Ethical Considerations for Gene Drive: Challenges of Balancing Inclusion, Power and Perspectives

Progress in gene-drive research has stimulated discussion and debate on ethical issues including community engagement and consent, policy and governance, and decision-making involved in development and deployment. Many organizations, academic institutions, foundations, and individual professionals have contributed to ensuring that these issues are considered prior to the application of gene-drive technology. Central topics include co-development of the technology with local stakeholders and communities and reducing asymmetry between developers and end-users. Important questions include with whom to conduct engagement and how to define community acceptance, develop capacity-building activities, and regulate this technology. Experts, academics, and funders have suggested that global frameworks, standards, and guidelines be developed to direct research in answering these important questions. Additionally, it has been suggested that ethical principles or commitments be established to further guide research practices. The challenging and interesting contradiction that we explore here is that the vast majority of these conversations transpire with little or no input from potential end-users or stakeholders who, we contend, should ultimately determine the fate of the technology in their communities. The question arises, whose concerns regarding marginalization, disempowerment, and inequity should be included in discussions and decisions concerning how inequities are perceived and how they may be addressed? At what stage will true co-development occur and how will opinions, perspectives and knowledge held by low-income country stakeholders be applied in determining answers to the questions regarding the ethics being debated on the academic stage? Our opinion is that the time is now.

[1]  Experts’ moral views on gene drive technologies: a qualitative interview study , 2021, BMC medical ethics.

[2]  Chase L. Beisel,et al.  A Code of Ethics for Gene Drive Research , 2021, The CRISPR journal.

[3]  Transformation and slippage in co-production ambitions for global technology development: The case of gene drive , 2021 .

[4]  A. James,et al.  Application of the Relationship-Based Model to Engagement for Field Trials of Genetically Engineered Malaria Vectors , 2020, The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene.

[5]  Philipp W. Messer,et al.  Core commitments for field trials of gene drive organisms , 2020, Science.

[6]  A. James,et al.  Next-generation gene drive for population modification of the malaria vector mosquito, Anopheles gambiae , 2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  E. Turnhout,et al.  The politics of co-production: participation, power, and transformation , 2020 .

[8]  U. Grossniklaus,et al.  Gene drives: benefits, risks, and possible applications , 2020 .

[9]  F. Bidault,et al.  The dynamics of relational quality in co-development alliances , 2019, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[10]  J. Lunshof,et al.  Guidance on stakeholder engagement practices to inform the development of area-wide vector control methods , 2019, PLoS neglected tropical diseases.

[11]  Annet Namukwaya,et al.  Knowledge engagement in gene drive research for malaria control , 2019, PLoS neglected tropical diseases.

[12]  T. Matenga,et al.  Contemporary issues in north–south health research partnerships: perspectives of health research stakeholders in Zambia , 2019, Health Research Policy and Systems.

[13]  D. Brossard,et al.  Promises and perils of gene drives: Navigating the communication of complex, post-normal science , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[14]  James E. Dahlman,et al.  Editing nature: Local roots of global governance , 2018, Science.

[15]  J. Collins Gene drives in our future: challenges of and opportunities for using a self-sustaining technology in pest and vector management , 2018, BMC Proceedings.

[16]  Fredros O. Okumu,et al.  Pathway to Deployment of Gene Drive Mosquitoes as a Potential Biocontrol Tool for Elimination of Malaria in Sub-Saharan Africa: Recommendations of a Scientific Working Group , 2018, The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene.

[17]  Megan J. Palmer,et al.  Considerations for the governance of gene drive organisms , 2018, Pathogens and global health.

[18]  S. James,et al.  Principles for gene drive research , 2017, Science.

[19]  S. James,et al.  Results from the Workshop “Problem Formulation for the Use of Gene Drive in Mosquitoes” , 2017, The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene.

[20]  Division on Earth Gene Drives on the Horizon: Advancing Science, Navigating Uncertainty, and Aligning Research with Public Values , 2016 .

[21]  John M. Marshall,et al.  Guidance framework for testing of genetically modified mosquitoes , 2014 .

[22]  A. James,et al.  A Regulatory Structure for Working with Genetically Modified Mosquitoes: Lessons from Mexico , 2014, PLoS neglected tropical diseases.

[23]  T. Scott,et al.  Towards a framework for community engagement in global health research. , 2010, Trends in parasitology.

[24]  B. Nielsen The Role of Trust in Collaborative Relationships: A Multi-Dimensional Approach , 2004 .

[25]  Gerard A. Athaide,et al.  Understanding New Product Co-Development Relationships in Technology-Based, Industrial Markets , 2003 .