Abstract
Genetic biobanks are generally seen as structures of scientific research and therefore they are just considered a matter for scientists; following this common point of view, we have, on the one hand, science, and on the other hand, society. On the contrary, it will be shown that biobanks could be considered an example of the mutual constitution of the scientific and the social. After a theoretical re-framing of the relationship between science and society in the light of the Science and Technologies Studies perspective, it will be clarified how biobanks perfectly embody this mixture of science and society: they collect, purify and conserve organic material which is seemingly from an environment external to that of science, but to make it available for scientific research, they reorganize the environment according to its needs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bauman, Z. 1995. Life in Fragments: Essays in Postmodern Morality. Oxford: Blackwell.
Beck, U. 1992. Risk Society: Toward a New Modernity. London: Sage.
Brown, N. 2005. “Shifting Tenses: Reconnecting Regimes of Truth and Hope.” Configurations 13: 331–55.
Busby, H. 2006. “Biobanks, Bioethics and Concepts of Donated Blood in the UK.” Sociology of Health & Illness 28 (6): 850–65.
Featherstone, M., M. Hepworth, and B. Turner. 1991. The Body: Social Process and Cultural Theory. London: Sage.
Fujimura, J. 2003. “Future Imaginaries: Genome Scientists as Sociocultural Entrepreneurs.” In Genetica Nature/Culture: Anthropology and Science Beyond the Two-Culture Divide, edited by A. Goodman et al. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Giddens, A. 1990. The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A. 1991. Modernity and Self-Identity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Haddow, G., L. Graeme, S. Cunningham-Burley et al. 2007. “Tackling Community Concerns About Commercialisation and Genetic Research: A Modest Interdisciplinary Proposal.” Social Science & Medicine 64: 272–82.
Hogle, L.. 2008. “Emerging Medical Technologies.” In Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, edited by E. Hackett et al. Boston: MIT Press.
Jasanoff S. (Ed.). 2004. States of Knowledge: The Co-production on Science and Social Order. London: Routledge.
Keating, P., and A. Cambrosio. 2003. Medical Platform: Realigning the Normal and the Pathological in Late-Twentieth-Century Medicine. Boston: MIT Press.
Knorr-Cetina, K. 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford: Pergamon.
Lash, C. 1979. The Culture of Narcissism. New York: Norton & Co.
Latour, B. 1984. Les microbes: guerre et paix, suivi de Irreductions. Paris: Metailie.
Latour, B. 1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Clarendon.
Latour, B., and S. Woolgar. 1979. Laboratory Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Mauss, M. 1923–1924. “Essai sur le don. Forme et raison de l’échange dans les sociétés archaïques”. Année Sociologique (Seconde série).
Melucci, A. 1996. The Playing Self: Person and Meaning in the Planetary Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Melucci, A. 1997. “The Social Production of Nature.” In Gene Technology and the Public, edited by S. Lundin and M. Ideland, 58–70. Lund: Nordic Academic Press.
Mitchell, R., and C. Waldby. 2009. “National Biobanks: Clinical Labour, Risk Production, and the Creation of Biovalue.” Science, Technology and Human Values. doi: 10.1177/0162243909340267.
Mulkay, M. 1979. Science and the Sociology of Knowledge. London & Boston: Allen & Unwin.
Nelkin, D., and S. Lindee. 1995. The DNA Mystique: The Gene as a Cultural Icon. New York: Freeman.
Palsson, G., and P. Rabinow. 1999. “Iceland: The Case of a National Human Genome Project.” Anthropology Today 15 (5): 14–18.
Palsson, G., and P. Rabinow. 2001. “The Icelandic Genome Debates.” Trends in Biotechnology 19 (5): 166–71.
Shilling, C. 1993. The Body and the Social Theory. London: Sage.
Sigurdsson, S. 2001. “Yin-Yang Genetics, or the HSD Decode Controversy.” New Genetics and Society 20 (2): 103–17.
Testa, G. 2006. “Che cos’è un clone? Pratiche e significato delle biotecnologie rosse in un mondo globale.” In Cellule e cittadini, edited by M. Bucchi and F. Neresini. Milano: Sironi.
Thompson, C. 2005. Making Parents: The Ontological Choreography of Reproductive Technologies. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Tutton, R. 2004. “Person, Property and Gift: Exploring Languages of Tissue Donation to Biomedical Research.” In Genetic Databases: Socio-Ethical Issues in the Collection and Use of DNA, edited by R. Tutton and O. Corrigan. London: Routledge.
van Dijck, J. 1998. ImagEnation: Popular Images of Genetics. New York: New York University Press.
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): 305–23.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Neresini, F. (2011). Social Aspects of Biobanking: Beyond the Public/Private Distinction and Inside the Relationship Between the Body and Identity. In: Lenk, C., Sándor, J., Gordijn, B. (eds) Biobanks and Tissue Research. The International Library of Ethics, Law and Technology, vol 8. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1673-5_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1673-5_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1672-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1673-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)