Regulating Genome Editing: For an Enlightened Democratic Governance

Area of Science:

• Bioethics
• Moral Psychology
• Science and Technology Studies

Background:

• Persistent ethical disagreements surround genome editing technologies.
• Existing regulatory approaches face challenges in addressing moral pluralism.

Purpose of the Study:

• To explore and critique two primary approaches to genome editing regulation: elitist and democratic.
• To propose a novel regulatory framework that synthesizes the strengths of existing models.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of theoretical frameworks for genome editing regulation.
• Critique of "elitist" (Greene) and "democratic" (Baylis, Jasanoff) regulatory models.
• Development of the "enlightened democracy" approach.

Main Results:

• The "elitist" approach risks detachment from public values.
• The "democratic" approach may be impractical or swayed by uninformed opinion.
• The "enlightened democracy" approach offers a balanced regulatory strategy.

Conclusions:

• Effective genome editing regulation necessitates a hybrid model.
• The "enlightened democracy" approach aims to reconcile expert insights with public engagement for ethical governance.
• This framework seeks to navigate complex moral disagreements in gene editing policy.