Expectations as techniques of legitimation? Imagined futures through global bioethics standards for health research.

IF 2.5 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Pub Date : 2021-08-16 eCollection Date: 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1093/jlb/lsaa086
Mark L Flear
{"title":"Expectations as techniques of legitimation? Imagined futures through global bioethics standards for health research.","authors":"Mark L Flear","doi":"10.1093/jlb/lsaa086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>I argue that expectations or strong beliefs about what can occur, and the imaginaries they construct, can be shaped by organizations and used by them as techniques for public legitimation of their governance and regulatory activities. I advance this argument by reference to the International Council on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). The expectations and imaginary flowing from the ICH's mission and framing, 'harmonisation for better health', support a focus on technological development for the production of safe, quality, and effective pharmaceuticals and individual ethical conduct to achieve it. The expectations also marginalize wider systemic issues relating to social justice, particularly those affecting the global South. The central role of scientific-technical knowledge and expertise to harmonization abets the latter by minimizing the value to governance of public knowledges on systemic issues. Instead of ensuring the contribution of these knowledges to governance through public participation, there is an attempt to bolster legitimation through communication of expectations and transparency to show practices are in accordance with them (ie expectations are met).</p>","PeriodicalId":56266,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","volume":"8 2","pages":"lsaa086"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ab/8d/lsaa086.PMC8366718.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and the Biosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa086","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I argue that expectations or strong beliefs about what can occur, and the imaginaries they construct, can be shaped by organizations and used by them as techniques for public legitimation of their governance and regulatory activities. I advance this argument by reference to the International Council on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). The expectations and imaginary flowing from the ICH's mission and framing, 'harmonisation for better health', support a focus on technological development for the production of safe, quality, and effective pharmaceuticals and individual ethical conduct to achieve it. The expectations also marginalize wider systemic issues relating to social justice, particularly those affecting the global South. The central role of scientific-technical knowledge and expertise to harmonization abets the latter by minimizing the value to governance of public knowledges on systemic issues. Instead of ensuring the contribution of these knowledges to governance through public participation, there is an attempt to bolster legitimation through communication of expectations and transparency to show practices are in accordance with them (ie expectations are met).

作为合法化技术的期望?通过全球健康研究生物伦理标准想象未来。
我认为,对可能发生的事情的期望或强烈信念,以及它们所构建的想象,可以由组织塑造,并被组织用作使其治理和监管活动公开合法化的技巧。我以《国际人用药品注册技术要求协调理事会》(ICH)为例推进这一论点。ICH 的使命和框架--"为更好的健康而协调"--所产生的期望和想象,支持将重点放在生产安全、优质、有效药品的技术发展上,以及实现这一目标的个人道德行为上。这种期望也使与社会公正有关的更广泛的系统性问题边缘化,特别是那些影响全球南部的问题。科技知识和专业知识在协调方面的核心作用,通过最大限度地降低系统性问题上的公共知识对治理的价值,助长了后者。人们不是通过公众参与来确保这些知识对治理的贡献,而是试图通过传达期望和透明度来表明做法符合这些期望(即期望得到满足),从而加强合法性。
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
Journal of Law and the Biosciences
Journal of Law and the Biosciences Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
35
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Law and the Biosciences (JLB) is the first fully Open Access peer-reviewed legal journal focused on the advances at the intersection of law and the biosciences. A co-venture between Duke University, Harvard University Law School, and Stanford University, and published by Oxford University Press, this open access, online, and interdisciplinary academic journal publishes cutting-edge scholarship in this important new field. The Journal contains original and response articles, essays, and commentaries on a wide range of topics, including bioethics, neuroethics, genetics, reproductive technologies, stem cells, enhancement, patent law, and food and drug regulation. JLB is published as one volume with three issues per year with new articles posted online on an ongoing basis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信