‘That would break the containment’: the co-production of responsibility and safety-by-design in xenobiology

References

• Asin-Garcia, Enrique, Amalia Kallergi, Laurens Landeweerd, and Vitor A. P. Martins dos Santos. 2020. “Genetic Safeguards for Safety-by-Design: So Close Yet So Far.” Trends in Biotechnology 38 (12): 1308–1312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asselt, Marjolein B. A., and Ortwin Renn. 2011. “Risk Governance.” Journal of Risk Research 14 (4): 431–449.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aven, Terje, and Ortwin Renn. 2010. Risk Management and Risk Governance. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Berg, Paul, David, Baltimore, Sydney, Brenner, Richard O. Roblin, and Maxine F. Singer. 1975. “Summary Statement of the Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA Molecules.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 72 (6): 1981–1984.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bijker, Wiebe E., Thomas Parke Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, eds. 1987. The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the History and Sociology of Technology. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bouchaut, Britte, and Lotte Asveld. 2020. “Safe-by-Design: Stakeholders’ Perceptions and Expectations of How to Deal with Uncertain Risks of Emerging Biotechnologies in the Netherlands.” Risk Analysis 40 (8): 1632–1644.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess, Adam. 2016. “Introduction.” In Routledge Handbook of Risk Studies, edited by Adam Burgess, Alberto Alemanno, and Jens O. Zinn, 1–14. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cases, Ildefonso, and Víctor de Lorenzo. 2005. “Genetically Modified Organisms for the Environment: Stories of Success and Failure and What We Have Learned from Them.” International Microbiology 8: 213–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaput, John C., Piet Herdewijn, and Marcel Hollenstein. 2020. “Orthogonal Genetic Systems.” ChemBioChem (February).
   Google Scholar
• Collingridge, David. 1980. The Social Control of Technology. London: Frances Pinter.
   Google Scholar
• Dooren, Thom Van. 2007. “Terminated Seed: Death, Proprietary Kinship and the Production of (Bio)Wealth.” Science as Culture 16 (1): 71–94.
   Google Scholar
• Doorn, Neelke. 2012. “Responsibility Ascriptions in Technology Development and Engineering: Three Perspectives.” Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (1): 69–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Driebe, D. J., and R. R. McDaniel. 2005. “Complexity, Uncertainty and Surprise: An Integrated View.” In Uncertainty and Surprise in Complex Systems: Questions on Working with the Unexpected, edited by R. R. McDaniel and D. J. Driebe, pp. 19–30. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, Sam Weiss, and Megan J. Palmer. 2018. “Anomaly Handling and the Politics of Gene Drives.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 5 (sup1): S223–S242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Felt, Ulrike, and Brian Wynne, eds. 2007. Science and Governance: Taking European Knowledge Society Seriously. Report of the Expert Group on Science and Governance to the Science, Economy and Society Directorate, Directorate-General for Research, European Commission, Brussels.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, Erik, and Roop L Mahajan. 2006. “Contradictory Intent? US Federal Legislation on Integrating Societal Concerns into Nanotechnology Research and Development.” Science and Public Policy 33 (1): 5–16.
   Google Scholar
• Florin, Marie-Valentine. 2019. “Risk Governance and ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’ Can Be Mutually Supportive.” Journal of Risk Research (September): 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Frow, Emma. 2020. “From ‘Experiments of Concern’ to ‘Groups of Concern’: Constructing and Containing Citizens in Synthetic Biology.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 45 (6): 1038–1064.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Funtowicz, Silvio O., and Jerome R. Ravetz. 1990. Uncertainty and Quality in Knowledge for Policy. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Genya V. Dana, Todd Kuiken, David Rejeski, and Allison A. Snow. 2012. “Synthetic Biology: Four Steps to Avoid a Synthetic-Biology Disaster.” Nature 483 (7387): 29. doi:10.1038/483029a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbons, Michael, Helga Nowotny, Camille Limoges, Simon Schwartzman, and Peter Scott. 1994. The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: SAGE Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Giddens, Anthony. 2000. Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Grinbaum, Alexei, and Christopher Groves. 2013. “What Is ‘Responsible’ About Responsible Innovation? Understanding the Ethical Issues.” In Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society, edited by Richard Owen, John Bessant, and Maggy Heintz, 119–142. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Gross, Matthias. 2010. Ignorance and Surprise: Science, Society, and Ecological Design. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grove-White, Robin. 2006. “Britain’s Genetically Modified Crop Controversies: The Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission and the Negotiation of ‘Uncertainty’.” Community Genetics 9 (3): 170–177.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grunwald, Armin. 2012. Responsible Nanobiotechnology: Philosophy and Ethics. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
   Google Scholar
• Grunwald, Armin. 2014. “Synthetic Biology as Technoscience and the EEE Concept of Responsibility.” In Synthetic Biology: Character and Impact, edited by Bernd Giese, Christian Pade, Henning Wigger, and Arnim von Gleich, 249–265. Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Herdewijn, Piet, and Philippe Marlière. 2009. “Toward Safe Genetically Modified Organisms Through the Chemical Diversification of Nucleic Acids.” Chemistry & Biodiversity 6 (6): 791–808.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hilgartner, Stephen. 2015. “Capturing the Imaginary: Vanguards, Visions and the Synthetic Biology Revolution.” In Science & Democracy: Making Knowledge and Making Power in the Biosciences and Beyond, edited by Stephen Hilgartner, Clark Miller, and Rob Hagendijk, 33–55. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hurlbut, J. B. 2015. “Remembering the Future: Science, Law and the Legacy of Asilomar.” In Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power, edited by Jasanoff, Sheila, and Kim, Sang-Hyun, 126–151. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hurlbut, James Benjamin. 2017. “Laws of Containment: Control Without Limits in the New Biology: Life Beyond the Human.” In Gene Editing, Law, and the Environment, edited by Irus Braverman, 77–93. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hurley, Paul. 2009. Beyond Consequentialism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Irwin, Alan, and Brian Wynne, eds. 1996. Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila. 2003. “Technologies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science.” Minerva 41 (3): 223–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila. 2004. States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and Social Order. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila. 2005. Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, Sheila, and Sang-Hyun Kim. 2009. “Containing the Atom: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea.” Minerva 47 (2): 119–146.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn, Alfred E. 1966. “The Tyranny of Small Decisions: Market Failures, Imperfections, and the Limits of Economics.” Kyklos 19 (1): 23–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kearnes, Matthew, and Brian Wynne. 2007. “On Nanotechnology and Ambivalence: The Politics of Enthusiasm.” NanoEthics 1 (2): 131–142.
   Google Scholar
• Kelty, Christopher M. 2009. “Beyond Implications and Applications: The Story of ‘Safety by Design’.” NanoEthics 3 (2): 79–96.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Latour, Bruno. 1992. “Where Are the Missing Masses? The Sociology of a Few Mundane Artifacts.” In Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, edited by Wiebe J Bijker and John Law, 225–258. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• MacKenzie, Donald. 1993. Inventing Accuracy: A Historical Sociology of Nuclear Missile Guidance. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Macnaghten, Phil. 2020. The Making of Responsible Innovation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Malyshev, Denis A., Kirandeep Dhami, Thomas Lavergne, Tingjian Chen, Nan Dai, Jeremy M. Foster, Ivan R. Corrêa, and Floyd E. Romesberg. 2014. “A Semi-Synthetic Organism with an Expanded Genetic Alphabet.” Nature 509 (7500): 385–388.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandell, Daniel J., Marc J. Lajoie, Michael T. Mee, Ryo Takeuchi, Gleb Kuznetsov, Julie E. Norville, Christopher J. Gregg, Barry L. Stoddard, and George M. Church. 2015. “Biocontainment of Genetically Modified Organisms by Synthetic Protein Design.” Nature 518 (7537): 55–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marlière, Philippe. 2009. “The Farther, the Safer: A Manifesto for Securely Navigating Synthetic Species Away from the Old Living World.” Systems and Synthetic Biology 3 (1–4): 77–84.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marris, Claire. 2015. “The Construction of Imaginaries of the Public as a Threat to Synthetic Biology.” Science as Culture 24 (1): 83–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marris, Claire, and Jane Calvert. 2020. “Science and Technology Studies in Policy: The UK Synthetic Biology Roadmap.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 45 (1): 34–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marris, Claire, and Catherine Jefferson. 2013. Workshop on ‘Synthetic Biology: Containment and Release of Engineered Micro-Organisms’ Held on 29 April 2013 at King’s College London: Scoping Report. London: King’s College, London.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, Elise, and Christopher M. Kelty. 2010. “Responsibility and Nanotechnology.” Social Studies of Science 40 (3): 405–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moe-Behrens, Gerd H. G., Rene Davis, and Karmella A. Haynes. 2013. “Preparing Synthetic Biology for the World.” Frontiers in Microbiology 4 (January): 1–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nissenbaum, Helen 1996. “Accountability in a Computerized Society.” Science and Engineering Ethics 2: 25–42.
   Google Scholar
• Owen, Richard, John Bessant, and Maggy Heintz, eds. 2013. Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Owen, Richard, Phil Macnaghten, and Jack Stilgoe. 2012. “Responsible Research and Innovation: From Science in Society to Science for Society, with Society.” Science and Public Policy 39 (6): 751–760.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Penders, Bart. 2011. “Cool and Safe: Multiplicity in Safe Innovation at Unilever.” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 31 (6): 472–481.
   Google Scholar
• Perrow, Charles. 1984. Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Poel, Ibo Van de, and Zoë Robaey. 2017. “Safe-by-Design: From Safety to Responsibility.” NanoEthics 11 (3): 297–306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. 2010. New Directions: The Ethics of Synthetic Biology and Emerging Technologies. Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Rabinow, Paul, and Gaymon Bennett. 2012. Designing Human Practices: An Experiment with Synthetic Biology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Renn, Ortwin. 2008. Risk Governance: Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World. London: Earthscan Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Rip, Arie. 2006. “Folk Theories of Nanotechnologists.” Science as Culture 15 (4): 349–365.
   Google Scholar
• Rip, Arie. 2014. “The Past and Future of RRI.” Life Sciences, Society and Policy 10 (1): 17.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rip, Arie. 2016. “The Clothes of the Emperor. An Essay on RRI in and Around Brussels.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 3 (3): 290–304.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robaey, Zoë. 2018. “Dealing with Risks of Biotechnology: Understanding the Potential of Safe-by-Design”.
   Google Scholar
• Robaey, Zoë, Shannon L. Spruit, and Ibo van de Poel. 2018. “The Food Warden: An Exploration of Issues in Distributing Responsibilities for Safe-by-Design Synthetic Biology Applications.” Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (September): 1673–1696.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rosa, Eugene A., Ortig, Renn, and Aaron M. McCright. 2014. The Risk Society Revisited: Social Theory and Governance. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rovner, Alexis J., Adrian D. Haimovich, Spencer R. Katz, Zhe Li, Michael W. Grome, Brandon M. Gassaway, Miriam Amiram, et al. 2015. “Recoded Organisms Engineered to Depend on Synthetic Amino Acids.” Nature 518 (7537): 89–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Saille, Stevienna. 2015. “Innovating Innovation Policy: The Emergence of ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 2 (2): 152–168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, Markus. 2010. “Xenobiology: A New Form of Life as the Ultimate Biosafety Tool.” BioEssays 32 (4): 322–331.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, Markus, and Víctor de Lorenzo. 2012. “Synthetic Constructs in/for the Environment: Managing the Interplay Between Natural and Engineered Biology.” FEBS Letters 586 (15): 2199–2206.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, Markus, Kelle, Alexander, Ganguli-Mitra, Agomoni, and de Vriend, Huib, eds. 2010. Synthetic Biology: The Technoscience and Its Societal Consequences. Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz-Plaschg, Claudia, Angela Kallhoff, and Iris Eisenberger. 2017. “Making Nanomaterials Safer by Design?” NanoEthics 11 (3): 277–281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smallman, Melanie. 2018. “Science to the Rescue or Contingent Progress? Comparing 10 Years of Public, Expert and Policy Discourses on New and Emerging Science and Technology in the United Kingdom.” Public Understanding of Science 27 (6): 655–673.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, Jack, and David H. Guston. 2017. “Responsible Research and Innovation.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. 4th ed., edited by Ulrike Felt, Rayvon Fouché, Clark Miller, and Laurel Smith-Doerr, 853–880. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, Jack, Richard Owen, and Phil Macnaghten. 2013. “Developing a Framework for Responsible Innovation.” Research Policy 42 (9): 1568–1580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling, Andy. 2008. “‘Opening Up’ and ‘Closing Down’.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 33 (2): 262–294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling, Andy. 2012. “Opening Up the Politics of Knowledge and Power in Bioscience.” PLoS Biology 10 (1): e1001233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling, Andy. 2019. “Engineering and Sustainability: Control and Care in Unfoldings of Modernity.” SWPS, 2019–06.
   Google Scholar
• Stirling, Andrew, K. R. Hayes, and Jason Delborne. 2018. “Towards Inclusive Social Appraisal: Risk, Participation and Democracy in Governance of Synthetic Biology.” BMC Proceedings 12 (S8): 15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Swierstra, Tsjalling, and Arie Rip. 2007. “Nano-Ethics as NEST-Ethics: Patterns of Moral Argumentation About New and Emerging Science and Technology.” NanoEthics 1 (1): 3–20.
   Google Scholar
• Torres, Leticia, Antje Krüger, Eszter Csibra, Edoardo Gianni, and Vitor B. Pinheiro. 2016. “Synthetic Biology Approaches to Biological Containment: Pre-Emptively Tackling Potential Risks.” Essays in Biochemistry 60 (4): 393–410.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winner, Langdon. 1977. Autonomous Technology: Technics-Out-of-Control as a Theme for Political Thought. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Winner, Langdon. 1986. The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Winner, Langdon. 1990. “Engineering Ethics and Political Imagination.” In Broad and Narrow Interpretations of Philosophy of Technology, edited by Paul T. Durbin, 53–64. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, Susan. 1994. Molecular Politics: Developing American and British Regulatory Policy for Genetic Engineering, 1972–1982. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, Oliver, Guy-Bart Stan, and Tom Ellis. 2013. “Building-in Biosafety for Synthetic Biology.” Microbiology 159 (Pt 7): 1221–1235.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wynne, Brian. 1988. “Unruly Technology: Practical Rules, Impractical Discourses and Public Understanding.” Social Studies of Science 18 (1): 147–167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne, Brian. 1992. “Uncertainty and Environmental Learning: Reconceiving Science and Policy in the Preventive Paradigm.” Global Environmental Change 2 (2): 111–127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne, Brian. 2001. “Creating Public Alienation: Expert Cultures of Risk and Ethics on GMOs.” Science as Culture 10 (4): 445–481.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wynne, Brian. 2002. “Risk and Environment as Legitimatory Discourses of Technology: Reflexivity Inside Out?” Current Sociology 50 (3): 459–477.
   Google Scholar
• Zwart, Hub, Laurens Landeweerd, and Arjan van Rooij. 2014. “Adapt or Perish? Assessing the Recent Shift in the European Research Funding Arena from ‘ELSA’ to ‘RRI’.” Life Sciences Society and Policy 10 (1): 11.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar