Mammal Cloning: Regulation and Public Participation in Argentina and the United Kingdom
Keywords:
cloning, regulation, participation, publicAbstract
Since the birth of the first mammal cloned from adult cells (Dolly the sheep, in 1996), the technique has not stopped being perfected. Although it gave rise to warnings and lively controversies, the regulations that control these scientific-technological developments did not always evolve at the same pace. This article analyzes the standards and institutions of the United Kingdom and Argentina that are responsible for the supervision, evaluation and approval of research and development regarding mammalian cloning and other techniques derived from it. It shows that these two countries established their regulatory system in radically different ways, and identifies possible hypotheses for this, which are mainly economic, but also historical and cultural. At the same time, it shows that these two different models for monitoring and controlling cloning give rise to two different forms of participation in science and technology decision-making. One of them privileges a more democratic component, contemplating to a greater extent the opinion of the lay public, while the other focuses on the opinion of experts.Downloads
References
AUGSTEN, F. (2005): “El debate actual sobre el uso de biotecnología en la Unión Europea, algunas implicaciones para los países del sur”, en J. Villareal, S. Helfrich y A. Calvillo (eds.): ¿Un mundo patentado? La privatización de la vida y del conocimiento, Ediciones Böll, pp. 122-147.
BAUER, M., DURANT, J., GASKELL, G., LIAKOPOULOS, M. y BRIDGMAN, E. (1998): “United Kingdom”, en J. Durant, M. Bauer y G. Gaskell (eds.): Biotechnology in the public sphere. A European Sourcebook, Londres, Science Museum, pp. 162-176.
BEST, J. (2008): Social problems, Estados Unidos, Norton & Company.
BILAÑSKI, G. (2018a): “El derecho de los animales no-humanos desde la perspectiva de la política de las necesidades”, Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Críticos Animales, año 5, vol. 1, pp. 109-121.
BILAÑSKI, G. (2018b): LA CLONACIÓN FUERA DEL LABORATORIO: Un análisis de los eventos, regulaciones y debates en Argentina y Reino Unido, tesis de maestría, Buenos Aires, IDAES-UNSAM.
CECTE (2004): Informe y recomendaciones sobre clonación humana, Argentina. Disponible en: www.mincyt.gob.ar/_post/descargar.php?idAdjuntoArchivo=44381. Consultado el 21/02/2019.
CENTER FOR GENETICS AND SOCIETY (2006): A decade after Dolly.
COUNCIL OF EUROPE (1998): “Additional Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine, on the Prohibition of Cloning Human Beings”, Europe Treaty Series, n° 168.
DELLACHA, J. M., CARULLO, J. C., PLONSKY, G. A. y DE JESÚS, K. E. (2003): La biotecnología en el Mercosur: Regulación de la bioseguridad y de la Propiedad Intelectual, Santa Fe, Ediciones UNL.
DEPARTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENT FOOD & RURAL AFFAIRS (s/f): About us. Disponible en: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs/about. Consultado el 21/02/2019.
ELMUNDO (14/02/2001): “El Parlamento Europeo aprueba el fin de la moratoria para los transgénicos”, El Mundo, 14 de febrero. Disponible en: https://www.elmundo.es/elmundosalud/2001/02/14/medicina/982155816.html. Consultado el 21/02/2019.
EMA (2017): About us. Disponible en: https://www.ema.europa.eu/documents/other/about-us-european-medicines-agency-ema_en.pdf. Consultado el 21/02/2019.
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT NEWS (2015): “Cloning for food: MEPs vote on plans to ban the practice”, en: European Parliament News, 7 de septiembre. Disponible en: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/economy/20150617STO67201/cloning-for-food-meps-vote-on-plans-to-ban-the-practice. Consultado el 21/02/2019.
GACTEC (1997): “Documento n° 5: Programa de Biotecnología”, Plan Nacional Plurianual de Ciencia y Tecnología 1998-2000, Argentina.
HAMILTON, S. (2003): “Traces of the Future: Biotechnology, Science Fiction, and the Media”, Science Fiction Studies, vol. 30, n° 2, pp. 267-282.
HFEA (s/f a): About us. Disponible en: https://www.hfea.gov.uk/about-us/. Consultado el 21/02/2019.
HFEA (s/f b): Cloning issues in reproductive science. Disponible en: http://hfeaarchive.uksouth.cloudapp.azure.com/www.hfea.gov.uk/hfea/rss/518.html. Consultado el 01/11/2016.
HFEA (2004): HFEA grants the first therapeutic cloning licence for research. Disponible en: http://www.hfea.gov.uk/758.html. Consultado el 06/02/2017.
HFEA (2009): Changes to legislation 1991-2004. Disponible en: http://hfeaarchive.uksouth.cloudapp.azure.com/www.hfea.gov.uk/2221.html. Consultado el 23/01/2018.
HGAC y HFEA (1998): Cloning issues in reproduction, science and medicine.
HOLLIMAN, R. (2004): “Media coverage of cloning: a study of media content, production and reception”, Public Understanding of Science, n° 13, pp. 107-130.
MANIN, B., PRZEWORSKI, A. y STOKES, S. (1999): “Elections and representation”, en A. Przeworski, S. Stokes y B. Manin (eds.): Democracy, accountability and representation, Estados Unidos, Cambridge University Press.
MHRA (s/f): About us. Disponible en: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/medicines-and-healthcare-products-regulatory-agency/about. Consultado el 26/01/2018.
MINCYT (2010): Boletín Estadístico Tecnológico: Biotecnología, n° 4, diciembre-marzo. Disponible en: www.mincyt.gob.ar/_post/descargar.php?idAdjuntoArchivo=22513. Consultado el 21/02/2019.
NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE (2003): Reaping the Rewards of Agricultural Research, Londres, Stationery Office. Disponible en: https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2003/01/0203300.pdf. Consultado el 21/02/2019.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (1998): “Memorandum submitted by the Office of Science and Technology”, Appendices. Disponible en: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199798/cmselect/cmsctech/1039/103905.htm. Consultado el 02/02/2018.
PELLEGRINI, P. A. (2013): “What risks and for whom? Argentina’s regulatory policies and global commercial interests in GMOs”, Technology in Society, vol. 35, n° 2, pp, 129-138.
PELLEGRINI, P. A. (2014): Transgénicos: ciencia, agricultura y controversias en la Argentina, Bernal, Universidad Nacional de Quilmes.
POTH, C. (2013): “Reconstruyendo la institucionalidad del modelo biotecnológico agrario. Un enfoque sobre la Comisión Nacional de Biotecnología Agropecuaria”, en C. Gras y V. Hernández (coords.): El agro como negocio: producción, sociedad y territorios en la globalización, Buenos Aires, Biblos, pp. 289-322.
REBORATTI, C. (2012): “Socio-environmental Conflict in Argentina”, Journal of Latin American Geography, vol. 11, n° 2, pp. 3-20.
REY SANTOS, O. (2006): “Marco analítico para el desarrollo de un sistema legal de la seguridad de la biotecnología moderna (bioseguridad)”, FAO Estudio legislativo, n° 90.
SAGPyA (2004). Plan Estratégico 2005-2015 para el Desarrollo de la Biotecnología Agropecuaria, Argentina.
SECyT (2006): “Documentos consensuados con las Secretarías de Estado responsables de las políticas sectoriales. Prioridades en investigación, desarrollo e innovación para el programa PROTIS”, Plan Estratégico Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación “Bicentenario” (2006-2010), Argentina.
THE PRESIDENT’S COUNCIL ON BIOETHICS (2002): Human cloning and human dignity: An ethical inquiry, Washington DC. Disponible en: https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/559368/pcbe_cloning_report.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Consultado el 14/01/2018.
THOMAS, H., FRESSOLI, M. y AGUIAR, D. (2006). “Procesos de construcción de “funhormocionamiento” de organismos animales genéticamente modificados: el caso de la vaca transgénica clonada (Argentina 1996-2006)”, Convergencia, n° 42, pp. 153-180.
UNESCO (1997): Declaración Universal sobre el Genoma Humano y los Derechos Humanos.
VARA, A. M., PIAZ, A. y ARANCIBIA, F. (2012): “Biotecnología agrícola y ‘sojización’ en la Argentina: controversia pública, construcción de consenso y ampliación del marco regulatorio”, Política & Sociedade, vol. 11, n° 20, pp. 135-170.
WILLMOTT, G. (2015). “Common sense on cloning farm animals: just because we can, doesn’t mean we should”, 8 de septiembre. Disponible en: http://www.gleniswillmott.eu/common-sense-on-cloning-farm-animals-just-because-we-can-doesnt-mean-we-should/. Consultado el 16/02/2017.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
All CTS's issues and academic articles are under a CC-BY license.
Since 2007, CTS has provided open and free access to all its contents, including the complete archive of its quarterly edition and the different products presented in its electronic platform. This decision is based on the belief that offering free access to published materials helps to build a greater and better exchange of knowledge.
In turn, for the quarterly edition, CTS allows institutional and thematic repositories, as well as personal web pages, to self-archive articles in their post-print or editorial version, immediately after the publication of the final version of each issue and under the condition that a link to the original source will be incorporated into the self-archive.
