A New Governance Approach to Regulating Human Genome Editing.

John M Conley, Arlene M Davis, Gail E Henderson, Eric T Juengst, Karen M Meagher, Rebecca L Walker, Margaret Waltz, Jean Cadigan
{"title":"A New Governance Approach to Regulating Human Genome Editing.","authors":"John M Conley,&nbsp;Arlene M Davis,&nbsp;Gail E Henderson,&nbsp;Eric T Juengst,&nbsp;Karen M Meagher,&nbsp;Rebecca L Walker,&nbsp;Margaret Waltz,&nbsp;Jean Cadigan","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>For years, genomic medicine-medicine based on the growing understanding of the genetic contribution to many diseases and conditions-has been hailed as the future of medical treatment, but it has thus far had limited effect on day-to-day medical practice. The ultimate goal of genomic medicine has always been the ability not just to identify dangerous gene mutations, but to fix them. Now CRISPR and related genome-editing technologies may have the potential to provide a safe and effective way to repair dangerous mutations. In the wake of ethically dubious experiments with human embryos in China, the international governance of human genome editing is emerging as an urgent topic for scientists, regulators, and the public. Efforts to develop a governance model are underway at national and international levels. These efforts are the subject of multiple initiatives by national and international health and science organizations and are topics of discussion at scientific conferences, summits, and meetings. This Article reports on the Authors' multi-year, interdisciplinary project to identify and investigate the practical, ethical, and policy considerations that are emerging as the greatest concerns about human genome editing, and ultimately to develop policy options. The project involves monitoring the discussions of groups, both government-sponsored and private, that are considering how genome editing should be governed; observing conferences where the topic is discussed; analyzing emerging policy reports by national and international bodies; and interviewing a wide range of stakeholders, including scientists, ethicists, and those who make and comment on public policy. The Article identifies several stakeholder concerns that are especially prominent in the research to date and begins to explore the implications of these concerns for alternative models of governance. There are current indications that, for practical purposes, a focus on \"soft,\" hybrid forms of governance based on networks of multiple public and private stakeholders may turn out to be the most promising course to pursue. The \"new governance\" paradigm developed in the corporate and financial sectors offers a useful model for understanding the dynamics of this approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":90661,"journal":{"name":"North Carolina journal of law & technology","volume":"22 2","pages":"107-141"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8565716/pdf/nihms-1748795.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"North Carolina journal of law & technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For years, genomic medicine-medicine based on the growing understanding of the genetic contribution to many diseases and conditions-has been hailed as the future of medical treatment, but it has thus far had limited effect on day-to-day medical practice. The ultimate goal of genomic medicine has always been the ability not just to identify dangerous gene mutations, but to fix them. Now CRISPR and related genome-editing technologies may have the potential to provide a safe and effective way to repair dangerous mutations. In the wake of ethically dubious experiments with human embryos in China, the international governance of human genome editing is emerging as an urgent topic for scientists, regulators, and the public. Efforts to develop a governance model are underway at national and international levels. These efforts are the subject of multiple initiatives by national and international health and science organizations and are topics of discussion at scientific conferences, summits, and meetings. This Article reports on the Authors' multi-year, interdisciplinary project to identify and investigate the practical, ethical, and policy considerations that are emerging as the greatest concerns about human genome editing, and ultimately to develop policy options. The project involves monitoring the discussions of groups, both government-sponsored and private, that are considering how genome editing should be governed; observing conferences where the topic is discussed; analyzing emerging policy reports by national and international bodies; and interviewing a wide range of stakeholders, including scientists, ethicists, and those who make and comment on public policy. The Article identifies several stakeholder concerns that are especially prominent in the research to date and begins to explore the implications of these concerns for alternative models of governance. There are current indications that, for practical purposes, a focus on "soft," hybrid forms of governance based on networks of multiple public and private stakeholders may turn out to be the most promising course to pursue. The "new governance" paradigm developed in the corporate and financial sectors offers a useful model for understanding the dynamics of this approach.

调控人类基因组编辑的新治理方法。
多年来,基因组医学——建立在对许多疾病和病症的遗传作用的日益了解的基础上的医学——被誉为医学治疗的未来,但迄今为止,它在日常医疗实践中的作用有限。基因组医学的最终目标一直是不仅能够识别危险的基因突变,而且能够修复它们。现在,CRISPR和相关的基因组编辑技术可能有潜力提供一种安全有效的方法来修复危险的突变。在中国的人类胚胎实验存在伦理问题之后,人类基因组编辑的国际治理正成为科学家、监管机构和公众的一个紧迫话题。国家和国际层面正在努力制定治理模式。这些努力是国家和国际卫生和科学组织多项倡议的主题,也是科学会议、首脑会议和会议的讨论主题。本文报告了作者多年的跨学科项目,以确定和调查正在成为人类基因组编辑最大关注点的实践、伦理和政策考虑因素,并最终制定政策选择。该项目包括监控政府资助和私人团体的讨论,这些团体正在考虑如何管理基因组编辑;观察讨论该主题的会议;分析国家和国际机构的新政策报告;并采访了广泛的利益相关者,包括科学家、伦理学家和那些制定和评论公共政策的人。本文确定了迄今为止研究中特别突出的几个涉众关注点,并开始探索这些关注点对替代治理模型的影响。目前有迹象表明,出于实际目的,关注基于多个公共和私人利益相关者网络的“软”混合治理形式可能是最有前途的做法。在企业和金融部门发展起来的“新治理”范式为理解这种方法的动态提供了一个有用的模型。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信