Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Science Communication
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schibeci, R.
Right arrow Articles by Dietrich, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Community Involvement in Biotechnology Policy?

The Australian Experience

Renato Schibeci

Murdoch University, r.schibeci{at}murdoch.edu.au

Jeff Harwood

Murdoch University

Heather Dietrich

Murdoch University

The authors analyze the framework for public participation in Australian biotechnology policy and argue that participation is undermined by the institutional structures that were ostensibly designed to facilitate consultation. They conclude that for the moment, community consultation in the formulation of Australian biotechnology policy appears limited. Indeed, the Australian Gene Technology Act 2000 and the Gene Technology Community Consultative Committee Operating Procedures effectively exclude the community from participating in deliberations on biotechnology policy. The community continues to be treated as consumers of advice, rather than technological citizens who can make a genuine contribution to biotechnology policy.

Key Words: biotechnology • policy • participation • citizenship • government

Science Communication, Vol. 27, No. 3, 429-445 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1075547005285066


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Science CommunicationHome page
M. S. Schafer
From Public Understanding to Public Engagement: An Empirical Assessment of Changes in Science Coverage
Science Communication, June 1, 2009; 30(4): 475 - 505.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
R. Schibeci and J. Harwood
Stimulating authentic community involvement in biotechnology policy in Australia
Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2007; 16(2): 245 - 255.
[Abstract] [PDF]