合成生物学之谜:关于公众对治理框架反思的定性研究。

Systems and Synthetic Biology Pub Date : 2015-12-01 Epub Date: 2015-10-05 DOI:10.1007/s11693-015-9182-x
Johannes Starkbaum, Matthias Braun, Peter Dabrock
{"title":"合成生物学之谜:关于公众对治理框架反思的定性研究。","authors":"Johannes Starkbaum, Matthias Braun, Peter Dabrock","doi":"10.1007/s11693-015-9182-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Synthetic biology is currently one of the most debated emerging biotechnologies. The societal assessment of this technology is primarily based on contributions by scientists and policy makers, who focus mainly on technical challenges and possible risks. While public dialogue is given, it is yet rather limited. This study explores public debates concerning synthetic biology based on a focus group study with citizens from Austria and Germany and contextualises the analysed public views with content from policy reports and previous empirical studies on public engagement. The findings suggest that discussants favoured a gradual implementation process of synthetic biology, which is receptive to questions about the distribution of possible benefits. The discussed topics correspond in many ways with content from policy reports and former investigations, yet the emphasis of the discussions was different for many aspects.</p>","PeriodicalId":22161,"journal":{"name":"Systems and Synthetic Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5383795/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The synthetic biology puzzle: a qualitative study on public reflections towards a governance framework.\",\"authors\":\"Johannes Starkbaum, Matthias Braun, Peter Dabrock\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11693-015-9182-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Synthetic biology is currently one of the most debated emerging biotechnologies. The societal assessment of this technology is primarily based on contributions by scientists and policy makers, who focus mainly on technical challenges and possible risks. While public dialogue is given, it is yet rather limited. This study explores public debates concerning synthetic biology based on a focus group study with citizens from Austria and Germany and contextualises the analysed public views with content from policy reports and previous empirical studies on public engagement. The findings suggest that discussants favoured a gradual implementation process of synthetic biology, which is receptive to questions about the distribution of possible benefits. The discussed topics correspond in many ways with content from policy reports and former investigations, yet the emphasis of the discussions was different for many aspects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22161,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Systems and Synthetic Biology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5383795/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Systems and Synthetic Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11693-015-9182-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2015/10/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systems and Synthetic Biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11693-015-9182-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/10/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

合成生物学是目前争论最多的新兴生物技术之一。对这项技术的社会评估主要基于科学家和政策制定者的贡献,他们主要关注技术挑战和可能的风险。虽然也有公众对话,但相当有限。本研究基于对奥地利和德国公民的焦点小组研究,探讨了有关合成生物学的公众辩论,并将分析的公众观点与政策报告内容和以往有关公众参与的实证研究结合起来。研究结果表明,讨论者倾向于合成生物学的逐步实施过程,这有利于接受有关可能利益分配的问题。讨论的话题在很多方面与政策报告和以往调查的内容一致,但讨论的重点在很多方面有所不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The synthetic biology puzzle: a qualitative study on public reflections towards a governance framework.

Synthetic biology is currently one of the most debated emerging biotechnologies. The societal assessment of this technology is primarily based on contributions by scientists and policy makers, who focus mainly on technical challenges and possible risks. While public dialogue is given, it is yet rather limited. This study explores public debates concerning synthetic biology based on a focus group study with citizens from Austria and Germany and contextualises the analysed public views with content from policy reports and previous empirical studies on public engagement. The findings suggest that discussants favoured a gradual implementation process of synthetic biology, which is receptive to questions about the distribution of possible benefits. The discussed topics correspond in many ways with content from policy reports and former investigations, yet the emphasis of the discussions was different for many aspects.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Predicting stable functional peptides from the intergenic space of E. coli. The role of CRKL in breast cancer metastasis: insights from systems biology. The synthetic biology puzzle: a qualitative study on public reflections towards a governance framework. Exploring the differences in metabolic behavior of astrocyte and glioblastoma: a flux balance analysis approach. Evolving modular genetic regulatory networks with a recursive, top-down approach.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1