Foetal programming meets human capital: biological plasticity, development, and the limits to the economization of life

IF 1.3 4区医学 Q4 SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL

Biosocieties Pub Date : 2023-09-16 DOI:10.1057/s41292-023-00309-8

Tessa Moll, Maurizio Meloni, Ayuba Issaka

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The disciplinary integration of biology and economy is taking new forms in the postgenomic era, transforming long-standing exchanges between human biology and economics. In this article, we first describe how an emerging area of research in development and health economics has embraced, stabilized, and expanded the emerging field of the Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD). We map the global expansion of this literature particularly in the Global South. Via an analysis of shifting models of health in human capital, we argue that as economists draw on DOHaD theories, their increasing focus on marginalized groups in postcolonial settings produces a darker model of health deficit. Based on notions of accumulated shocks, this model questions the generalizable expansion of the economization of life and speaks to a wider and more sombre range of figures. Health models in economics reflect the double nature of biological and developmental plasticity caught between agency and passivity, change, and near-permanency.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

胎儿编程符合人力资本:生物可塑性，发展和限制的经济生活

生物学与经济学的学科融合在后基因组时代呈现出新的形式，改变了人类生物学与经济学长期以来的交流。在本文中，我们首先描述了发展和卫生经济学的一个新兴研究领域是如何拥抱、稳定和扩展健康和疾病的发展起源(DOHaD)这一新兴领域的。我们描绘了这种文学的全球扩张，特别是在全球南方。通过对不断变化的人力资本健康模型的分析，我们认为，随着经济学家借鉴DOHaD理论，他们越来越多地关注后殖民环境中的边缘化群体，产生了一个更黑暗的健康赤字模型。基于累积冲击的概念，这个模型质疑了生活经济化的普遍化扩展，并谈到了更广泛和更阴暗的数字范围。经济学中的健康模型反映了介于能动性和被动性、变化性和近永久性之间的生物和发展可塑性的双重性质。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Biosocieties SOCIAL SCIENCES, BIOMEDICAL-

CiteScore

3.40

自引率

6.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： BioSocieties is committed to the scholarly exploration of the crucial social, ethical and policy implications of developments in the life sciences and biomedicine. These developments are increasing our ability to control our own biology; enabling us to create novel life forms; changing our ideas of ‘normality’ and ‘abnormality’; transforming our understanding of personal identity, family relations, ancestry and ‘race’; altering our social and personal expectations and responsibilities; reshaping global economic opportunities and inequalities; creating new global security challenges; and generating new social, ethical, legal and regulatory dilemmas. To address these dilemmas requires us to break out from narrow disciplinary boundaries within the social sciences and humanities, and between these disciplines and the natural sciences, and to develop new ways of thinking about the relations between biology and sociality and between the life sciences and society. BioSocieties provides a crucial forum where the most rigorous social research and critical analysis of these issues can intersect with the work of leading scientists, social researchers, clinicians, regulators and other stakeholders. BioSocieties defines the key intellectual issues at the science-society interface, and offers pathways to the resolution of the critical local, national and global socio-political challenges that arise from scientific and biomedical advances. As the first journal of its kind, BioSocieties publishes scholarship across the social science disciplines, and represents a lively and balanced array of perspectives on controversial issues. In its inaugural year BioSocieties demonstrated the constructive potential of interdisciplinary dialogue and debate across the social and natural sciences. We are becoming the journal of choice not only for social scientists, but also for life scientists interested in the larger social, ethical and policy implications of their work. The journal is international in scope, spanning research and developments in all corners of the globe. BioSocieties is published quarterly, with occasional themed issues that highlight some of the critical questions and problematics of modern biotechnologies. Articles, response pieces, review essays, and self-standing editorial pieces by social and life scientists form a regular part of the journal.