Abstract：The governance of emerging technological risks has become an important and urgent practical issue.Taking human genome editing as an example,this study found that the“technocracy”paradigm based on scientific rationality has formed in current risk governance,in which scientific experts are dominant,and the participation of non-scientific subjects is weakened or even absent.However,there are scientific uncertainties in technology,methodology,and epistemology in human gene editing,which make technocracy face knowledge dilemmas,responsibility dilemmas,and trust dilemmas.Therefore,a paradigm reform of“reflexive governance”is needed,which takes scientific uncertainty as the premise of governance,emphasizes risk rationality as the rational basis,inclusive deliberation as the practice model,and trust reconstruction as the goal.
[1]WHO.Human genome editing:a framework for governance[R].Geneva:World Health Organization,2021. [2]BAYLIS F,DARNOVSKY M,HASSON K,et al.Human germline and heritable genome editing:the global policy landscape[J].The CRISPR journal,2020,3(5):365-377. [3]刘永谋.技术治理的逻辑[J].中国人民大学学报,2016(6):118-127. [4]贾萨诺夫.自然的设计:欧美的科学与民主[M].尚智丛,译.上海:上海交通大学出版社,2011. [5]ROSS C.Hand servant of technocracy:public engagement and expertise in heritable human genome editing[J].Spontaneous generations,2022,10(1):63-87. [6]周吉银,王明旭.“基因编辑婴儿”事件后的伦理重塑[J].中国医学伦理学,2019(1):1694-1698. [7]刘园园.人类胚胎基因编辑研究纳入管理规范[N].科技日报,2016-05-14(4). [8]WHO.Human genome editing:recommendations[R].Geneva:World Health Organization,2021. [9]徐凌.科学不确定性的类型、来源及影响[J].哲学动态,2006(3):48-53. [10]高良,杨爱华,朱亚宗.“基因编辑婴儿”事件的伦理争议与规制原则探微[J].自然辩证法通讯,2019(7):14-22. [11]KRIMSKY S,GOLDING D.Social theories of risk[M].London:Greenwood Publishing Group,1992. [12]吴标兵,许为民.技术不确定性:技术政治学的分析视角[J].中共浙江省委党校学报,2014(1):76-81. [13]王慧媛,李鹏飞,徐丽娟,等.基因编辑技术伦理治理探讨[J].中国科学院院刊,2021(11):1259-1269. [14]周桂田.知识、科学与不确定性:专家与科技系统的“无知”如何建构风险[J].政治与社会哲学评论,2005(13):131-180. [15]贝克.世界风险社会[M].吴英姿,译.南京:南京大学出版社,2004. [16]EVERSON M,VOS E.Uncertain risks regulated[M].London:Routledge,2009. [17]赵鹏.知识与合法性:风险社会的行政法治原理[J].行政法学研究,2011(4):46-53. [18]吉登斯.现代性的后果[M].田禾,译.南京:译林出版社,2011. [19]GREGOROWIUS D,ANDORNO B,ZEMP D.The role of scientific self-regulation for the control of genome editing in the human germline[J].EMBO reports,2017,18(3):355-358. [20]周桂田.全球化风险挑战下发展型国家之治理创新:以台湾公民知识监督决策为分析[J].政治与社会哲学评论,2013(44):65-148. [21]贝克,吉登斯,拉什.自反性现代化:现代社会秩序中的政治、传统与美学[M].赵文书,译.北京:商务印书馆,2001. [22]VOB J,BAUKNECHT D,KEM R.Reflexive governance for sustainable development[M].Cheltenham:Edward Elgar,2006. [23]贝克.风险社会[M].张文杰,译.南京:译林出版社,2018. [24]肖瑛.从“理性vs非(反)理性”到“反思vs自反”:社会理论中现代性诊断范式的流变[J].社会,2005(2):1-24. [25]JASANOFF S,HURLBUT B.Democratic governance of human germline genome editing[J].The CRISPR journal,2019,2(5):266-271. [26]顾忠华.第二现代:风险社会的出路[M].台北:巨流图书公司,2001. [27]唐伟华.对作为经验的欧美人类种系基因编辑立法的省思[J].科学与社会,2019(4):57-72. [28]HANZHI Y,XUE L,BARRANGOU R,et al.Opinion:toward inclusive global governance of human genome editing[J].Proceedings of the national academy of sciences,2021,118(47):1-5. [29]DRYZEK J,NICOL D,NIEMEYER S,et al.Global citizen deliberation on genome editing[J].Science,2020,369(6510):1435-1437. [30]WYNNE B.风险社会、不确定性和科学民主化:STS的未来[J].周任芸,译.科技、医疗与社会,2007(5):15-42. [31]CATALA A.Democracy,trust,and epistemic justice[J].The monist,2015(98):424-440.
2023, 
