Giving Voice to the Voiceless in Environmental Gene Editing

Area of Science:

• Environmental Science
• Ethics
• Public Policy

Background:

• Participatory deliberation enhances decision-making by including diverse perspectives.
• Environmental gene editing presents complex ethical challenges regarding risk and benefit distribution.
• Historically marginalized groups and varied value systems need centering in environmental decisions.

Purpose of the Study:

• To argue for the inclusion of nonhuman nature and future generations in environmental gene editing deliberations.
• To promote a more informed, just, and equitable decision-making process for environmental gene editing.
• To explore strategies for incorporating non-traditional participants into environmental decision-making.

Main Methods:

• Ethical analysis valuing nonhuman intrinsic worth and intergenerational interconnectedness.
• Review of legal rights of nature movements and case studies like the Boardman River Dams Project.
• Examination of methods for representative participation in public deliberation.

Main Results:

• Inclusion of nature's and future generations' voices fosters reflection on human-nature relationships.
• Strategies can be developed to represent nonhuman and future interests in deliberative forums.
• Enhanced deliberation can safeguard intergenerational equity and promote responsible environmental stewardship.

Conclusions:

• Deliberation on environmental gene editing must ethically extend to include nonhuman nature and future generations.
• Practical strategies, inspired by existing movements and methods, can facilitate this expanded participation.
• Centering these voices is crucial for equitable risk-benefit distribution and long-term environmental justice.