Toward anticipatory governance of human genome editing: a critical review of scholarly governance discourse

References

• Abou El-Einen, M., T. Cathomen, Z. Ivics, C. H. June, M. Renner, C. K. Schneider, and G. Bauer. 2017. “Human Genome Editing in the Clinic: New Challenges in Regulatory Benefit-Risk Assessment.” Cell Stem Cell 21: 427–430. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.06.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adashi, E. Y., and I. G. Cohen. 2015. “Editing the Genome of the Human Germline: May Cool Heads Prevail.” The American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12): 40–42. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2015.1103805.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adashi, E. Y., and I. G. Cohen. 2017. “Ideology vs. Beneficence.” Journal of Law and the Biosciences 4 (2): 365–370. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsx023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allyse, M., M. Michie, J. Mozersky, and R. Rapp. 2015. “Cherchez la femme: Reproductive CRISPR and Women's Choices.” The American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12): 47–49. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2015.1103808.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnstein, S. R. 1969. “A Ladder of Citizen Participation.” Journal of the American Institute of Planners 35 (4): 216–224. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baltimore, D. 2016. “Why We Need a Summit on Human Gene Editing.” Issues in Science and Technology 32 (3): 35–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baltimore, D., P. Berg, M. Botchan, D. Carroll, R. A. Charo, G. Church, J. E. Corn, et al. 2015. “A Prudent Path Forward for Genomic Engineering and Germline Gene Modification.” Science 348 (6230): 36–38. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab1028.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baltzegar, J., J. C. Barnes, J. E. Elsensohn, N. Gutzmann, M. S. Jones, S. King, and J. Sudweeks. 2018. “Anticipating Complexity in the Deployment of Gene Drive Insects in Agriculture.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 5 (sup1): S81–S97. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1407910.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barben, D., E. Fisher, C. Selin, and D. H. Guston. 2008. “Anticipatory Governance of Nanotechnology: Foresight, Engagement, and Integration.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, edited by E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, and J. Wajcman, 3rd ed., 979–1000. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baylis, F., and M. McLeod. 2017. “First-in-human Phase 1 CRISPR Gene Editing Cancer Trials: Are We Ready?” Current Gene Therapy 17 (4): 309–319. doi:https://doi.org/10.2174/1566523217666171121165935.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beckman, E. S., N. Deuitch, M. Michie, M. A. Allyse, K. A. Riggan, and K. E. Ormond. 2019. “Attitudes Toward Hypothetical Uses of Gene-Editing Technologies in Parents of People with Autosomal Aneuploidies.” The CRISPR Journal 2 (5): 324–330. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0021.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bertrand, P., Z. Pirtle, and D. Tomblin. 2017. “Participatory Technology Assessment for Mars Mission Planning: Public Values and Rationales.” Space Policy 42: 41–53. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2017.08.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bibikova, M., M. Golic, K. G. Golic, and D. Carroll. 2002. “Targeted Chromosomal Cleavage and Mutagenesis in Drosophila Using Zinc-Finger Nucleases.” Genetics 161 (3): 1169–1175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bishop, P., A. Hines, and T. Collins. 2007. “The Current State of Scenario Development: an Overview of Techniques.” Foresight 9 (1): 5–25. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680710727516.
   Google Scholar
• Blaese, R. M., K. W. Culver, A. D. Miller, C. S. Carter, T. Fleisher, M. Clerici, et al. 1995. “T Lymphocyte-Directed Gene Therapy for ADA-SCID: Initial Trial Results After 4 Years.” Science 270 (5235): 475–480. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.270.5235.475.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blendon, R. J., M. T. Gorski, and J. M. Benson. 2016. “The Public and the Gene-Editing Revolution.” The New England Journal of Medicine 374 (15): 1406–1411. doi:https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1602010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boaz, A., D. Biri, and C. McKevitt. 2016. “Rethinking the Relationship Between Science and Society: Has There Been a Shift in Attitudes to Patient and Public Involvement and Public Engagement in Science in the United Kingdom?” Health Expectations 19 (3): 592–601. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonvillian, W. B., and R. Van Atta. 2011. “ARPA-E and DARPA: Applying the DARPA Model to Energy Innovation.” The Journal of Technology Transfer 36: 469–513. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-011-9223-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borgelt, E. L., S. Dharamsi, and C. T. Scott. 2013. “Dear Student: Stem Cell Scientists’ Advice to the Next Generation.” Cell Stem Cell 12 (6): 652–655. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2013.05.007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovenkerk, B. 2015. “Scientific Responsibility: Should Analysis Start with the Scientists?” The American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12): 66–68. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2015.1103807.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bozeman, B. 2007. Public Values and Public Interest: Counterbalancing Economic Individualism. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bozeman, B., and D. Sarewitz. 2011. “Public Value Mapping and Science Policy Evaluation.” Minerva 49: 1–23. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-011-9161-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brokowski, C. 2018. “Do CRISPR Germline Ethics Statements Cut It?” The CRISPR Journal 1 (2): 115–125. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2017.0024.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brown, N. 2003. “Hope Against Hype—Accountability in Biopasts, Presents and Futures.” Science Studies 16 (2): 3–21.
   Google Scholar
• Burall, S. 2018. “Rethink Public Engagement for Gene Editing.” Nature 555: 438–439. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-03269-3.
   Google Scholar
• Burns, E. T., J. A. Flegal, D. W. Keith, A. Mhajan, D. Tingley, and G. Wagner. 2016. “What Do People Think When They Think About Solar Geoengineering? A Review of Empirical Social Science Literature, and Prospects for Future Research.” Earth’s Future 4 (11): 536–542. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/2016EF000461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bush, V. 1945. Science the Endless Frontier, A Report to the President. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
   Google Scholar
• Callahan, D. 2015. “Gene Editing: Hope, Hype, and Caution.” Hastings Center Post, December, 8. https://web.archive.org/web/20190413112322/https://www.thehastingscenter.org/gene-editing-hope-hype-and-caution/.
   Google Scholar
• Cavalier, D., and E. B. Kennedy. 2016. The Rightful Place of Science: Citizen Science. Tempe, AZ: Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, S., P. J. Donovan, T. Douglas, C. Gyngell, J. Harris, R. Lovell-Badge, D. J. H. Mathews, and A. Regenberg. 2015. “Genome Editing Technologies and Human Germline Genetic Modification: The Hinxton Group Consensus Statement.” The American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12): 42–47. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2015.1103814.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chhetri, N., R. Ghimire, M. Wagner, and M. Wang. 2020. “Global Citizen Deliberation: Case of World-Wide Views on Climate and Energy.” Energy Policy 147: 111892. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111892.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chneiweiss, H., F. Hirsch, L. Montoliu, A. M. Müeller, S. Fenet, M. Abecassis, et al. 2017. “Fostering Responsible Research with Genome Editing Technologies: a European Perspective.” Transgenic Research 26: 709–713. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-017-0028-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Church, G. 2015. “Perspective: Encourage the Innovators.” Nature 528: S7. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/528S7a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Church, G. 2017. “Compelling Reasons for Repairing Human Germlines.” The New England Journal of Medicine 377 (20): 1909–1911. doi:https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1710370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. 2020. “The Latest Round in the CRISPR Patent Battle has an Apparent Victor, But the Fight Continues.” Science September 11. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe7573.
   Google Scholar
• Collingridge, D. 1980. The Social Control of Technology. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Conley, S. N. 2020. “Who Gets to be Born? The Anticipatory Governance of Pre-Implantation Genetic Diagnosis Technology in the United Kingdom from 1978-2001.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 7 (3): 507–527. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2020.1802544.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Contreras, J., and J. S. Sherkow. 2017. “CRISPR, Surrogate Licensing, and Scientific Discovery.” Science 355 (6326): 698–700. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal4222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Couzin, J., and J. Kaiser. 2005. “Gene Therapy: As Gelsinger Case Ends, Gene Therapy Suffers Another Blow.” Science 307 (5712): 1028b. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.307.5712.1028b.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doubleday, R., and B. Wynne. 2011. “Despotism and Democracy in the UK: Experiments in Reframing Citizenship.” In Reframing Rights: Bioconstitutionalism in the Genetic Age, edited by S. Jasanoff, 239–262. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Doudna, J. 2015. “Perspective: Embryo Editing Needs Scrutiny.” Nature 528: S6. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/528S6a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doudna, J. A., and E. Charpentier. 2014. “The new Frontier of Genome Engineering with CRISPR-Cas9.” Science 346 (6213): 1258019-1–1258096-9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1258096.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Douglas, M., and A. Wildavsky. 1982. Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technological and Environmental Dangers. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J. S., D. Nicol, S. Niemeyer, S. Pemberton, N. Curato, A. Bächtiger, P. Batterham, et al. 2020. “Global Citizen Deliberation on Genome Editing.” Science 369 (6510): 1435–1437.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J. S., and A. S. Tucker. 2008. “Deliberative Innovation to Different Effect. Consensus Conferences in Denmark, France, and the United States.” Public Administration Review 68 (5): 864–876. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00928.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durant, J. 1999. “Participatory Technology Assessment and the Democratic Model of the Public Understanding of Science.” Science and Public Policy 26 (5): 313–319. doi:https://doi.org/10.3152/147154399781782329.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2013) 2015. Horizon 2020 Work Programme 2014-2015: 16. Science with and for Society (Revised). http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/wp/2014_2015/main/h2020-wp1415-swfs_en.pdf#14.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, J. H. 2002. Playing God?: Human Genetic Engineering and the Rationalization of Public Bioethical Debate. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Felt, U., and B. Wynne. 2007. 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. Luxembourg, BY: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, E. 2019. “Governing with Ambivalence: The Tentative Origins of Socio-Technical Integration.” Research Policy 48 (5): 1138–1149. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.01.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, E., and G. Maricle. 2015. “Higher-level Responsiveness? Socio-Technical Integration Within US and UK Nanotechnology Research Priority Setting.” Science and Public Policy 42: 72–85. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, E., R. L. Mahajan, and C. Mitcham. 2006. “Midstream Modulation of Technology: Governance from Within. Bulletin of Science.” Technology & Society 26 (6): 485–496. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467606295402.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, E., M. O’Rourke, R. Evans, E. B. Kennedy, M. E. Gorman, and T. P. Seager. 2015. “Mapping the Integrative Field: Taking Stock of Socio-Technical Collaborations.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 2 (1): 39–61. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.1001671.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Funk, C., and M. Hefferon. 2019. “Public Views of Gene Editing for Babies Depend on How it Would be Used.” Pew Research Center Science & Society, July 26. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2018/07/26/public-views-of-gene-editing-for-babies-depend-on-how-it-would-be-used/.
   Google Scholar
• Funtowicz, S., and J. Ravetz. 1993. “Science for the Post-Normal Age.” Futures 25: 739–755. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(93)90022-L.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaskell, G., I. Bard, A. Allansdottir, R. V. da Cunha, P. Eduard, J. Hampel, E. Hildt, et al. 2017. “Public Views on Gene Editing and its Uses.” Nature Biotechnology 35 (11): 1021–1023. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3958.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Genus, A., and A. Stirling. 2018. “Collingridge and the Dilemma of Control: Towards Responsible and Accountable Innovation.” Research Policy 47 (1): 61–69. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.09.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• German Ethics Council. 2019. Intervening in the Human Germline: Opinion-Executive Summary & Recommendations. Translated by A. Sharpe. Berlin: German Ethics Council.
   Google Scholar
• Gewin, V. 2017. “Communication: Post-Truth Predicaments.” Nature 541: 425–427. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7637-425a.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greely, H. T. 2019a. “CRISPR'd Babies: Human Germline Genome Editing in the 'He Jiankui Affair.” Journal of Law and the Biosciences 6 (1): 111–183. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsz010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greely, H. T. 2019b. “Human Germline Genome Editing: An Assessment.” The CRISPR Journal 2 (5): 253–265. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0038.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Guerrini, C. J., M. A. Curnutte, J. S. Sherkow, and C. T. Scott. 2017. “The Rise of the Ethical License.” Nature Biotechnology 35 (1): 22–24. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3756.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guston, D. H. 2010. “The Anticipatory Governance of Emerging Technologies.” Journal of the Korean Vacuum Society 19 (6): 432–441. doi: https://doi.org/10.5757/JKVS.2010.19.6.432
   Google Scholar
• Guston, D. H. 2011. “Participating Despite Questions: Toward a More Confident Participatory Technology Assessment.” Science and Engineering Ethics 17: 691–697. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9314-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guston, D. H. 2014. “Understanding ‘Anticipatory Governance’.” Social Studies of Science 44 (2): 218–242. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312713508669.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guston, D., and D. Sarewitz. 2002. “Real-time Technology Assessment.” Technology in Society 24 (1-2): 93–109. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-791X(01)00047-1.
   Google Scholar
• Halpern, J., S. E. O'Hara, K. W. Doxzen, L. B. Witkowsy, and A. L. Owen. 2019. “Societal and Ethical Impacts of Germline Genome Editing: How Can We Secure Human Rights?” The CRISPR Journal 2 (4): 293–298. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0042.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Harris, J. 2015. “Germline Manipulation and Our Future Worlds.” The American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12): 30–34. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2015.1104163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvard School of Public Health & STAT. 2016. The Public and Genetic Editing, Testing, and Therapy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, A., and B. Salter. 2012. “Anticipatory Governance: Bioethical Expertise for Human/Animal Chimeras.” Science as Culture 21 (3): 291–313. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2011.630069.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HHS [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services]. 1979. The Belmont Report. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report.
   Google Scholar
• Hilgartner, S. 2015. “Capturing the Imaginary: Vanguards, Visions, and the Synthetic Biology Revolution.” In Science and Democracy: Making Knowledge and Making Power in the Biosciences and Beyond, edited by S. Hilgartner, C. Miller, and R. Hagendijk, 33–55. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hurlbut, J. B. 2015. “Limits of Responsibility: Genome Editing, Asilomar, and the Politics of Deliberation.” Hastings Center Report 45 (5): 11–14. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.484.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurlbut, J. B. 2017. Experiments in Democracy: Human Embryo Research and the Politics of Bioethics. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hurlbut, J. B. 2018. “In CRISPR’s World: Genome Editing and the Politics of Global Science.” In Routledge Handbook of Genomics and Society, edited by S. Gibbon, B. Prainsack, S. Hilgartner, and J. Lamoreaux, 2nd ed., 169–178. London: Routledge. doi:https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315451695.
   Google Scholar
• Hurlbut, J. B., S. Jasanoff, K. Saha, A. Ahmed, A. Appiah, E. Bartholet, F. Baylis, et al. 2018. “Building Capacity for a Global Genome Editing Observatory: Conceptual Challenges.” Trends in Biotechnology 36 (7): 639–641. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.04.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jalbert, K., S. M. Rubright, and K. Edelstein. 2017. “The Civic Informatics of FracTracker Alliance: Working with Communities to Understand the Unconventional Oil and Gas Industry.” Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 3: 528–559. doi:https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2017.128.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. 2005. Designs on Nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. 2015. “Future Imperfect: Science, Technology, and the Imaginations of Modernity.” In Dreamscapes of Modernity, edited by Sheila Jasanoff and Sang-Huyn Kim, 1–33. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. 2018. Can Science Make Sense of Life? Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., J. B. Hurlbut, and K. Saha. 2015. “CRISPR Democracy: Gene Editing and the Need for Inclusive Deliberation.” Issues in Science and Technology 32 (1), https://issues.org/crispr-democracy-gene-editing-and-the-need-for-inclusive-deliberation/.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., J. B. Hurlbut, and K. Saha. 2019. “Democratic Governance of Human Germline Genome Editing.” The CRISPR Journal 2 (5): 266–271. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0047.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., and H. R. Simmet. 2017. “No Funeral Bells: Public Reason in a ‘Post-Truth’ Age.” Social Studies of Science 47 (5): 751–770. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312717731936.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S., and J. B. Hurlbut. 2018. “A Global Observatory for Gene Editing.” Nature 555: 435–437. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-018-03270-w.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jinek, M., K. Chylinski, I. Fonfara, M. Hauer, J. A. Doudna, and E. Charpentier. 2012. “A Programmable Dual-RNA-Guided DNA Endonuclease in Adaptive Bacterial Immunity.” Science 337 (6096): 816–821. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1225829.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jinek, M., A. East, A. Cheng, S. Lin, E. Ma, and J. Doudna. 2013. “RNA-programmed Genome Editing in Human Cells.” eLife 2: e00471. doi:https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00471.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joly, P. 2015. “Governing Emerging Technologies? The Need to Think Outside the (Black) Box.” In Science and Democracy: Making Knowledge and Making Power in the Biosciences and Beyond, edited by S. Hilgartner, C. Miller, and R. Hagendijk, 33–55. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D. G., M. Whitaker, and M. King. 2011. “Speculative Ethics: Valid Enterprise or Tragic cul-de-sac?” In Bioethics in the 21st Century (Online), edited by A. Rudnick. Intech. https://www.intechopen.com/books/bioethics-in-the-21st-century/speculative-ethics-valid-enterprise-or-tragic-cul-de-sac-.
   Google Scholar
• Juengst, E. T. 2017. “Crowdsourcing the Moral Limits of Human Gene Editing?” Hastings Center Report 47 (3): 15–23. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.701.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juengst, E. T., G. E. Henderson, R. L. Walker, J. M. Conley, D. MacKay, K. M. Meagher, K. Saylor, M. Waltz, K. J. Kuczynski, and R. J. Cadigan. 2018. “Is Enhancement the Price of Prevention in Human Gene Editing?” The CRISPR Journal 1 (6): 351–354. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2018.0040.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kang, X., W. He, Y. Huang, Q. Yu, Y. Chen, X. Gao, X. Sun, and Y. Fan. 2016. “Introducing Precise Genetic Modifications into Human 3PN Embryos by CRISPR/Cas-Mediated Genome Editing.” Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 33 (5): 581–588. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-016-0710-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan, L., J. Nelson, D. Tomblin, M. Farooque, J. Lloyd, M. Neff, B. Bedsted, and D. Sarewitz. 2019. Exploring Democratic Governance of Geoengineering Research Through Public and Stakeholder Engagement. Washington, DC: Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes.
   Google Scholar
• Kim, J. 2016. “Genome Editing Comes of Age.” Nature Protocols 11 (9): 1573–1578. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2016.104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, N. M. P., P. C. Lord, and D. E. Lemley. 2017. “Editing the Genome: Prospects, Progress, Implications, and Cautions.” Current Genetic Medicine Reports 5: 35–43. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s40142-017-0109-6.
   Google Scholar
• Knoppers, B. M., and E. Kleiderman. 2019. “Heritable Genome Editing: Who Speaks for “Future” Children?” The CRISPR Journal 2 (5): 285–292. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0019.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Konrad, K., H. Van Lente, C. Groves, and C. Selin. 2016. “Performing and Governing the Future in Science and Technology.” In The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, edited by U. Felt, R. Fouché, C. Miller, and L. Smith-Doerr, 4th ed., 465–494. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kostick, K., L. R. Folwer, and C. T. Scott. 2019. “A Matter of Life and Longer Life.” Journal of Aging Studies 50: 100800. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2019.100800.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krimsky, S. 2019. “The Moral Choices on CRISPR Babies.” The American Journal of Bioethics 19 (1): 15–16. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2019.1644824.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuzdas, C., and A. Wiek. 2014. “Governance Scenarios for Addressing Water Conflicts and Climate Change Impacts.” Environmental Science & Policy 42: 181–196. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2014.06.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuzma, J., F. Gould, Z. Brown, J. Collins, J. Delborne, E. Frow, K. Esvelt, et al. 2018. “A Roadmap for Gene Drives: Using Institutional Analysis and Development to Frame Research Needs and Governance in a Systems Context.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 5 (sup1): S13–S39. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1410344.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Lancet. 2017. “Genome Editing: Science, Ethics, and Public Engagement.” The Lancet 390: 625. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32209-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lander, E. S., F. Baylis, F. Zhang, E. Charpentier, P. Berg, C. Bourgain, B. Friedrich, et al. 2019. “Adopt a Moratorium on Heritable Genome Editing.” Nature 567: 165–168. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00726-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lanphier, E., F. Urnov, S. E. Haecker, M. Werner, and J. Smolenski. 2015. “Don't Edit the Human Germ Line.” Nature 519 (7544): 410–411. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/519410a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang, P., Y. Xu, X. Zhang, C. Ding, R. Huang, Z. Zhang, J. Lv, et al. 2015. “CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Gene Editing in Human Tripronuclear Zygotes.” Protein & Cell 6 (5): 363–372. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s13238-015-0153-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma, H., N. Marti-Gutierrez, S. Park, J. Wu, Y. Lee, K. Suzuki, A. Koski, et al. 2017. “Correction of a Pathogenic Gene Mutation in Human Embryos.” Nature 548: 413–419. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nature23305.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macintosh, K. L. 2019. “Heritable Genome Editing and the Downsides of a Global Moratorium.” The CRISPR Journal 2 (5): 272–279. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0016.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mali, P., L. Yang, K. M. Esvelt, J. Aach, M. Guell, J. E. DiCarlo, J. E. Norville, and G. M. Church. 2013. “RNA-guided Human Genome Engineering via Cas9.” Science 339 (6121): 823–826. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1232033.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mathews, D. J. H., R. Lovell-Badge, S. Chan, P. J. Donovan, T. Douglas, C. Gyngell, J. Harris, and A. Regenberg. 2015. “A Path Through the Thicket.” Nature 527: 160–161. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/527159a.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michelson, E. S. 2016. Assessing the Societal Implications of Emerging Technologies. Milton Park: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Michie, M., and M. Allyse. 2019. “Gene Modification Therapies: Views of Parents of People with Down Syndrome.” Genetics in Medicine 21 (2): 487–492. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-018-0077-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles, I., J. C. Harper, L. Georghiou, M. Keenan, and R. Popper. 2008. “The Many Faces of Foresight.” In The Handbook of Technology Foresight: Concepts and Practice, edited by L. Georghiou, J. C. Harper, M. Keenan, I. Miles, and R. Popper, 3–23. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, J. C., S. Tan, G. Qiao, K. A. Barlow, J. Wang, D. F. Xia, X. Meng, et al. 2011. “A TALE Nuclease Architecture for Efficient Genome Editing.” Nature Biotechnology 29: 143–148. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.1755.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mintz, R. L., J. D. Loike, and R. L. Fischbach. 2019. “Will CRISPR Germline Engineering Close the Door to an Open Future?” Science and Engineering Ethics 25: 1409–1423. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0069-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montoliu, L., J. Merchant, F. Hirsch, M. Abecassis, P. Jouannet, B. Baertschi, C. Sarrauste de Menthiére, and H. Chneiweiss. 2018. “ARRIGE Arrives: Toward the Responsible Use of Genome Editing.” The CRISPR Journal 1 (2): 128–130. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2018.29013.mil.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• National Academy of Sciences. 2020. Heritable Human Genome Editing. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:https://doi.org/10.17226/25665.
   Google Scholar
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2015. “On Human Gene Editing: International Summit Statement.” December 3, https://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12032015a.
   Google Scholar
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. “On Human Genome Editing II: Statement by the Organizing Committee of the Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing.” November 29, http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=11282018b.
   Google Scholar
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2017. 2017. Human Genome Editing: Science, Ethics, and Governance. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:https://doi.org/10.17226/24623.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. 2008. Public Participation in Environmental Assessment and Decision Making. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Neuhaus, C. P., and A. L. Caplan. 2017. “Genome Editing: Bioethics Shows the Way.” PLoS Biology 15 (3): e2001934. doi:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2001934.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordmann, A. 2010. “A Forensics of Wishing: Technology Assessment in the Age of Technoscience.” Poiesis & Praxis 7 (1-2): 5–15. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10202-010-0081-7.
   Google Scholar
• Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 2016. Genome Editing: An Ethical Review. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
   Google Scholar
• Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 2018. Genome Editing and Human Reproduction: Social and Ethical Issues. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
   Google Scholar
• Ogilvy, J., and P. Schwartz. 2004. Plotting Your Scenarios. Emeryville, CA: Global Business Network.
   Google Scholar
• Ormond, K. E., D. P. Mortlock, D. T. Scholes, Y. Bombard, L. C. Brody, W. A. Faucett, N. A. Garrison, et al. 2017. “ASHG Position Statement: Human Germline Genome Editing.” The American Journal of Human Genetics 101: 167–176. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2017.06.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen, R., P. Macnaghten, and J. Stilgoe. 2012. “Responsible Research and Innovation: From Science in Society to Science for Society, with Society.” Science and Public Policy 39 (6): 751–760. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs093.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pei, D., D. W. Beier, E. Levy-Lahad, G. Marchang, J. Rossant, J. C. I. Belmote, R. Lovell-Badge, R. Jaenisch, A. Charo, and D. Baltimore. 2017. “Human Embryo Editing: Opportunities and Importance of Transnational Cooperation.” Cell Stem Cell 21: 423–426. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stem.2017.09.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center. 2015. “Public Views About Biomedical Issues.” Chap. 5 in Americans, Politics and Science Issues, 105–126. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2015/07/2015-07-01_science-and-politics_FINAL-1.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center. 2016a. U.S. Public Wary About Use of Biomedical Technologies to ‘Enhance’ Human Abilities. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
   Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center. 2016b. American Voices on Ways Human Enhancement Could Shape Our Future. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
   Google Scholar
• Pielke, R. A., Jr. 2007. The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511818110.
   Google Scholar
• Polanyi, M. 1962. “The Republic of Science.” Minerva 1 (1): 54–73. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01101453.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Racine, E. R., T. Martin Rubio, J. Chandler, C. Fortini, and J. Lucke. 2014. “The Value and Pitfalls of Speculation About Science and Technology in Bioethics: The Case of Cognitive Enhancement.” Medicine, Health Care, and Philosophy 17 (3): 325–337. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-013-9539-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rai, A. K., and R. Cook-Deegan. 2017. “Racing for Academic Glory and Patents: Lessons from CRISPR.” Science 358 (6365): 874–876. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao2468.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ramírez, R., and C. Selin. 2014. “Plausibility and Probability in Scenario Planning.” Foresight 16 (1): 54–74. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/FS-08-2012-0061.
   Google Scholar
• Ramsay, S. 2001. “No Closure in Sight for the 10/90 Health Research Gap.” The Lancet 358: 1348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rask, M. 2013. “The Tragedy of Citizen Deliberation—Two Cases of Participatory Technology Assessment.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 33–55. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2012.751012.
   Google Scholar
• Rask, M., and R. Worthington. 2015. Governing Biodiversity Through Democratic Deliberation. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Rayner, S., and R. Cantor. 1987. “How Fair is Safe Enough? The Cultural Approach to Societal Technology Choice.” Risk Analysis 7 (1): 3–9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1987.tb00963.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regalado, A. 2018. “EXCLUSIVE: Chinese Scientists are Creating CRISPR Babies.” MIT Technology Review, November 25 (online). https://www.technologyreview.com/2018/11/25/138962/exclusive-chinese-scientists-are-creating-crispr-babies/.
   Google Scholar
• Ribeiro, B., L. Bengtsson, P. Benneworth, S. Bührer, E. Castro-Martínez, M. Hansen, K. Jarmai, et al. 2018. “Introducing the Dilemma of Societal Alignment for Inclusive and Responsible Research and Innovation.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 5 (3): 316–331. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2018.1495033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riggan, K. A., R. R. Sharp, and M. Allyse. 2019. “Where Will We Draw the Line? Public Opinions of Human Gene Editing.” Qualitative Health Research 29 (12): 1823–1835. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732319846867.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez, H., E. Fisher, and D. Schuurbiers. 2013. “Integrating Science and Society in European Framework Programmes: Trends in Project-Level Solicitations.” Research Policy 42 (5): 1126–1137. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.02.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, K. M., K. Korzekwa, D. Brossard, D. A. Scheufele, and L. Heisler. 2017. “Engaging the Public at a Science Festival: Findings from a Panel on Human Gene Editing.” Science Communication 39 (2): 250–277. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547017697981.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenberg, N. 1994. Exploring the Black Box: Technology Economics and History. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rueda-Sabater, E., and D. Derosby. 2011. “The Evolving Internet in 2025: Four Scenarios.” Strategy & Leadership 39 (1): 32–38. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/10878571111095402.
   Google Scholar
• Saey, T. H. 2019. “CRISPR Enters its First Human Clinical Trials.” Science News, August 14 (online). https://www.sciencenews.org/article/crispr-gene-editor-first-human-clinical-trials.
   Google Scholar
• Saha, K., J. B. Hurlbut, S. Jasanoff, A. Ahmed, A. Appiah, E. Bartholet, F. Baylis, et al. 2018. “Building Capacity for a Global Genome Editing Observatory: Institutional Design.” Trends in Biotechnology 36 (8): 741–743. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.04.008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarewitz, D. R. 2015. “CRISPR: Science Can't Solve it.” Nature 522 (7557): 413–414. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/522413a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarewitz, D. R., and R. A. Pielke, Jr. 2000. “Prediction in Science and Policy.” In Prediction: Science, Decision Making, and the Future of Nature, edited by D. Sarewitz, R. A. Pielke, Jr., and R. A. Byerly, Jr., 11–22. Covelo, CA: Island Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sarewitz, D. R., and R. A. Pielke, Jr. 2007. “The Neglected Heart of Science Policy: Reconciling Supply of and Demand for Science.” Environmental Science & Policy 10: 5–16. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2006.10.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheufele, D. A., M. A. Xenos, E. L. Howell, K. M. Rose, D. Brossard, and B. W. Hardy. 2017. “U.S. Attitudes on Human Genome Editing.” Science 357 (6351): 553–554. doi:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan3708.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schick, A. 2017. “Bioethics and the Legitimation/Regulation of the Imagined Future.” In Imagined Futures in Science, Technology and Society, edited by G. Verschraegen, F. Vandermoere, L. Braeckmans, and B. Segaert, 15–44. New York, NY: Routledge. doi:https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315440842.
   Google Scholar
• Sclove, R. 2010. Reinventing Technology Assessment: A 21st Century Model. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, C. T., and L. DeFrancesco. 2015. “Selling Long Life.” Nature Biotechnology 33: 31–40. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, C. T., and C. Selin. 2019. “What to Expect When Expecting CRISPR Baby Number Four.” The American Journal of Bioethics 19 (3): 7–9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2018.1562793.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selin, C. 2008. “The Sociology of the Future: Tracing Stories of Technology and Time.” Sociology Compass 2(6): 1878–1895. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00147.x.
   Google Scholar
• Selin, C. 2012. “Professional Dreamers: The Future in the Past of Scenario Planning.” In Scenarios for Success: Turning Insights into Action, edited by B. Sharpe, and K. Van der Heijden, 27–52. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Selin, C. 2014. “On not Forgetting Futures.” Journal of Responsible Innovation 1 (1): 103–108. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.884378.
   Google Scholar
• Selin, C. 2015. “Merging Art and Design in Foresight: Making Sense of Emerge.” Futures 70: 24–35. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.12.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Selin, C., K. Campbell Rawlings, K. de Ridder-Vignone, J. Sadowski, C. Altamirano Allende, G. Gano, S. R. Davies, and D. H. Guston. 2017. “Experiments in Engagement: Designing Public Engagement with Science and Technology for Capacity Building.” Public Understanding of Science 26 (6): 634–649. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515620970.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shakespeare, T. 2015. “Gene Editing: Heed Disability Views.” Nature 527: 446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma, A., and C. T. Scott. 2015. “The Ethics of Publishing Human Germline Research.” Nature Biotechnology 33 (6): 590–592. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sherkow, J. S. 2019. “Controlling CRISPR Through Law: Legal Regimes as Precautionary Principles.” The CRISPR Journal 2 (5): 299–303. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0029.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smolenski, J. 2015. “CRISPR/Cas9 and Germline Modification: New Difficulties in Obtaining Informed Consent.” The American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12): 35–37. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2015.1103816.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spivak, R. A., I. G. Cohen, and E. Y. Adashi. 2017. “Germ-line Gene Editing and Congressional Reaction in Context: Learning from Almost 50 Years of Congressional Reactions to Biomedical Breakthroughs.” Journal of Law & Health 30(1): 20–54.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• STAT. 2016. “STAT’s Stats of the Year: 2016 by the Numbers.” STAT (online). https://www.statnews.com/2016/12/28/stat-stats-year-in-numbers/.
   Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, J., S. J. Lock, and J. Wilsdon. 2014. “Why Should We Promote Public Engagement with Science?” Public Understanding of Science 23 (1): 4–15. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513518154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stilgoe, J., R. Owen, and P. Macnaghten. 2013. “Developing a Framework for Responsible Innovation.” Research Policy 42 (9): 1568–1580. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling, A. 2008. ““Opening up” and “Closing Down”: Power, Participation, and Pluralism in the Social Appraisal of Technology.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 33 (2): 262–294. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243907311265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stokes, D. E. 1997. Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tomblin, D., Z. Pirtle, M. Farooque, D. Sittenfeld, E. Mahoney, R. Worthington, G. Gano, et al. 2017. “Integrating Public Deliberation into Engineering Systems: Participatory Technology Assessment of NASA’s Asteroid Redirect Mission.” Astropolitics 15 (2): 141–166. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14777622.2017.1340823.
   Google Scholar
• Toulmin, S. 1961. “Forecasting and Understanding.” Chap 1 in Foresight and Understanding, 18–43. New York, NY: Harper Torchbooks.
   Google Scholar
• Toulmin, S. 1966. “The Complexity of Scientific Choice II: Culture, Overheads, or Tertiary Industry?” Minerva 4 (2): 155–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urnov, F. D., J. C. Miller, Y. Lee, C. M. Beausejour, J. M. Rock, S. Augustus, A. C. Jamieson, M. H. Porteus, P. D. Gregory, and M. C. Holmes. 2005. “Highly Efficient Endogenous Human Gene Correction Using Designed Zinc-Finger Nucleases.” Nature 435: 646–651. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03556.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Mil, A., H. Hopkins, and S. Kinsella. 2017. Potential Uses for Genetic Technologies: Dialogue and Engagement Research Conducted on Behalf of the Royal Society. Hopkins Van Mil. https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/publications/2018/genetic-technologies-public-dialogue/.
   Google Scholar
• Vidyasagar, D. 2006. “Global Notes: The 10/90 Gap Disparities in Global Health Research.” Journal of Perianatology 26: 55–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viotti, M., A. R. Victor, D. K. Griffin, J. S. Groob, A. J. Brake, C. G. Zouves, and F. L. Barnes. 2019. “Estimating Demand for Germline Genome Editing: An in vitro Fertilization Clinic Perspective.” The CRISPR Journal 2 (5): 304–315. doi:https://doi.org/10.1089/crispr.2019.0044.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• von Schomberg, R. 2013. “A Vision of Responsible Research and Innovation.” In Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society, edited by R. Owen, J. Bessant, and M. Heintz, 51–74. West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118551424.ch3.
   Google Scholar
• Wade, N. 1999. “Patient Dies during a Trial of Therapy Using Genes.” The New York Times, September 29 (online). Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/29/us/patient-dies-during-a-trial-of-therapy-using-genes.html.
   Google Scholar
• Weinberg, A. M. 1972. “Science and Trans-Science.” Minerva 10 (2): 209–222. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01682418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weisberg, S. M., D. Badgio, and A. Chatterjee. 2017. “A CRISPR New World: Attitudes in the Public Toward Innovations in Human Genetic Modification.” Frontiers in Public Health 5 (117), doi:https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2017.00117.
   Google Scholar
• Whitman, D., J. Love, G. Rainville, and L. Skufca. 2018. U.S. Public Opinion & Interest on Human Enhancements Technology. Washington, DC: AARP Research. doi:https://doi.org/10.26419/res.00192.001.
   Google Scholar
• Wiek, A., L. Gasser, and M. Siegrist. 2009. “Systemic Scenarios of Nanotechnology: Sustainable Governance of Emerging Technologies.” Futures 41 (5): 284–300. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2008.11.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilsdon, J., and R. Willis. 2004. See-through Science: Why Public Engagement Needs to Move Upstream. London: Demos. doi:https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3844.3681.
   Google Scholar
• Wired. August 2015. Cover. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/designer_genes_cover.jpg.
   Google Scholar
• Wired. April 2019. Cover. Retrieved from https://media.wired.com/photos/5c8985f8ee28c70e73e44087/master/w_1258,h_1655,c_limit/2704_crispr_cover_carve.jpg.
   Google Scholar
• Withycombe Keeler, L. 2014. “Quenching Our Thirst for Future Knowledge: Participatory Scenario Construction and Sustainable Water Governance in a Desert City.” Doctoral diss., Arizona State University.
   Google Scholar
• Withycombe Keeler, L., M. J. Bernstein, and A. D. Hudson. 2020. The Future of Ageing in Smart Environments: Scenarios of 2050 [workshop report]. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University School for the Future of Innovation in Society, Global Futures Laboratory, and The Global KAITEKI Center.
   Google Scholar
• Withycombe Keeler, L., M. J. Bernstein, and C. Selin. 2019. “Intervening Through Futures for Sustainability Presents: Scenarios, Sustainability, and Responsible Research and Innovation.” In Socio-Technical Futures Shaping the Present, edited by A. Lösch, A. Grunwald, M. Meister, and I. Schulz-Schaeffer, 255–282. Wiesbaden, DE: Springer VS. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27155-8_12.
   Google Scholar
• Wolpe, P. R., K. S. Rommelfanger, and the Drafting and Reviewing Delegates of the BEINGS Working Groups. 2017. “Ethical Principles for the Use of Human Cellular Biotechnologies.” Nature Biotechnology 35 (11): 1050–1058. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. 2020. Advisory Committee on Developing Global Standards for Governance and Oversight of Human Genome Editing—Call for Contributions. https://www.who.int/ethics/topics/human-genome-editing/consultation-2020/en/.
   Google Scholar
• Wynne, B. 2001. “Creating Public Alienation: Expert Cultures of Risk and Ethics on GMOs.” Science as Culture 10 (4): 445–481. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09505430120093586.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wynne, B. 2006. “Public Engagement as a Means of Restoring Public Trust in Science—Hitting the Notes, but Missing the Music?” Public Health Genomics 9 (3): 211–220. doi:https://doi.org/10.1159/000092659.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar