Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Section 5: Regulation and Governance

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Health, Technology and Society

Part of the book series: Health, Technology and Society ((HTE))

  • 450 Accesses

Abstract

Health technologies—whether medical devices, drugs, or tissue-based therapeutics, such as stem cells—pose particular challenges in regard to their safety, efficacy, and long-term benefits and costs (and risks), both to patients and to the wider healthcare system. The four books in this section offer a detailed exploration of how health technologies are regulated. Governance points towards the ways in which such technologies and their producers are more, or less, accountable to those that use them, a process less to do with formal state regulation and more about process and practice within and between different social actors in scientific, clinical, and commercial domains.

  • Faulkner (Medical technology into healthcare and society. A sociology of devices, innovation and governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009) discusses the regulation of medical devices, which includes the mundane as well as the more sophisticated—for example, everything from ‘the bandage to the bioreactor’.

  • Davis and Abraham (Unhealthy pharmaceutical regulation. Innovation, politics and promissory science. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013) offer a detailed analysis of pharmaceutical drug regulation over the ‘neo-liberal era’ of the past 40 years, contrasting drug approval processes in the USA and EU.

  • Webster (The global dynamics of regenerative medicine. A social science critique. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013) examines the broad global ‘dynamics’ of regenerative medicine.

  • Gottweis et al. (The global politics of human embryonic stem cell science. Regenerative medicine in transition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009) explore the relationship between emerging regulatory regimes and the global political economy of embryonic stem cells.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abraham, J. (1995). Science, politics and the pharmaceutical industry. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abraham, J. (2008). Sociology of pharmaceuticals development and regulation: A realist empirical research programme. Sociology of Health & Illness, 30, 869–885.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abraham, J. & Davis C. (2005). Risking public safety: Experts, the medical profession and ‘acceptable’ drug injury. Health, Risk and Society, 7(4), 379–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abraham, J. & Davis C. (2006). Testing times: the emergence of the practolol disaster and its challenge to British drug regulation in the modern period. Social History of Medicine, 19(1), 127–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abraham, J., & Davis C. (2007). Deficits, expectations and paradigms in British and American drug safety assessments - Prising open the black box of regulatory science. Science, Technology and Human Values, 32(4), 399–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abraham, J., & Lewis G. (2000). Regulating Medicines in Europe: Competition, Expertise and Public Health. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, A. (2009). Accomplishing sequencing the human genome. PhD Thesis. CESAGEN, Cardiff University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, Z. (2007). Liquid times: Living in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Begg, C. B., Kim, K., & Neaton, J. D. (2014). “Right to Try” laws. Clinical Trials, 11(5), 519–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger, I., et al. (2016). Global distribution of businesses marketing stem cell-based intervention. Cell Stem Cell, 19(2), 158–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biophoenix. (2006). Opportunities in stem cell research and commercialization: Technology advances, regulatory impact and key players. Coventry, UK: Biophoenix.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borup, M., Brown, N., Konrad, K., & van Lente, H. (2006). The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 18, 285–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowker, G., & Star, S. (1999). Sorting things out: Classification and its consequences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C. (2012). Stem cell tourism poses risks. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 184(2), E121–E122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, N., Faulkner, A., Kent, J., & Michael, M. (2006). Regulating hybrids—“cleaning up” and “making a mess” in tissue engineering and transpecies transplantation. Social Theory and Health, 4(1), 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M. (2004). Europe wrestling with technology. Economy and Society, 33(1), 121–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H., & Gottweis, H. (2011). Stem cell treatment in China: Rethinking the patient role in the global bio-economy. Bioethics. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2011.01929.x.

  • Clouser, K. D. (1993). Bioethics and philosophy. Hastings Center Report, 23(6), S10–S11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, P. (2001). New economy innovation systems: biotechnology in Europe and the USA. Industry and Innovation, 8, 267–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, P. (2002). Knowledge economies: Clusters, learning and cooperative advantage. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, M. (2008). Life As surplus: Biotechnology and capitalism in the neoliberal era. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crozier, G. K. D., & Thomsen, K. (2010). Stem cell tourism and the role of health professional organizations. The American Journal of Bioethics, 10(5), 36–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cyranoski, D. (2009). Stem-cell therapy faces more scrutiny in China. Nature, 459, 146–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, C., & Abraham, J. (2013). Unhealthy pharmaceutical regulation. Innovation, politics and promissory science. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delanty, G., & Rumford, C. (2005). Rethinking Europe: Social theory and the implications of Europeanization. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deuten, J., & Rip, A. (2000). Narrative infrastructure in produce creation processes. Organisation, 7, 67–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Echlin, H. (2005, July 25). How much would you pay for this? The Guardian, pp. 10–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edgar, H., & Rothman, D. J. (1990). The challenge of AIDS to the regulatory process. Milbank Quarterly, 68(Suppl.1), 111–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eliza, B. (2009). Stem-cell experts raise concerns about medical tourism. The Lancet, 373(9667), 883–884.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H. (2003). Innovation in innovation: The triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Social Science Information, 42(3), 293–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faulkner, A. (1997). ‘Strange bedfellows’ in the laboratory of the NHS? An analysis of the new science of health technology assessment in the United Kingdom. Sociology of Health and Illness, 19B, 183–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faulkner, A. (2009). Medical technology into healthcare and society. A sociology of devices, innovation and governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faulkner, A. (2017). Special treatment? Flexibilities in the politics of regenerative medicine’s gatekeeping regimes in the UK. Science as Culture. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2017.1300641.

  • Faulkner, A., Geesink, I., Kent, J., & FitzPatrick, D. (2008). Tissue-engineered technologies: Scientific biomedicine, frames of risk and regulatory regime-building in Europe. Science as Culture, 17(2), 195–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faulkner, A., & Mahalatchimy, A. (2018). The politics of valuation and payment for regenerative medicine products in the UK. New Genetics and Society, 37(3), 227–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • FDA. (1997). FDA Backgrounder on FDAMA, November 1997, published online at https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/food-and-drug-administration-modernization-act-fdama-1997/fda-backgrounder-fdama.

  • Fisher, J. (2009). Medical research for hire: The political economy of pharmaceutical clinical trials. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, N., Ward, K., & O’Rourke, A. (2007). A sociology of technology governance for the information age: The case of pharmaceuticals, consumer advertising and the Internet. Sociology, 40(2), 315–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, J. (2017). Rethinking the clinical gaze: Patient-centred innovation in paediatric neurology. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottweis, H., & Petersen, A. (2008). Biobanks: Governance in comparative perspective. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottweis, H., Salter, B., & Waldby, C. (2009). The global politics of human embryonic stem cell science. Regenerative medicine in transition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haddad, C. (2019). Embodied values: Post-pharmaceutical health and the accumulation of surplus vitality in regenerative stem cell medicine. Sociologias, 21(50), 48–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, A., & Salter, B. (2012). Anticipatory governance: Bioethical expertise for human/animal chimeras. Science as Culture, 21(3), 291–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herder, M. (2019). Pharmaceutical drugs of uncertain value. Lifecycle regulation at the US Food and Drug Administration, and institutional incumbency. The Millbank Quarterly, 97(3), 820–857.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, D., & Katz, J. (1996). Hospitals: The hidden research system. Science and Public Policy, 23(5), 297–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoekman, J. (2016). Characteristics and follow-up of postmarketing studies of conditionally authorized medicines in the EU. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 82(1), 213–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogarth, S. (2015). Neoliberal technocracy: Explaining how and why the US Food and Drug Administration has championed pharmacogenomics. Social Science & Medicine, 131, 255–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogarth, S. (2017). Valley of the unicorns: Consumer genomics, venture capital and digital disruption. New Genetics and Society, 36(3), 250–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, M. (2006). The hidden research system: The evolution of cytogenetic testing in the National Health Service. Science as Culture, 15, 253–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, A., Rothstein, H., Yearley, S., & McCarthy, E. (1997). Regulatory science—towards a sociological framework. Futures, 29(1), 17–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (2005). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (Ed.). (2011). Reframing rights: Bioconstitutionalism in the genetic age. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaitin, K. I., & Di Masi, J. (2000). Measuring the pace of new drug development in the user fee era. Drug Information Journal, 24, 673–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kent, J., Faulkner, A., Geesink, I., & Fitzpatrick, D. (2006). Culturing cells, reproducing and regulating the self. Body and Society, 12(2), 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kewell, B., & Webster, A. (2009). A tale of ‘cautious pessimism’: Biotechnology, recession and the ‘new economy’. Biotechnology Journal, 4, 1106–1110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, H. D., & Kleinman, D. L. (2002). The social construction of technology: Structural considerations. Science, Technology & Human Values, 27(1), 28–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lexchin, J. (2016). Private profits versus public policy: The pharmaceutical industry and the Canadian state. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L., & Etzkowitz, H. (1996). Emergence of a triple helix of university–industry–government relations. Science and Public Policy, 23, 279–286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löfgren, H., & Benner, M. (2005). The political economy of the new biology: Biotechnology and the competition state. Paper Presented at the Druid Tenth Anniversary Summer Conference on Dynamics of Industry and Innovation: Organizations, Networks and Systems, Copenhagen Business School, 27–29 June, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendick, R. (2011, October 24). Stem cell loopholes allow XCell-Center to operate in Germany. The Telegraph Online. Retrieved January 4, 2020, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8082925/stem-cell-law-loopholes-allow-XCell-Center-to-operate-in-Germany.html

  • Morrison, M. (2019). The promises and challenges of biomodifying technologies for the UK. Nuffield Department of Population Health. Retrieved December 22, 2019, from https://www.ndph.ox.ac.uk/publications/1028604.

  • Nik-Khah, E. (2014). Neoliberal pharmaceutical science and the Chicago School of Economics. Social Studies of Science, 44(4), 518–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2004). Biotechnology for sustainable growth and development. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2006). The bioeconomy to 2030: Designing a policy agenda. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabeharisoa, V., & Bourret, P. (2009). Staging and weighting evidence in biomedicine. Social Studies of Science, 39, 691–715.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajan, S. K. (2006). Biocapital: The constitution of postgenomic life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, M. (2010, October 11). First trial of embryonic stem cells in humans. BBC News. Retrieved March 25, 2012, from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11517680.

  • Rose, D., & Blume, S. (2003). Citizens as users of technology: An exploratory study of vaccines and vaccination. In i. N. Oudshoorn & T. Pinch (Eds.), How users matter (pp. 103–131). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosemann, A. (2019). Alter-standardizing clinical trials: The gold standard in the crossfire. Science as Culture, 28(2), 125–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salter, B., & Harvey, B. (2014). Creating problems in the governance of science: Bioethics and human/animal chimeras. Science and Public Policy, 41(5), 685–696.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salter, B., & Salter, C. (2013). Bioethical ambition, political opportunity and the European governance of patenting: The case of human embryonic stem cell science. Social Science & Medicine, 98, 286–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salter, B., Zhou, Y., & Datta, S. (2015). Hegemony in the marketplace of biomedical innovation: Consumer demand and stem cell science. Social Science & Medicine, 131, 156–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salter, B., Zhou, Y., & Datta, S. (2016). Governing new global health-care markets: The case of stem cell treatments. New Political Economy. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2016.1198757.

  • Steffen, M., Lamping, W., & Lehto, J. (2005). Introduction: The Europeanization of health policies. In M. Steffen (Ed.), Health governance in Europe: Issues, challenges and theories. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timmermans, S., & Berg, M. (2003). The Gold Standard: The challenge of evidence-based medicine and standardization in health care. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timmermans, S., Bowker, G., & Star, S. (1998). The architecture of difference: Visibility, control and comparability in building a nursing interventions classification. In M. Berg & A. Mol (Eds.), Differences in medicine: Unravelling practices, techniques, and bodies (pp. 203–225). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, L. (2015). US stem cell clinics, patient safety, and the FDA. Trends in Molecular Medicine, 21(5), 271–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vermeulen, N., Tamminen, S., & Webster, A. (Eds.). (2012). Bio-objects: Life in the 21st century. London: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldby, C. (2002). Stem cells, tissue cultures and the production of biovalue. Health: An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health, Illness and Medicine, 6(3), 305–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldby, C., & Mitchell, R. (2006). Tissue economies: Blood, organs and cell lines in late capitalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, A. (2019). Accelerating innovation: Complexity, regulation and temporality. Frontiers in Sociology, 4(13), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, A. et al. (2011). Clinical trials in regenerative medicine: stem cell heterogeneity and the disciplining of ectopic life. Biosocieties, 6, 401–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster, A., & Gardner, J. (2019). Aligning technology and institutional readiness: The adoption of innovation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management.https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1601694.

  • Wieseler, B., McGauran, N., & Kaiser, T. (2019). New drugs: Where did we go wrong and what can we do better? British Medical Journal, 366(l4340), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiktorowicz, M., Moscou, K., & Lexchin, J. (2018). Transnational pharmacogovernance: Emergent patterns in the jazz of pharmaceutical policy convergence. Globalization and Health, 14(86), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woolacott, N., Corbett, M., Jones-Diette, J., & Hodgson, R. (2017). Methodological challenges for the evaluation of clinical effectiveness in the context of accelerated regulatory approval: An overview. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 90, 108–118.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Global Health Policy, University of Sussex, Sussex, UK

    Alex Faulkner

  2. Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, King’s College London, London, UK

    Courtney Davis & John Abraham

  3. Department of Sociology, University of York, York, UK

    Andrew Webster

  4. Department of Political Economy, King’s College London, London, UK

    Brian Salter

  5. Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Catherine Waldby

Authors
  1. Alex Faulkner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Courtney Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John Abraham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrew Webster
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Brian Salter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Catherine Waldby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew Webster .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept of Sociology, W/231C, University of York, Wentworth College, Heslington, UK

    Andrew Webster

  2. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Maastricht University, MAASTRICHT, Limburg, The Netherlands

    Sally Wyatt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Faulkner, A., Davis, C., Abraham, J., Webster, A., Salter, B., Waldby, C. (2020). Section 5: Regulation and Governance. In: Webster, A., Wyatt, S. (eds) Health, Technology and Society. Health, Technology and Society. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4354-8_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4354-8_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-15-4353-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-15-4354-8

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation