Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Prerequisites for Genetic Democracy

  • Chapter
Genetic Democracy

Part of the book series: International Library Of Ethics, Law, And The New Medicine ((LIME,volume 37))

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Ahlqvist, T. “From information society to biosociety? On societalwaves, developing key technologies, and new professions.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 75 (2005),501–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Árnason, V. “Coding and Consent: Moral Challenges of theDatabase Project in Iceland”. Bioethics 18 (2004), 27–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birch, A. The Concepts andTheories of Modern Democracy. London Routledge, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, K. “Not Just Experts: The Public Debate aboutReprogenetics in Germany”. Hastings Center Report(May–June 2005), 42–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchannan, A., Brock, D., Daniels, N., & Wikler, D. FromChance to Choice: Genetics and Justice. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cahill, L. S. “Biotech & Justice: Catching Up with the RealWorld Order”. Hastings Center Report (September–October2003), 34–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chadwick, R. “Informed consent and genetic research”. In Doyal,L., & Tobias, J. (eds.) Informed Consent in MedicalResearch. London: BMJ Books, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A. Democracy and its Critics. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, R. A. On Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press,2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, A. “What silence knows – planning, public participationand environmental values”. Environmental Values 10 (2001),77–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Directive 2001/18/EC. In www-pageshttp://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_106/ l_10620010417en00010038.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodds, S., & Thomson, C. “Bioethics and democracy: Competingroles of national bioethics organisations”. Bioethics 20(2006), 326–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Federation of Biotechnology. “Task Group on PublicPerceptions”. Report of the Focus Workshops: Who shouldcommunicate with public and how? In www-pages:http://files.efbpublic.org/downloads/EU_FW_REPORT_1.pdf,2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaskell, G. et al. Europeans and Biotechnology in 2005: Patterns andTrends: Eurobarometer 64.3. In www-pages:http://www.ec.europa.eu/research/press/2006/pdf/pr1906_eb_64_3_final_report-may2006_en.pdf, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R. Democracy. Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson, M. “Ethics of sustainable development – A study ofSwedish regulations for genetically modified organisms”. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16 (2003), 51–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klombenhouwer, T., & van den Belt, H. “Regulating functionalfoods in the European union: Informed choice versus consumerprotection?”. Journal of Agricultural and EnvironmentalEthics 16 (2003), 545–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuusi, O. Geenitieto kuuluu kaikille. Helsinki, Edita 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Launis, V. Geeniteknologia, arvot ja vastuu. Helsinki:Gaudeamus, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mannermaa, M. Biosociety and Human Being: A report to the NationalTechnology Agency of Finland (Tekes). www-sivuilla:http://onet.tehonetti.fi/mannermaa_en/onet/ articlesandlinks/?group=00000011&mag_nr=3,2006(2003).

    Google Scholar 

  • Marris, C., Wynne, B., Simmons, P., & Weldon, S. PublicPerceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe: FinalReport of the PABE Research Project. 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moroso, M. Perspectives on Public Engagement. The Newsletterof the ESRC Genomics Network 2006, no. 4, p. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. International Futures Programme. The Bioeconomy to 2030:Designing a Policy Agenda. In www-pages:http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/7/51/37504590.pdf, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, O. Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics. Port Chester,NY: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paula, L., & Birrer, F. “Including public perspectives inindustrial biotechnology and the biobased economy”. Journalof Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 198 (2006), 253–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petit, P. “Republican freedom and contestatory democratization.”In Shapiro, I., & Hacker-Cordón C. (eds.) Democracy’sValue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przeworsky, A. “Minimalist conception of democracy: a defence”.In Shapiro, I., & Hacker-Cordón C. (eds.) Democracy’sValue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Räikkä, J., & Rossi, K. Geenit ja etiikka:kysymyksiä uuden geeniteknologian arvoista. Helsinki: WSOY,2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röcklinsberg, H. “Consent and consensus in policies relatedto food – five core values”. Journal of Agricultural andEnvironmental Ethics 19 (2006), 285–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnik, D. “Setting biomedical research priorities: Justice,science, and public participation”. Kennedy Institute ofEthics Journal 11 (2001), 181–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rydin, Y. Public Participation: Different Rationales; DifferentStrategies. In www-pageswww.environment.fi/download.asp?contentid=60431&lan=en,2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Setälä, M. Demokratian arvo: Teoriat,käytännöt ja mahdollisuudet. Helsinki: Gaudeamus,2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe, V. A. “Science, bioethics, and the public interest: Onthe need for transparency”. Hastings Center Report(May–June 2002), 23–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterckx, S., & Macmillan, T. “Taking citizens seriously”.Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 19 (2006),219–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tamminen, T. “Kenen bioyhteiskunta?” Futura 4 (2004),99–106.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Turku, Finland

    Helena Siipi

Authors
  1. Helena Siipi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Turku, Finland

    Veikko Launis  & Juha Räikkä  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Siipi, H. (2008). The Prerequisites for Genetic Democracy. In: Launis, V., Räikkä, J. (eds) Genetic Democracy. International Library Of Ethics, Law, And The New Medicine, vol 37. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6212-4_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6212-4_2

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-6205-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-6212-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation