Sustainability and anticipatory governance in synthetic biology

International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development

Volumn 3, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 25-38

  Wiek, Arnim ^a   Guston, David ^a   Frow, Emma ^b   Calvert, Jane ^b  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Anticipatory Governance; Bioethical Issues; Prudent Vigilance; Research Funding; Synthetic Biology; Transformational Sustainability Science

Indexed keywords

EID: 84866303893     PISSN: 19478402     EISSN: 19478410     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4018/jsesd.2012040103     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Ajikumar, P. K., Tyo, K., Carlsen, S., Mucha, O., Phon, T. H., & Stephanopoulos, G. (2008). Terpenoids: Opportunities for biosynthesis of natural product drugs using engineered microorganisms. Mo-lecular Pharmaceutics, 5(2), 167-190. doi:10.1021/mp700151b (Pubitemid 351579123)
2. Almeida, E., Bhattacharya, S., Bubenheim, D., Cohen, J., Cumbers, J., Hoehler, T., & Rothschild, L. (Eds.). (2011, June 15). Synthetic Biology SB5.0, NASA Satellite Meeting. Retrieved from http://syn-theticbiology.arc.nasa. gov/node/21
3. Armstrong, R., & Spiller, N. (2010). Synthetic biology: living quarters. Nature, 467(7318), 916-918. doi:10.1038/467916a
4. Barben, D., Fisher, E., Selin, C, & Guston, D. H. (2008). Anticipatory governance of nano techno logy: foresight, engagement, and integration. In Hacket, E. J., Amsterdamska, O., Lynch, M., & Wajcman, J. (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (3rd ed., pp. 979-1000). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Bedau, M. A., & Parke, E. C. (2009). Introduction to the ethics of protocells. In Bedau, M. A., & Parke, E. C. (Eds.), The ethics of protocells: moral and social implications of creating life in the laboratory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6. BioBricks Foundation. (2011). SB 5.0: The Fifth International Meeting on Synthetic Biology. Retrieved from http://sb5.biobricks. org/files/sb 5-program-book-v3.pdf
7. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council. (2008). Synthetic biology: Socialand ethical challenges. Retrieved from http://www.bbsrc.ac.uk/ organisation/policies/reviews/scientific-areas/0806-synthetic-biology.aspx
8. Calvert, J., & Martin, P. (2009). The role of social scientists in synthetic biology. EMBOReports, 10(3), 201-204. doi:10.1038/embor.2009.15
9. Chopra, P., & Kamma, A. (2006). Engineering life through synthetic biology. In Silico Biology, 6, 401-410. (Pubitemid 44857637)
10. DARPA. (2011). Living foundries: Advanced tools and capabilities for generalizable platforms (ATCG) (Report No. DARPA-BAA-11-60). Retrieved from https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode= form&id= 010c6a305013fb972061e3d76fcea2dd&t ab=core&-cview=0
11. Deamer, D. (2008, November 7). First life, and next life: the origins and synthesis of living cells. In Pro-ceedings of the 9th EMBL/EMBO Joint Conference, Heidelberg, Germany.
12. Dellomonaco, C, Fava, F, & Gonzalez, R. (2010). The path to next generation biofuels: successes and challenges in the era of synthetic biology. Microbial Cell Factories, 9, 3. doi:10.1186/1475-2859-9-3
13. Dunbar, S. J. (2010, July 12-14). Synthetic biology opportunities in agriculture. In Proceedings of the Second RoSBNet Synthetic Biology Workshop, Oxford, UK. Retrieved from http://sysos.eng.ox.ac.uk/control/RoSBNet/images/c/ c1/Rosbnet-SDunbar. pdf
14. ETC Group (2007). Extreme genetic engineering: An introduction to synthetic biology. Retrieved from http://www.etcgroup.org/upload/publication/ 602/01/synbioreportweb.pdf
15. ETC Group (2008). Commodifying nature's last straw? Extreme genetic engineering and the post-petroleum sugar economy. Retrieved from http://www.etcgroup.org/upload/publication/703/02/sugareconomyweboct10-2008.pdf
16. European Academies Science Advisory Council. (2010). Realising European potential in synthetic biology: Scientific opportunities and good governance. Retrieved from http://www.easac.eu/fileadmin/PDF-s/reports-statements/ Synthetic%20 Biology%20report.pdf
17. European Commission. (2005). New perspectives on the knowledge-based bio-economy. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/research/conferences/2005/kbb/ pdf/kbbe-conferencereportpdf
18. European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies to the European Commission. (2009). Ethical aspects of synthetic biology. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/bepa/european-group-ethics/docs/publications/ round-table-ethical-aspects-of-synthetic-biology.pdf
19. Fisher, E. (2007). Ethnographic invention: probing the capacity of laboratory decisions. NanoEthics, 1, 155-165. doi:10.1007/s11569-007-0016-5
20. Frow, E., Ingram, D., Powell, W., Steer, D., Vogel, J., & Yearley, S. (2009). The politics of plants. Food Se-curity, 1(1), 17-23. doi: 10.1007/s12571-008-0007-6
21. Gaisser, S., Reiss, T., Lunkes, A., Müller, K., & Bernaur, H. (2008). TESSY achievements and future perspectives in synthetic biology. Retrieved from http://www.tessy-europe.eu/public-docs/TESSY-Final-Report-D5-3. pdf
22. Gibson, R. B. (2006). Sustainability assessment: basic components of a practical approach. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 24, 170-182. doi:10.3152/147154606781765147 (Pubitemid 44649907)
23. Guston, D. H. (2008). Innovation policy: not just a jumbo shrimp. Nature, 454, 940-941. doi:10.1038/454940a
24. Guston, D. H., & Sarewitz, D. (2002). Real-time technology assessment. Technology in Society, 24(1-2), 93-109. doi:10.1016/S0160-791X(01) 00047-1 (Pubitemid 34290508)
25. House of Commons. (2010). Bioengineering seventh report of session 2009-10: Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence. Retrieved from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/ cmsctech/220/220.pdf
26. International Risk Governance Council. (2011). Guidelines for the appropriate risk governance of synthetic biology. Retrieved from http://www.irgc. org/IMG/pdf/irgc-SB-final-07jan-web.pdf
27. Joachim, M., Greden, L., & Arbona, J. (2008). Fab tree hab living tree house. Retrieved from http://www.archinode.com/bienal.html
28. Kahan, D. M., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil, J., & Cohen, G. (2009). Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nature Nanotechnology, 4(2), 87-90. doi:10.1038/nnano.2008.341
29. Khalil, A. S., & Collins, J. J. (2010). Synthetic biology: applications come of age. Nature Reviews. Genetics, 11, 367-379. doi:10.1038/nrg2775
30. Loorbach, D. (2010). Transition management for sustainable development: a prescriptive, complexity-based governance framework. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions, 23(1), 161-183. doi: 10.11 11/j.1468-0491.2009.01471.x
31. Macnaghten, P., Kearnes, M. B., & Wynne, B. (2005). Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: what role for the social sciences? Science Communication, 27(2), 268-291. doi:10.1177/1075547005281531 (Pubitemid 41795482)
32. Marcus, G. E. (1995). Technoscientificimaginaries: conversations, profiles, and memoirs. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
33. Naylor, R., Liska, A. J., Burke, M. B., Falcon, W. P., Gaskell, J. C, Rozelle, S. D., & Cassman, K. (2007). The ripple effect: biofuels, food security and the environment. Environment, 49, 30-43. doi:10.3200/ENVT.49.9.30- 43 (Pubitemid 351659758)
34. New and Emerging Science and Technology (NEST). (2005). Synthetic biology: Applying engineering to biology. Retrieved from http://ftp.cordis. europa. eu/pub/nest/docs/syntheticbiology-b5-eur21796-en.pdf
35. New and Emerging Science and Technology (NEST). (2007). Synthetic biology: ANESTpathfinder initiative. Retrieved from http://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/ pub/nest/docs/5-nest-synthetic-080507.pdf
36. Norton. (2010). Synthetic biology: Some concerns of a biodiversity advocate. Remarks on synthetic biology to the presidential commission on bioethics. Retrieved from http://www. bioethic s. go v/cms/sites/default/files/ Synthetic-Biology.pdf
37. OECD and the Royal Society. (2010). Symposium on opportunities and challenges in the emergingfield of synthetic biology: Synthesis report. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/23/49/45144066.pdf
38. Pauwels, E. (2009). Review of quantitative and qualitative studies on U.S. public perceptions of synthetic biology. Systems and Synthetic Biology, 3, 37-46. doi:10.1007/s11693-009-9035-6
39. Pfleger, B. (2008). Sustainability through synthetic biology. Retrieved from http://www.engr.wisc.edu/che/newsletter/2008-springsummer/article05-bri-an- pfleger.html
40. Pohflepp, S. (2009). Growth assembly. Retrieved from http://www. daisy ginsberg. com/proj ects/growthassembly.html
41. Poste, G. (2007, October 10). Synthetic biology and sustainability. Paper presented at the 1st Interdisciplinary Symposium: Global Sustainability-A Nobel Cause, Potsdam, Germany.
42. Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. (2010). New directions: The ethics of synthetic biology and emerging technologies. Retrieved from http://www.bioethics.gov/documents/synthetic-biol-ogy/PCSBI-Synthetic- Biology-Report-12.16.10.pdf
43. Preston, C. J. (2008). Synthetic biology: Drawing a line in Darwin's sand. Environmental Values, 17, 23-39. doi:10.3197/096327108X271932 (Pubitemid 351392351)
44. Robinson, D. K. R. (2009). Co-evolutionary scenarios: An application to prospecting futures of the responsible development of nanotechnology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76, 1222-1239. doi:10.1016/j. techfore.2009.07.015
45. Rutz, B. (2007). Synthetic biology through the prism of scenarios. Biotechnology Journal, 2, 1072-1075. doi:10.1002/biot.200700143 (Pubitemid 47520944)
46. Sarewitz, D., Kriebel, D., Clapp, R., Crumbley, C., & Hoppin, P (2010). The sustainable solutions agenda: Consortium forscience, policyandoutcomes. Tempe, AZ and Lowell, MA: Arizona State University and University of Massachusetts.
47. Selin, C. (2007). Expectations and the emergence of nanotechnology. Science, Technology & Human Val-ues, 32(2), 196-220. doi:10.1177/ 0162243906296918
48. Sheridan, C. (2009). Making green. Nature Biotechnology, 27, 1074-1076. doi:10.1038/nbt1209-1074
49. Torgersen, H. (2009). Synthetic biology in society: learning from past experience? Systems and Synthetic Biology, 3, 9-17. doi:10.1007/s11693-009-9030- y
50. Turner, R. K. (1993). Sustainability: principles and practice. In Turner, R. K. (Ed.), Sustainable environmental economics and management: Principles and practice (pp. 3-36). London, UK: Belhaven Press.
51. Wiek, A., Gasser, L., & Siegrist, M. (2009). Systemic scenarios of nanotechnology-Sustainable governance of emerging technologies. Futures, 41, 284-300. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2008.11.016
52. Wiek, A., Guston, D., van der Leeuw, S., Selin, C, & Shapira, P. (n.d.). The nano-enhanced city, sustainability challenges, and anticipatory governance. Manuscript under review.
53. Wiek, A., & Larson, K. L. (in press). Water governance, people, and sustainability-A systems approach for analyzing and assessing water governance regimes. Water Resources Management.
54. Wiek, A., Ness, B., Brand, F. S., Schweizer-Ries, P, & Farioli, F. (2012). From complex systems analysis to transformational change: A comparative appraisal of sustainability science projects. Sustainability Science, 7(1), 5-24. doi:10.1007/s11625-011-0148-y
55. Wiek, A., Zemp, S., Siegrist, M., & Walter, A. I. (2007). Sustainable governance of emerging technologies-critical constellations in the agent network of nanotechnology. Technology in Society, 29(4), 388-406. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2007.08.010 (Pubitemid 47570731)
56. Woodrow Wilson Center. (2009). New life, old bottles: Regulatingfirst-generationproducts of synthetic biology. Retrieved from http://www.synbioproject. org/process/assets/files/6319/nano-synbio2-elec- tronic-final.pdf