome research.
41. See Thackeray 1998, pp. 202-18
42. Janis MD, Smith S. 2006. Obsolescence in intellectual properry regimes. Res. Pap. No. 05-48, Univ. Iowa Legal Studies
43. Jasanoff S. 1995. Science at the Bar. Science and Technology in American Law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
44. Jasanoff S. 1998. The eye of everyman: witnessing DNA in the Simpson trial. Soc. Stud. Sci. 28:713-40
45. Jaszi P, Woodmansee M. 2003. Beyond authorship. Reconfiguring rights in traditional culture and bioknowledge. In Scientific Authorship. Credit and Intellectual Property in Science, ed. M Biagioli, P Galison, pp. 195-223. New York: Routledge
46. Jordan K, Lynch M. 1998. The dissemination, standardization and routinization of a molecular biology technique. Soc. Stud. Sci. 28:773-800
47. Kahn J. 2006. Patenting race. Nat. Biotechnol. 24:1349-51
48. Keenan RJ, Stemmer WPC. 2002. Nontransgenic crops from transgenic plants. Nat. Biotechnol. 20:215-16
49. Kevles D. 1998. Diamond v Chakrabarty and beyond: the political economy of the patenting of life.
50. See Thackeray 1998, pp. 65-79
51. Lander ES, Budowle B. 1994. DNA fingerprint dispute laid to rest. Nature 371:735-38
52. Lassen J, Allansdottir A, Liakopoulos M, Mortensen AT, Olofsson A. 2002. Testing times - the reception of Roundup Ready soya in Europe. In Biotechnology: The Making of a Global Controversy, ed. MW Bauer, G Gaskell, pp. 279-312. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
53. Lezaun J. 2006. Creating a new object of government: making genetically modified organisms traceable. Soc. Stud. Sci. 36:499-531
54. Luhmann N. 1989. Ecological Communication. Cambridge, UK: Polity
55. Luhmann N. 1995. Social Systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
56. Lynch M. 2003. God's signature: DNA profiling, the new gold standard in forensic science. Endeavour 27:93-97
57. Macnaghten P, Kearnes MB, Wynne B. 2005. Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: what role for the social sciences? Sci. Commun. 27:268-91
58. Maskus KE, Reichman JH, eds. 2005. International Public Goods and Transfer of Technology Under a Globalized Intellectual Property Regime. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
59. Mazzoleni R, Nelson RR. 1998. The benefits and costs of strong patent protection: a contribution to the current debate. Res. Policy 27:273-84
60. Médecins sans Frontières (MSF). 2004. Drug Patents Under the Spotlight. Geneva: Médecins sans Frontières. 37 pp. http://www.accessmed-msf.org/documents /Patent%20report%20.pdf
61. Memmi D. 2003. Faire Vivre et Laisser Mourir: Le Gouvernement Contemporain de la Naissance et de la Mort. Paris: La Découverte
62. Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 902, 2004 SCC 34
63. Müller-Wille S, Rheinberger H-J. 2004. Gene. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. EN Zalta. Stanford, CA. Metaphys. Res. Lab, CSLI, Stanford Univ. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/gene /
64. Noiville C. 2003. Du Bon Gouvernement des Risques. Paris: Presses Univ. France
65. Novas C, Rose N. 2000. Genetic risk and the birth of the somatic individual. Econ. Soc. 29:485-513
66. Pottage A. 2004. Our original inheritance. In Law, Anthropology, and the Constitution of the Social, ed. A Pottage, M Mundy, pp. 249-85. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
67. Pottage A. 2006a. Materialities in life and law: informatic technologies and industrial property. Paragrana 15:81-99
68. Pottage A. 2006b. Too much ownership: bioprospecting in the age of synthetic biology. Biosocieties 1:137-58
69. Rabinow P. 1996. Making PCR. A Story of Biotechnology. Chicago: Chicago Univ. Press
70. Rabinow P. 2004. Assembling ethics in an ecology of ignorance. Presented at First Conf. Synth. Biol., MIT, Cambridge, MA, June 10-12. http://openwetware.org/images/7/7a/SB1.0_Rabinow.pdf
71. Rabinow P, Rose N. 2006. Biopower today. Biosocieties 1:195-218
72. Rapp R. 2000. Testing Women, Testing the Fetus: The Social Impact of Amniocentesis in America. New York: Routledge
73. Rheinberger H-J. 1995. Beyond nature and culture: a note on medicine in the age of molecular biology. Sci. Context 8:249-63
74. Riles A. 2005. A new agenda for the cultural study of law: taking on the technicalities. Buffalo Law Rev. 53:973-1033
75. Rose N. 1999. The Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
76. Rose N. 2006. The Politics of Life Itself: Biomedicine, Power, and Subjectivity in the Twenty-First Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
77. Rose N, Novas C. 2003. Biological citizenship. In Global Assemblages: Technology, Politics and Ethics as Anthropological Problems, ed. S Collier, A Ong, pp. 439-63. Oxford: Blackwell
78. Rose N, O'Malley P, Valverde M. 2006. Governmentality. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 2:83-104
79. Saks MJ, Koehler JJ. 2005. The coming paradigm shift in forensic identification science. Science 308:892-95
80. Scheffer T. 2004. Materialities of legal proceedings. Int. J. Semiot. Law 17:356-89
81. Sell S. 2003. Private Power, Public Law. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
82. Strathern M. 1992. After Nature: English Kinship in the Late Twentieth Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
83. Strathern M. 1996. Enabling identity? Biology, choice and the new reproductive technologies. In Questions of Cultural Identity, ed. S Hall, P du Gay, pp. 37-52. London: Routledge
84. Strathern M. 1999. Property, Substance & Effect. Anthropological Essays on Persons and Things. London: Athlone
85. Strathern M. 2001. The patent and the malanggan. Theory Cult. Soc. 18:1-26
86. Strathern M. 2006. Kinship, Law and the Unexpected: Relatives Are Always a Surprise. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
87. Sunder Rajan K. 2006. Biocapital: The Constitution of Postgenomic Life. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press
88. Sunstein C. 2005. The Laws of Fear: Beyond the Precautionary Principle. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
89. Supiot A. 2007. Homo Juridicus: On the Anthropological Function of the Law. London: Verso
90. Swanson T, Goeschl T. 2005. Diffusion and distribution: the impacts on poor countries of technological enforcement within the biotechnology sector.
91. See Maskus & Reichman 2005, pp. 669-94
92. Thackeray A, ed. 1998. Private Science. Biotechnology and the Rise of the Molecular Sciences. Philadelphia: Penn. Univ. Press
93. Waldby C. 2002. Stem cells, tissue cultures and the production of biovalue. Health 6:305-23
94. Waldby C, Mitchell R. 2006. Tissue Economies: Blood, Organs and Cell Lines in Late Capitalism. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press