In 1999, the UK Government responded to escalating tensions surrounding biotechnology governance by creating two strategic, non-statutory advisory bodies: the Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission (AEBC) and the Human Genetics Commission (HGC). They were designed to represent diverse stakeholder perspectives, operate transparently and engage with a variety of interested individuals and groups. This was a shift in meta-governance involving the creation of boundary organisations, discipline-bridging instruments of governance that serve to stabilise, clarify and legitimise policy advice. This paper has two main objectives: to conduct a comparative exploration of the relative success of HGC and AEBC as boundary organisations; and to test the utility of an analysis of public meeting transcripts, supplemented by interview data, in identifying factors contributing to consensus and contention in these twin Commissions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jones et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: