Malmö University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • 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
Bringing in the controversy: re-politicizing the de-politicized strategy of ethics committees
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Education and Society (LS), Department of Nature, Environment and Society (NMS).ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6389-0686
2013 (English)In: Life Sciences, Society and Policy, E-ISSN 2195-7819, Vol. 9, no 11Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Human/animal relations are potentially controversial and biotechnologically produced animals and animal-like creatures – bio-objects such as transgenics, clones, cybrids and other hybrids – have often created lively political debate since they challenge established social and moral norms. Ethical issues regarding the human/animal relations in biotechnological developments have at times been widely debated in many European countries and beyond. However, the general trend is a move away from parliamentary and public debate towards institutionalized ethics and technified expert panels. We explore by using the conceptual lens of bio-objectification what effects such a move can be said to have. In the bio-objectification process, unstable bio-object becomes stabilized and receives a single “bio-identity” by closing the debate. However, we argue that there are other possible routes bio-objectification processes can take, routes that allow for more open-ended cases. By comparing our observations and analyses of deliberations in three different European countries we will explore how the bio-objectification process works in the context of animal ethics committees. From this comparison we found an interesting common feature: When animal biotechnology is discussed in the ethics committees, technical and pragmatic matters are often foregrounded. We noticed that there is a common silence around ethics and a striking consensus culture. The present paper, seeks to understand how the bio-objectification process works so as to silence complexity through consensus as well as to discuss how the ethical issues involved in animal biotechnology could become re-politicized, and thereby made more pluralistic, through an “ethos of controversies”.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2013. Vol. 9, no 11
Keywords [en]
Ethics committees, Animal biotechnology, Controversies, Bio-objectification, animal experimentation
National Category
Social Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-3448DOI: 10.1186/2195-7819-9-11Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84975722581Local ID: 16349OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-3448DiVA, id: diva2:1400249
Available from: 2020-02-28 Created: 2020-02-28 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(590 kB)104 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 590 kBChecksum SHA-512
17d43c45a415431f77174bd16274fc836578cc8eae31bcfbc51205bfd9095b84503d3942f12be2cb6bb88e3b91d54001fba68925193a440dd631f43cf0e87785
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Ideland, Malin

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Ideland, Malin
By organisation
Department of Nature, Environment and Society (NMS)
In the same journal
Life Sciences, Society and Policy
Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 104 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

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 43 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • 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