Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Paradigm Change in Innovation Policies? Assessing the Causes and Consequences of Embryo Research Laws

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Innovation Policy and Governance in High-Tech Industries

  • 1176 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter investigates the impact of embryo research laws on the innovative ability of national economies. Based on a quantitative comparison of embryo research laws and biotechnology patents in 21 industrialised Western countries, this chapter makes three arguments. First, we observe a clear trend: Stem cell research has incited a wave of liberalizations of embryo research laws. Second, this trend is not universal. We notice a considerable variation in embryo research laws. This pattern can be explained by the interaction of partisan and societal actors. Third, the variation of embryo research laws is not directly related to the innovative ability of national economies. Permissive embryo research laws are not necessarily associated with an innovative biotechnology sector. The innovativeness often is an unintended consequence, rather than the result, of a political strategy. These results caution against simple theses about the impact of regulation on innovativeness. Impacts of embryo research laws on the innovative ability of the biotech sector will be visible only in the long-term.

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 139.99
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

  • Arie, S. (2005). In Europe, Italy now a guardian of embryo rights. Christian Science Monitor, 14 June 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arundel, A. (2003). Biotechnology indicators and public policy. STI Working Papers, 2003(5).

    Google Scholar 

  • Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI) (2004). Science and innovation: Working towards a ten-year investment framework. A response by the ABPI. http://www.abpi.org.uk/information/pdfs/S&I_consultation.doc. Accessed 20 April 2006.

  • Banchoff, T. (2005). Path dependence and value-driven issues: The comparative politics of stem cell research. World Politics, 57(2), 200–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, T. (2003a). GE free NZ Inc. Submission on the supplementary order paper on the human assisted reproductive technology bill. http://www.biopolitics-berlin2003.org/doc_rt.asp?p=1&id=51. Accessed 28 February 2006.

  • Barr, T. (2003b). Made to order – the government buys into GE babies. OrganicNZ, 62(4), 20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (Eds.). (2001). Biotechnology 1996–2000: The years of controversy. London: Science Museum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (Eds.). (2002). Biotechnology: The making of a global controversy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, T. (2000a). Biotechnology: Investing in the future. Speech held on 17 November 2000, London, http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20060715135117/number10.gov.uk/page1548.

  • Blair, T. (2000b). Wir werden Europa führen. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 8 December 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bondevik, K. M. (2003). Speech at Trans-Atlantic Dialogue on GenEthics and Health. Centre for Strategic & International Studies, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broughton, D. (1988). The social bases of Western European conservative parties. In B. Girvin (Ed.), The transformation of contemporary conservatism (pp. 193–224). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgermeister, J. (2003). Danes begin stem cell work. The Scientist Daily News, 28 October 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrell, R. (2005). Assisted reproduction in the Nordic countries: A comparative study of policies and regulation. Nordic Committee on Bioethics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, C. S. (2001). Source or resource? Human embryo research as an ethical issue. In P. Lauritzen (Ed.), Cloning and the future of human embryo research (pp. 34–49). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castles, F. G. (1994). On religion and public policy: Does Catholicism make a difference? European Journal of Political Research, 25(1), 19–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2005). European research projects involving stem cells in the 6th Framework Programme. Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe. (1998). Medically assisted procreation and the protection of the human embryo: Comparative study on the situation in 39 states. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (2001). Stellungnahme zur Forschung mit embryonalen Stammzellen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dodson, L., & Gray, D. (2002). Embryo ban hits research. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/02/25/1014471629519.html.

  • Duverger, M. (1966). Sociologie politique. Paris: PUF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink, S. (2007a). Ein deutscher Sonderweg? Die deutsche Embryonenforschungspolitik im Licht international vergleichender Daten. Leviathan, 1(2007), 107–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fink, S. (2007b). Ethics vs. innovation? The impact of embryo research laws on the innovative ability of national economies. Science, Technology & Innovation Studies, 3(2), 133–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink, S. (2008a). Forschungspolitik zwischen Innovation und Lebensschutz. Die Determinanten von Embryonenforschungspolitiken im internationalen Vergleich (Staatslehre und politische Verwaltung). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink, S. (2008b). Politics as usual or bringing religion back in? The influence of parties, institutions, economic interests and religion on embryo research laws. Comparative Political Studies, 41(12), 1631–1656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fink, S. (2009). Churches as societal veto players: Religious influence in actor-centered theories of policy making. West European Politics, 32(1), 77–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Futurewatch. (2006). Stem cell research in New Zealand. Wellington: Ministry of Research, Science and Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gearhart, J. (1998). New potential for human embryonic stem cells. Science, 282(5391), 1061–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottweis, H. (1998). Governing molecules: The discursive politics of genetic engineering in Europe and the United States. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabner, P. (1999). Technik, Politik und Gesellschaft: Eine Untersuchung am Beispiel des österreichischen Gentechnikgesetzes. Wien: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gratton, B. (2002). Survey on the national regulations in the European Union regarding research on human embryos. Report for The European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadolt, B. (2005). Reproduktionstechnologiepolitik in Österreich: Die Genese des Fortpflanzungsmedizingesetzes 1992 und die Rolle von ExpertInnen. Reihe Soziologie: Institut für höhere Studien Wien. 74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hague, A. (2006). Stem cell research in Sweden: An overview. Stockholm: British Embassy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haines, L. (2005). Spain greenlights therapeutic cloning. The Register, 11 July 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, D. (1994). Introduction. Christian Democracy as a political phenomenon. In D. Hanley (Ed.), Christian democracy in Europe: A comparative perspective. London: Pinter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallerud, E. (2004). The ambiguity of progress: Biotechnology in Norway. In M. Häyrinen-Alestalo, & E. Kallerud (Eds.), Mediating public concern in biotechnology a map of sites, actors and issues in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Norwegian Institute for Studies in Research and Higher Education Rapport 2/2004 (pp. 83–112).

    Google Scholar 

  • Körtner, U. (2002). Ethische Fragen der Biotechnologie. In C. Kopetzki, & H. Mayer (Eds.), Biotechnologie und Recht (pp. 1–14). Wien: Manz´sche Verlags- und Universitätsbuchhandlung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulawik, T. (2003). Gender representation and the politics of biotechnology in Sweden: Explaining liberal regulations in a social democratic state. Paper presented at the The ECPR General Conference, Marburg, September 19–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauritzen, P. (Ed.). (2001). Cloning and the future of human embryo research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilge, W. (2001). The case for adult stem cell research. 21st Century Science and Technology Magazine, Winter 2001–2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzi, R. (2003). Italy approves embryo law. The Scientist Daily News. 12 December 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayntz, R., & Nedelmann, B. (1987). Eigendynamische soziale Prozesse: Anmerkungen zu einem analytischen Paradigma. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 4(39), 648–669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendieta, E. (2004). Habermas on human cloning. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 30(5–6), 721–743.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minkenberg, M. (2002). Religion and public policy: Institutional, cultural, and political impact on the shaping of abortion policies in Western Democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 35(2), 221–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulkay, M. (1997). The embryo research debates: Science and the politics of reproduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Packer, K., & Webster, A. (1996). Patenting culture in science: Reinventing the scientific wheel of credibility. Science, Technology & Human Values, 21(4), 427–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time: History, institutions, and social analysis. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramjoué, C., & Klöti, U. (2004). ART policy in Italy: Explaining the lack of comprehensive regulation. In I. Bleiklie, M. L. Goggin, & C. Rothmayr (Eds.), Comparative biomedical policy: Governing assisted reproductive technologies (pp. 42–63). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothmayr, C., & Ramjoué, C. (2004). Germany. ART policies as embryo protection. In I. Bleiklie, M. L. Goggin, & C. Rothmayr (Eds.), Comparative biomedical policy: Governing assisted reproductive technologies (pp. 174–190). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, M. A. (2001). Creating embryos for research: On weighing symbolic costs. In P. Lauritzen (Ed.), Cloning and the future of human embryo research (pp. 50–66). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games real actors play: Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiffino, N., & Varone, F. (2004). ART policy in Belgium: A bioethical paradise? In I. Bleiklie, M. L. Goggin, & C. Rothmayr (Eds.), Comparative biomedical policy: Governing assisted reproductive technologies (pp. 21–41). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, M. G. (1993). Theorien in der international vergleichenden Staatstätigkeitsforschung. In A. Héritier (Ed.), Policy-Analyse. Kritik und Neuorientierung (pp. 371–393). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, V., & Bauer, J. (2007). Governance: Prospects of complexity theory in revisiting system theory. Quello Center Working Papers, 07–01. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, M. (2004). Church and state clash, noisily, in Spain. NYTimes on the Web, 4 October 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sleator, A. (2000). Stem cell research under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990. House of Commons Library Research Paper 00/93. London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spaemann, R. (2001). Gezeugt, nicht gemacht. Die verbrauchende Embryonenforschung ist ein Anschlag auf die Menschenwürde. In C. Geyer (Ed.), Biopolitik (pp. 41–50). Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spar, D. (2004). The business of stem cells. New England Journal of Medicine, 351, 211–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs (2000). Scientific, ethical and regulatory aspects of human cloning and stem cell research. Public hearing. House of Representatives, Parliament of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. (2001). Scientific, ethical and regulatory aspects of human cloning and stem cell research. Parliament of Australia: House of Representatives.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinbock, B. (2001). Respect for human embryos. In P. Lauritzen (Ed.), Cloning and the future of human embryo research (pp. 21–33). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stock, G., & Campbell, J. (Eds.). (2000). Engineering the human germline: An exploration of the science and ethics of altering the genes we pass on to our children. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stranzinger, P. (1992). Die artifizielle menschliche Fortpflanzung aus medizinischer, ethischer und juristischer Sicht: Staatliche und kirchliche Standpunkte zur artifiziellen Insemination, zur In-vitro-Fertilisation und zum Umgang mit menschlichen Embryonen - ein Vergleich. Salzburg, Salzburg: Univ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, J. A., Itskovitz-Eldor, J., Shapiro, S. S., Waknitz, M. A., Swiergiel, J. J., Marshall, V. S., et al. (1998). Embryonic stem cell lines derived from human blastocysts. Science, 282(5391), 1145–1147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torgersen, H., Hampel, J., Jelsøe, E., et al. (2002). Promise, problems and proxies: Twenty-five years of debate and regulation in Europe. In M. W. Bauer & G. Gaskell (Eds.), Biotechnology: The making of a global controversy (pp. 21–94). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNESCO. (2004). National legislation concerning human reproductive and therapeutic cloning. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Beuzekom, B. (2001). Biotechnology statistics in OECD member countries: Compendium of existing national statistics. STI Working Papers, 2001(6).

    Google Scholar 

  • Varone, F., & Schiffino, N. (2004). Regulating red and green biotechnologies in Belgium: Diverging designs of biopolicies. Archives of Public Health, 62(1–2), 83–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varone, F., & Schiffino, N. (2007). Conflict and consensus in Belgian biopolicies: GMO controversy versus biomedical self-regulation. In É. Montpetit, C. Rothmayr, & F. Varone (Eds.), The politics of biotechnology in North America and Europe: Policy networks, institutions, and internationalization (pp. 193–213). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith. (1987). Donum vitae: Instruction on respect for human life in its origin and on the dignity of the procreation. Origins, 40, 697–711.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters, L. (2004). Human embyronic stem cell research: An intercultural perspective. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 14(1), 3–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, J., & Osborne, R. (2006). Attitudes to embryonic stem cell research in New Zealand. Wellington: Bioethics Council of New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bamberg, Bamberg, Germany

    Simon Fink

Authors
  1. Simon Fink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon Fink .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Quello Center for Telecommunication, Michigan State University, Communication Arts and Sc. Building 409, East Lansing, 48824, Michigan, USA

    Johannes Bauer

  2. , Department of Politics and Management, University of Konstanz, Universitätsstr. 10, Konstanz, 78464, Germany

    Achim Lang

  3. , Department of Politics and Management, University of Konstanz, Universitätsstr. 10, Konstanz, 78464, Germany

    Volker Schneider

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Fink, S. (2012). A Paradigm Change in Innovation Policies? Assessing the Causes and Consequences of Embryo Research Laws. In: Bauer, J., Lang, A., Schneider, V. (eds) Innovation Policy and Governance in High-Tech Industries. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12563-8_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12563-8_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-12562-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-12563-8

  • eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation