Search

Hybrid breeding may revolutionise the potato world, especially in low- and middle-income countries. The major impact will be on yield in remote and challenging agro-environments. We expect that hybrid breeding will increase the turnover of varieties in those environments when new seed systems based on hybrid true potato seed have been established. With faster breeding and multiplication systems, it is possible to produce clean seed and to respond to climate change as well as rapidly changing market and societal needs. For this revolution to happen, the potato production system (of both seed and ware) needs to be radically changed and such changes are not easy to orchestrate. During the introduction of such a potentially disruptive innovative technology, many actors, stakeholders and institutions play a significant role and each of these parties has its own objectives, interests, and concerns. This concluding chapter aims to answer the question how such a radical innovation can be steered in a societally responsible manner to realise global food security and sustainability in potato production. To guide and coordinate the system innovations triggered by the potential of hybrid potato breeding, strong public-private partnerships are required in different links of the potato value chain.

Potato is an important crop for food security. However, it is very vulnerable to diseases and pests and these are partly seed-borne and therefore transmitted from one generation to the next. Breeding is cumbersome while multiplication is slow. These issues can be solved by a new technology: hybrid breeding based on true potato seed. This book gives an overview of relevant developments in creating new opportunities making use of this technology. This introductory chapter describes the aims of the book, provides a main agenda for debate on this new technology and outlines the structure of the book and briefly indicates the contents of its chapters.

Synthetic biology is a series of scientific and technological practices involved in the application of engineering principles to the design and production of predictable and robust biological systems. While policy discussions abound in this area, emerging technologies like synthetic biology present considerable challenges in the articulation of concrete policy options given that their introduction into society may still be in the distant future. This paper reports on a series of governance workshops that focused on synthetic biology’s ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) as they pertain to human health, and discusses particular limitations of the ELSI approach that we encountered in our work. In an attempt to avoid policymaking for potential implications of uncertain future applications we instead conclude by proposing tangible forms of anticipatory governance that may be more adequate in addressing the more immediate concerns raised by synthetic biology.

Valorization of knowledge has been defined as a major challenge in the context of genomics as an emerging strategic research field. Valorization is a Dutch science-policy concept for what is elsewhere called science impact or the third mission of universities. This article describes the institutionalization of valorization policy in the Dutch genomics research system as a specific manifestation of a changing social contract between science and society, which mainly targets economic value creation and the stimulation of entrepreneurship. A societal debate has emerged in which this focus on economic aspects has been strongly criticized as one-sided. In response, policy-makers are willing to adopt a broader definition of valorization. On the basis of an analysis of valorization policies and practices in Dutch medical genomics, this article draws attention to two myths in this valorization debate.

Developments in public health genomics (PHG) hold the promise to be beneficial for individuals and to promote public health. Central to this paper is the idea that given the range of uncertainties and ambiguities related to genome-based information and technologies (GBIT), the responsible introduction of GBIT in health care systems requires an incremental approach. The paper highlights policy issues connected to two major shifts connected to developments in PHG that challenge traditional boundaries. First, the introduction of GBIT in health care systems challenges the boundary between research and clinical care. It entails complex data flows that raise a number of issues relating to infrastructural demands, intellectual property, data security and privacy, tensions between the needs of research and the needs of the individual, patient rights and professional responsibilities, and the potential feedback of (re)analysed data. Secondly, the introduction of GBIT in health care systems challenges the boundary between clinical care (particularly diagnostics) and screening. Both diagnostics and screening involve potentially large amounts of information about an individual’s genome, and raise new and challenging issues concerning quality assessment and how to deal with unsolicited information that might be generated from these tests. These issues could arise in a variety of health care settings in which whole genome sequencing tests find further application in established and new practices of diagnostics and screening. The possibility of screening the whole genome raises the question of what to screen for and when, and whether existing evaluative frameworks – concerning quality assessment and ethical and legal aspects of GBIT – are robust enough, or require fine-tuning. These shifts have implications for the relations between all stakeholders. The responsible introduction of GBIT in the health care system thus requires an early dialogue in which these stakeholders are activ, Developments in public health genomics (PHG) hold the promise to be beneficial for individuals and to promote public health. Central to this paper is the idea that given the range of uncertainties and ambiguities related to genome-based information and technologies (GBIT), the responsible introduction of GBIT in health care systems requires an incremental approach. The paper highlights policy issues connected to two major shifts connected to developments in PHG that challenge traditional boundaries. First, the introduction of GBIT in health care systems challenges the boundary between research and clinical care. It entails complex data flows that raise a number of issues relating to infrastructural demands, intellectual property, data security and privacy, tensions between the needs of research and the needs of the individual, patient rights and professional responsibilities, and the potential feedback of (re)analysed data. Secondly, the introduction of GBIT in health care systems challenges the boundary between clinical care (particularly diagnostics) and screening. Both diagnostics and screening involve potentially large amounts of information about an individual’s genome, and raise new and challenging issues concerning quality assessment and how to deal with unsolicited information that might be generated from these tests. These issues could arise in a variety of health care settings in which whole genome sequencing tests find further application in established and new practices of diagnostics and screening. The possibility of screening the whole genome raises the question of what to screen for and when, and whether existing evaluative frameworks – concerning quality assessment and ethical and legal aspects of GBIT – are robust enough, or require fine-tuning. These shifts have implications for the relations between all stakeholders. The responsible introduction of GBIT in the health care system thus requires an early dialogue in which these stakeholders are activ