Carmen, I. (2004). Politics in the laboratory. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar

Convention on Biological Diversity (2000). Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.Google Scholar

Jennings, B. (2003). The liberalism of life: Bioethics in the face of biopower. Raritan, 22(4), 132–147.Google Scholar

López, J. J., & Robertson, A. (2007). Ethics or politics? The emergence of ELSI discourse in Canada. The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 44(2), 201–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Macnaghten, P., Kearnes, M., & Wynne, B. (2005). Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: What role for the social sciences? Science Communication, 27(2), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCain, L. (2002). Informing technology policy decisions: the US Human Genome Project’s ethical, legal, and social implications programs as a critical case. Technology in Society, 24(1–2), 111–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

National Human Genome Research Institute (2004). ELSI planning and evaluation history: The planning and evaluation history of the ethical, legal and social implications (ELSI) Research Program. http://www.genome.gov/10001754. Accessed 21 September 2009.

Rei, Wenmay (2003). In search of an institutional paradigm for genetic technology: Integrated institutional capacity—building, dynamic decision-making mechanism, and deliberative normative foundations 2002–2004. National Science Council Project Proposal.Google Scholar

Sismondo, S. (2008). Science and technology studies and an engaged program. In E. J. Hackett et al. (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (3rd ed., pp. 13–31). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

The Executive Yuan (2009) The national science and technology development plan of 2009–2012, Measure 4313.Google Scholar

UNESCO (1997). Universal declaration on the human genome and human rights.Google Scholar

Wynne, B. (2005). Risk as globalizing ‘Democratic’ Discourse? Framing subjects and citizens. In M. Leach, I. Scoones, & B. Wynne (Eds.), Science and citizens: globalization & the challenge of engagement (pp. 66–82). London: Zed Books.Google Scholar