Regulatory capacity building and the governance of clinical stem cell research in China
Sleeboom-Faulkner, M; Chen, H; Rosemann, A
Date: 1 February 2018
Journal
Science and Public Policy
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Publisher DOI
Abstract
While other works have explained difficulties in applying ‘international’ guidelines in the field of
regenerative medicine in so-called low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in terms of ‘international
hegemony’, ‘political and ethical governance’ and ‘cosmopolitisation’, this article on stem
cell regulation in China emphasizes ...
While other works have explained difficulties in applying ‘international’ guidelines in the field of
regenerative medicine in so-called low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in terms of ‘international
hegemony’, ‘political and ethical governance’ and ‘cosmopolitisation’, this article on stem
cell regulation in China emphasizes the particular complexities faced by large LMICs: the emergence
of alternative regulatory arrangements made by stakeholders at a provincial level at home.
On the basis of ethnographic and archival research of clinical stem cell research hubs, we have
characterized six types of entrepreneurial ‘bionetworks’, each of which embodies a regulatory orientation
that developed in interaction with China’s regulatory dilemmas. Rather than adopting
guidelines from other countries, we argue that regulatory capacity building is more appropriately
viewed as a relational concept, referring to the ability to develop regulatory requirements that can
cater for different regulatory research needs on an international level and at home.
Social and Political Sciences, Philosophy, and Anthropology
Faculty of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences
Item views 0
Full item downloads 0