uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Responsible Conduct in Dual Use Research: Towards an Ethic of Deliberation in the Life Sciences
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics.
2013 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Life scientists have increasingly been asked to incorporate a dual use responsibility in their research conduct. In this thesis, different aspects of what constitutes a reasonable responsibility in terms of avoiding harmful misuse of research for biological weapon purposes have been explored.

The first study investigated the claim that scientists have a dual use responsibility, and also outlined some of its possible content. Criteria for what may constitute preventable harm were used to analyze some proposed obligations in the field, and it was concluded that reasonable obligations include: e.g. considering the potential negative implications of one’s research and reporting activities of concern. In the second study, the conditions for a Precautionary Principle (PP) were explored and applied to the dual use research context. The study found that the main conditions of the PP frequently appear in present discussions and formulations of life scientists’ responsibility. It was also concluded that the PP is applicable to the dual use field and that it is meaningful and useful as a normatively guiding principle. The third study suggested an ethics of dissemination, based on the assumption that scientists have a responsibility to occasionally constrain the dispersion of their research findings. Three core aspects were proposed for an ethics of dual use dissemination. Additionally, to help scientists understand when constraints may be justified, three corresponding conditions for their application were suggested. In the fourth study, the concept of ethical competence was introduced and explored within a dual use context. It was concluded that competence-building is important in the nurturing of individual responsibility and, subsequently, in achieving a culture of dual use responsibility in the life sciences.

Finally, the discussion on ethical competence was included in a proposed ethic of deliberation, in which various stakeholders in the dual use debate are conceived to participate in communicative processes. It was argued that spaces for deliberative activities should be institutionalized by the scientific community to ensure structural opportunities for individuals to both assume responsibility and share it. Moreover, it was argued that deliberation can constitute a cornerstone of responsible dual use governance.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis, 2013. , 95 p.
Series
Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Medicine, ISSN 1651-6206 ; 866
Keyword [en]
bioethics, biological warfare, biological weapons, biosecurity, communicative ethics, deliberative ethics, dual use, ethical competence, life science research, precautionary principle, responsible conduct
National Category
Medical Ethics
Research subject
Bioethics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-193050ISBN: 978-91-554-8593-1 (print)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-193050DiVA: diva2:603143
Public defence
2013-03-23, Auditorium Minus, Gustavianum, Akademigatan 3, Uppsala, 09:15 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2013-03-01 Created: 2013-01-28 Last updated: 2013-03-05Bibliographically approved
List of papers
1. Taking due care: Moral obligations in dual use research
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Taking due care: Moral obligations in dual use research
2008 (English)In: Bioethics, ISSN 0269-9702, E-ISSN 1467-8519, Vol. 22, no 9, 477-487 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In the past decade, the perception of a bioterrorist threat has increased and created a demand on life scientists to consider the potential security implications of dual use research. This article examines a selection of proposed moral obligations for life scientists that have emerged to meet these concerns and the extent to which they can be considered reasonable. It also describes the underlying reasons for the concerns, how they are managed, and their implications for scientific values.Five criteria for what constitutes preventable harm are suggested and a number of proposed obligations for life scientists are considered against these criteria, namely, the obligations to prevent bioterrorism; to engage in response activities; to consider negative implications of research; not to publish or share sensitive information; to oversee and limit access to dangerous material; and to report activities of concern.

Although bioterrorism might be perceived as an imminent threat, the analysis illustrates that this is beyond the responsibility of life scientists either to prevent or to respond to. Among the more reasonable obligations are duties to consider potential negative implications of one's research, protect access to sensitive material, technology and knowledge, and report activities of concern. Responsibility, therefore, includes obligations concerned with preventing foreseeable and highly probable harm. A central conclusion is that several of the proposed obligations are reasonable, although not unconditionally.

Keyword
bioethics, biological weapons, dual use, duty, obligation, research ethics
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-102990 (URN)10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00695.x (DOI)000260048200004 ()18959730 (PubMedID)
Available from: 2009-05-13 Created: 2009-05-13 Last updated: 2017-03-30
2. A precautionary principle for dual use research in the life sciences
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A precautionary principle for dual use research in the life sciences
2011 (English)In: Bioethics, ISSN 0269-9702, E-ISSN 1467-8519, Vol. 25, no 1, 1-8 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Most life science research entails dual-use complexity and may be misused for harmful purposes, e.g. biological weapons. The Precautionary Principle applies to special problems characterized by complexity in the relationship between human activities and their consequences. This article examines whether the principle, so far mainly used in environmental and public health issues, is applicable and suitable to the field of dual-use life science research. Four central elements of the principle are examined: threat, uncertainty, prescription and action. Although charges against the principle exist - for example that it stifles scientific development, lacks practical applicability and is poorly defined and vague - the analysis concludes that a Precautionary Principle is applicable to the field. Certain factors such as credibility of the threat, availability of information, clear prescriptive demands on responsibility and directives on how to act, determine the suitability and success of a Precautionary Principle. Moreover, policy-makers and researchers share a responsibility for providing and seeking information about potential sources of harm. A central conclusion is that the principle is meaningful and useful if applied as a context-dependent moral principle and allowed flexibility in its practical use. The principle may then inspire awareness-raising and the establishment of practical routines which appropriately reflect the fact that life science research may be misused for harmful purposes.

Keyword
precautionary principle, dual use, life science, research, responsibility, biological weapons
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Research subject
Bioethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-124826 (URN)10.1111/j.1467-8519.2009.01740.x (DOI)000286070300002 ()19594724 (PubMedID)
Available from: 2010-05-06 Created: 2010-05-06 Last updated: 2017-03-30
3. The ethics of disseminating dual use knowledge
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The ethics of disseminating dual use knowledge
2013 (English)In: Research Ethics, ISSN 1747-0161, Vol. 9, no 1, 6-19 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In 2011, for the first time ever, two scientific journals were asked not to publish research papers in full detail. The research in question was on the H5N1 influenza virus (bird flu), and the concern was that the expected public health benefits of disseminating the findings did not outweigh the potential harm should the knowledge be misused for malicious purposes. This constraint raises important ethical concerns as it collides with scientific freedom and openness. In this article, we argue that constraining the dissemination of dual-use knowledge can in certain cases be justified because, for example: scientists have a responsibility for potentially harmful consequences of their research; the public need not always know of all scientific discoveries; uncertainty about the risks of harm may warrant precaution; and expected benefits do not always outweigh potential harm. However, the constraints in question are not absolute but can be both temporary and partial. We propose three core aspects for an ethics of dual-use dissemination: dual-use awareness, precaution, and acknowledgment of conflicting values. Additionally, to help scientists understand when constraints on dissemination may be justified we suggest three corresponding conditions that prompt scientists to recognize dual-use material or research, consider the potential impact of dual-use knowledge dissemination, and acknowledge and respond to external dissemination concerns.

National Category
Medical Ethics
Research subject
Bioethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-192995 (URN)10.1177/1747016113478517 (DOI)
Available from: 2013-01-28 Created: 2013-01-28 Last updated: 2017-03-30
4. Ethical competence in dual use life science research
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Ethical competence in dual use life science research
2012 (English)In: Applied Biosafety: Journal of the American Biological Safety Association, Vol. 17, no 3, 120-127 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
National Category
Other Medical Sciences not elsewhere specified
Research subject
Bioethics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-187942 (URN)
Available from: 2012-12-12 Created: 2012-12-12 Last updated: 2017-03-30

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1445 kB)1149 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1445 kBChecksum SHA-512
f1fa80345c5a0afaebad99f01f099f09649a531a75a5891a74ec09d00a6ebe6eea64fc44bfeb7e4bd8ca50723bf539ec418c2993230e68f6ca12cdf6d9cf912b
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf
Buy this publication >>

Authority records BETA

Kuhlau, Frida

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Kuhlau, Frida
By organisation
Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics
Medical Ethics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 1149 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 1705 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf