Literature DB >> 31847781

Articulating 'free, prior and informed consent' (FPIC) for engineered gene drives.

Dalton R George1,2, Todd Kuiken1, Jason A Delborne1,2.   

Abstract

Recent statements by United Nations bodies point to free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) as a potential requirement in the development of engineered gene drive applications. As a concept developed in the context of protecting Indigenous rights to self-determination in land development scenarios, FPIC would need to be extended to apply to the context of ecological editing. Without an explicit framework of application, FPIC could be interpreted as a narrowly framed process of community consultation focused on the social implications of technology, and award little formal or advisory power in decision-making to Indigenous peoples and local communities. In this paper, we argue for an articulation of FPIC that attends to issues of transparency, iterative community-scale consent, and shared power through co-development among Indigenous peoples, local communities, researchers and technology developers. In realizing a comprehensive FPIC process, researchers and developers have an opportunity to incorporate enhanced participation and social guidance mechanisms into the design, development and implementation of engineered gene drive applications.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Convention on Biological Diversity; community engagement; indigenous peoples; public engagement; responsible research and innovation; synthetic biology

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31847781      PMCID: PMC6939908          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2019.1484

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  27 in total

1.  Ethics. Protecting communities in biomedical research.

Authors:  C Weijer; E J Emanuel
Journal:  Science       Date:  2000-08-18       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Community-based participatory research contributions to intervention research: the intersection of science and practice to improve health equity.

Authors:  Nina Wallerstein; Bonnie Duran
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2010-02-10       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Ethical lessons from a tale of two genetically modified insects.

Authors:  Carolyn P Neuhaus; Arthur L Caplan
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 54.908

4.  Promises and perils of gene drives: Navigating the communication of complex, post-normal science.

Authors:  Dominique Brossard; Pam Belluck; Fred Gould; Christopher D Wirz
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-01-14       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Considerations for the governance of gene drive organisms.

Authors:  Larisa Rudenko; Megan J Palmer; Kenneth Oye
Journal:  Pathog Glob Health       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Completing the circle: a model for effective community review of environmental health research.

Authors:  Beverly Xaviera Watkins; Peggy Morrow Shepard; Cecil D Corbin-Mark
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Informed consent in field trials of gene-drive mosquitoes.

Authors:  Pamela A Kolopack; James V Lavery
Journal:  Gates Open Res       Date:  2017-12-11

8.  Mice Against Ticks: an experimental community-guided effort to prevent tick-borne disease by altering the shared environment.

Authors:  Joanna Buchthal; Sam Weiss Evans; Jeantine Lunshof; Sam R Telford; Kevin M Esvelt
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2019-05-13       Impact factor: 6.237

9.  Does the U.S. public support using gene drives in agriculture? And what do they want to know?

Authors:  Michael S Jones; Jason A Delborne; Johanna Elsensohn; Paul D Mitchell; Zachary S Brown
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 14.136

Review 10.  Gene drives in our future: challenges of and opportunities for using a self-sustaining technology in pest and vector management.

Authors:  James P Collins
Journal:  BMC Proc       Date:  2018-07-19
View more
  3 in total

1.  Ugandan stakeholder hopes and concerns about gene drive mosquitoes for malaria control: new directions for gene drive risk governance.

Authors:  Sarah Hartley; Robert D J Smith; Adam Kokotovich; Chris Opesen; Tibebu Habtewold; Katie Ledingham; Ben Raymond; Charles B Rwabukwali
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2021-03-16       Impact factor: 2.979

2.  Gene drive: progress and prospects.

Authors:  N Wedell; T A R Price; A K Lindholm
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Articulating ethical principles guiding Target Malaria's engagement strategy.

Authors:  Aaron J Roberts; Delphine Thizy
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2022-02-05       Impact factor: 2.979

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.