A Central American Perspective on Global Regulations on Human Genome Editing, Global Markets and Geopolitics

• In Event: How Should STS Address Inequality? As a Subject, a (Dis)Value)? Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives - I

Abstract

There are legally binding international regulations on a diverse set of issues. The most effective global regulations are linked to market issues: “free” market bilateral agreements, as CAFTA or international agreements on trade such as the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS).
Normative documents produced in international scientific or technical meetings are usually no more than recommendations encouraging scientists and States to adopt certain guidelines, protocols, codes of conduct.
The contrast between market/intellectual property (IP) regulations and medical/scientific ethics regulations is what I want to focus on, from the perspective of recent changes in trade and scientific research regulations in Costa Rica, linked to the political relation with USA.
Scholars and scientists have called for a global dialogue on the ethics of human genome editing and for the democratization of decision making processes related to biotechnologies. What are the conditions of possibility for democratization and international dialogue on these matters? How corporative/geopolitical interests and the diverse expressions of inequality determine the possibility of a dialogue aimed to regulate human genome editing?
My standpoint is based on my path between the sciences and the humanities. I’m a Pharm. D., have training in intellectual property and used to work for the patent office in Costa Rica. Then I pursued a degree and an academic career in Bioethics and in Cultural Studies. I have been working on the ethical issues of patenting human DNA. And I worked as a parliamentary advisor on IP rights and public health during the CAFTA referendum.

Author

• Gabriela Arguedas, Universidad de Costa Rica