Stakeholder Involvement in the Governance of Human Genome Editing in Japan

被引:0
|
作者
Tatsuki Aikyo
Atsushi Kogetsu
Kazuto Kato
机构
[1] Osaka University,Department of Biomedical Ethics and Public Policy, Graduate School of Medicine
[2] Hiroshima University,Graduate School of Biomedical and Health Sciences
来源
Asian Bioethics Review | 2023年 / 15卷
关键词
Human genome editing; Human embryo research; Expert panel on Bioethics; Japan; Ethics review; Governance; Stakeholder involvement;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Genome editing is a technology that can accurately and efficiently modify the genome of organisms, including the human genome. Although human genome editing (HGE) has many benefits, it also involves technical risks and ethical, legal, and social issues. Thus, the pros and cons of using this technology have been actively debated since 2015. Notably, the research community has taken an interest in the issue and has discussed it internationally. However, for the governance of HGE, the roles of government agencies and the general public are also important for an effective regulatory system. Here, we examine the roles of the research community, government, and public in the governance of HGE through an analysis of discussions in the Japanese Expert Panel on Bioethics. During the discussion of the research ethics review system, the professionalism of the research community and the pros and cons of state oversight have become issues for debate. Furthermore, through an examination of the overall policy-making process, three stakeholders are clearly involved in the governance of emerging medical technologies in the Expert Panel on Bioethics, a discussion forum established by government agencies. The contrast among these roles provides insight into the positive roles of government agencies and the research community and the conditions under which these roles are played. We also note that there are diverse actors in the public, which may have an impact on their participation. Our results may serve as a guide for countries and organizations to establish governance on emerging medical technologies.
引用
收藏
页码:431 / 455
页数:24
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Stakeholder Involvement in the Governance of Human Genome Editing in Japan
    Aikyo, Tatsuki
    Kogetsu, Atsushi
    Kato, Kazuto
    [J]. ASIAN BIOETHICS REVIEW, 2023, 15 (04) : 431 - 455
  • [2] Democratic Governance of Human Germline Genome Editing
    Jasanoff, Sheila
    Hurlbut, J. Benjamin
    Saha, Krishanu
    [J]. CRISPR JOURNAL, 2019, 2 (05): : 266 - 271
  • [3] Regulatory and governance gaps for human genome editing in Mexico
    Aquino-Jarquin, Guillermo
    [J]. TRENDS IN BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2024, 42 (06) : 665 - 670
  • [4] Toward inclusive global governance of human genome editing
    Yu, Hanzhi
    Xue, Lan
    Barrangou, Rodolphe
    Chen, Shaowei
    Huang, Ying
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2021, 118 (47)
  • [5] IMPERATIVES OF GOVERNANCE human genome editing and the problem of progress
    Hurlbut, J. Benjamin
    [J]. PERSPECTIVES IN BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE, 2020, 63 (01) : 177 - 194
  • [6] Global Governance of Human Genome Editing: What Are the Rules?
    Marchant, Gary E.
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF GENOMICS AND HUMAN GENETICS, VOL 22, 2021, 2021, 22 : 385 - 405
  • [7] Responsible governance of human germline genome editing in China†
    Peng, Yaojin
    Lv, Jianwei
    Ding, Lulu
    Gong, Xia
    Zhou, Qi
    [J]. BIOLOGY OF REPRODUCTION, 2022, 107 (01) : 261 - 268
  • [8] Human heritable genome editing and its governance: views of scientists and governance professionals
    Cadigan, R. Jean
    Waltz, Margaret
    Conley, John M.
    Major, Rami M.
    Branch, Elizabeth K.
    Juengst, Eric T.
    Flatt, Michael A.
    [J]. NEW GENETICS AND SOCIETY, 2024, 43 (01)
  • [9] The Intrinsic Value of Public Deliberation in the Governance of Human Genome Editing
    Kamenova, Kalina
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS, 2023, 23 (07): : 63 - 65
  • [10] Stakeholder and Public Involvement in Risk Governance
    Ortwin Renn
    [J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 2015, 6 : 8 - 20