![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
The concept of ‘public consultation’ and the idea of ‘democratic deliberation’ describe different forms of engagement of various citizens and stakeholders in the governance of science and technology projects (STPs). On the one hand, public consultation is concerned with enhancing the quality of decisions through public understanding of a complex STP. On the other hand, democratic deliberation is concerned with taking quality decisions through communicative action and free argumentation between all parties affected. This article focuses on the STP of the UK Biobank, addressing the following question: which form of upstream engagement is required in governing the next phase of the UK Biobank for the public good of health? Drawing on political theory debates and qualitative evidence, it is argued that although ideal democratic governance of the (next phase of) UK Biobank requires transition from public consultation to democratic deliberation the latter faces practical limitations. Thus, deliberative engagement cannot be full in specific STPs for the public good of health.
Notes
Note
1. The origins of this crisis goes back to 1993, when the BSE epidemic resulted in crisis on public confidence in scientific advise and the state's risk management processes (Frewer and Salter 2009). The legitimacy crisis of science and technology took another form in 1998, when the discussion of risks involved in GMOs resulted in opposition to GMOs by public interest groups and eventually in bans of any trials in the open because of the perceived dangers associated with the GMO technology (Tait Citation2009).