Social license and synthetic biology: the trouble with mining terms

24Citations
Citations of this article
53Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In the wake of controversies over first-generation biotechnologies, the growing field of synthetic biology appears cognizant of the need to attend to the social, political, cultural, and ethical dimensions of innovation. Public engagement has emerged as an important means for attending to these dimensions. Here, we call attention to the problematic nature of one paradigm being drawn upon to conceptualize this public engagement for synthetic biology: social license to operate (SLO). After reviewing SLO’s emergence in the resource extraction context and the existing critiques of SLO, we examine its current use in the synthetic biology literature. We argue that an SLO-derived model of engagement is especially inadequate for synthetic biology due to unique challenges posed by synthetic biology and the limited conception of engagement provided by SLO. We conclude by discussing alternative public engagement paradigms and examples better suited to inform synthetic biology governance.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Delborne, J. A., Kokotovich, A. E., & Lunshof, J. E. (2020). Social license and synthetic biology: the trouble with mining terms. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 7(3), 280–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2020.1738023

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free