Department of Communication, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA,
Hum Biol. 2020 Jul 9;91(3):179-188. doi: 10.13110/humanbiology.91.3.01.
This article argues that the genetic engineering technology known as gene drive must be evaluated in the context of the historic and ongoing impacts of settler colonialism and military experimentation on indigenous lands and peoples. After defining gene drive and previewing some of the key ethical issues related to its use, the author compares the language used to justify Cold War-era nuclear testing in the Pacific with contemporary scholarship framing islands as ideal test sites for gene drive-modified organisms. In both cases, perceptions of islands as remote and isolated are mobilized to warrant their treatment as sites of experimentation for emerging technologies. Though gene drive may offer valuable interventions into issues affecting island communities (e.g., vector-borne disease and invasive species management), proposals to conduct the first open trials of gene drive on islands are complicit in a long history of injustice that has treated islands (and their residents) as dispensable to the risks and unintended consequences associated with experimentation. This article contends that ethical gene drive research cannot be achieved without the inclusion of indigenous peoples as key stakeholders and provides three recommendations to guide community engagement involving indigenous communities: centering indigenous self-determination, replacing the deficit model of engagement with a truly participatory model, and integrating indigenous knowledge and values in the research and decision-making processes related to gene drive.
本文认为,必须在殖民主义和军事实验对土著土地和人民的历史性和持续影响的背景下,评估被称为基因驱动的基因工程技术。在定义了基因驱动并预览了与使用相关的一些关键伦理问题之后,作者将冷战时期太平洋核试验中使用的语言与当代将岛屿作为基因驱动修饰生物理想试验场的学术观点进行了比较。在这两种情况下,将岛屿视为偏远和孤立的看法被调动起来,以证明它们可以作为新兴技术试验场的合理性。尽管基因驱动可能为影响岛屿社区的问题提供有价值的干预措施(例如,虫媒传染病和入侵物种管理),但在岛屿上进行基因驱动首次公开试验的提议,是长期不公正对待的一部分,这种不公正对待将岛屿(及其居民)视为与实验相关的风险和意外后果无关紧要。本文认为,如果不将土著人民作为主要利益相关者纳入其中,就不可能进行符合伦理的基因驱动研究,并为涉及土著社区的社区参与提供了三项建议:以土著人民的自决为中心,用真正的参与式模式取代参与不足的模式,以及将土著知识和价值观纳入与基因驱动相关的研究和决策过程中。