Emerging biotechnologies: full report - Nuffield Council on Bioethics
Emerging biotechnologies: full report - Nuffield Council on Bioethics
Emerging biotechnologies: full report - Nuffield Council on Bioethics
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
E m e r g i n g b i o t e c h n o l o g i e s<br />
Chapter 10 - C<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>s: emerging<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g> and the public good<br />
Introducti<strong>on</strong><br />
10.1 The broad nature of our brief has meant that our treatment of the ethical and social issues<br />
surrounding emerging <str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g> is necessarily quite general. We have forsworn<br />
c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong> of ‘case studies’, trying always to stand back from particular c<strong>on</strong>texts in order to<br />
see emerging <str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g> as part of a bigger picture, <strong>on</strong>e that engages our attitudes<br />
towards science and technology as resp<strong>on</strong>ses to social challenges and as forces shaping social<br />
relati<strong>on</strong>s and material well-being. Our subject has not been emerging <str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g> but how<br />
we think about emerging <str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g>, and how this thinking affects and is affected by what<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g> emerge. We have therefore ranged widely across intellectual disciplines and<br />
explored diverse literatures as our enquiry has demanded. This has produced some unexpected<br />
juxtapositi<strong>on</strong>s.<br />
10.2 Our own approach is deliberately interdisciplinary – as we observed early <strong>on</strong>, finding the terms<br />
of an unbiased and open engagement between different values and interests within different<br />
normative frames is the proper subject of an ‘ethics’ of emerging biotechnology governance. 705<br />
This frame always has to be c<strong>on</strong>structed – it is not already there, waiting to be discovered by a<br />
process of abstract reas<strong>on</strong>ing.<br />
10.3 In this Report, we began by observing the diversity of our subject matter, that there are almost<br />
no features shared in comm<strong>on</strong> between <str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g>. Indeed, because (although not <strong>on</strong>ly<br />
because) they often come about through the c<strong>on</strong>vergence of existing technologies of different<br />
kinds, there may be more variati<strong>on</strong> am<strong>on</strong>g <str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g> than between a given biotechnology<br />
and n<strong>on</strong>-biological technology. Nevertheless, although we could not clearly define them as a<br />
class, we found a way of addressing emerging <str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g>, as the assembling of<br />
knowledges, practices, products and applicati<strong>on</strong>s, that involved significant ‘biological’ elements.<br />
In order to do this we had to refocus our attenti<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> the nature of ‘emerging’ as a process<br />
rather than the nature of the <str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g> that emerge. This led us to identify uncertainty,<br />
ambiguity and transformative potential as important features that mark out emerging<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g>, and which c<strong>on</strong>stitute the problem with which research, policy and commerce<br />
must engage.<br />
Our argument for a ‘public ethics’<br />
10.4 Before drawing together our c<strong>on</strong>clusi<strong>on</strong>s we now summarise the main steps in the argument<br />
that we have developed in the course of this Report.<br />
a) Biotechnologies have the capacity to produce public benefits but also public harms, both<br />
direct and indirect, possibly in ways that are transformative (i.e. that transform the horiz<strong>on</strong><br />
of future possibilities, for example, by locking in dependency <strong>on</strong> particular technologies,<br />
perhaps even <strong>on</strong>es not yet invented). This may involve a deferral of resp<strong>on</strong>sibility for<br />
tackling the challenges we presently face to a future in which it is assumed more powerful<br />
soluti<strong>on</strong>s will be available (the ‘biotechnology wager’).<br />
b) There is a public interest both in the fact that new <str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g> emerge and in which<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>biotechnologies</str<strong>on</strong>g> emerge because (1) they hold potential for benefit and harm (so we want<br />
the beneficial <strong>on</strong>es) and (2) there are always opportunity costs (there are better and worse<br />
technologies so we want the most beneficial <strong>on</strong>es; in any case it is unlikely that we can<br />
have all of them so some selecti<strong>on</strong> is inevitable).<br />
705 See paragraph 4.42 above.<br />
174