GCRI · 生物技术与生物安全
两用与伦理
Much life sciences research is dual use: knowledge, materials and technologies developed for beneficial purposes could also be misused to cause harm. This topic, studied at Biotechnology and Biosecurity, a platform of The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI), examines how research of concern is identified, how responsibility is shared between researchers, institutions, funders and publishers, and how concerns are escalated, alongside the wider ethical questions biotechnology raises.
专家提出的问题。
- How can research of concern be identified early, without discouraging beneficial science?
- What responsibilities do researchers, institutions, funders and publishers each hold?
- How should concerns be raised and escalated, and how are those who raise them protected?
- How should the publication of sensitive findings be handled?
- How do ethical questions of consent, equity and benefit sharing apply to biotechnology?
监督与能力登记册。
团队跟踪该主题时会使用的界面：其指标、状态与决策。名称为示例，数值仅作示意。
监督与能力登记册
Dual use and ethics · National committee · Review year 2
- 设有委员会的机构，%61关注
- 已培训员工，%64正常
- 已完成审查55今年
- 已提交的事件报告13信息
机构监督
| A 机构 | 活跃 | Q4 | 87 | 当前 |
| 研究园区 | 活跃 | Q4 | 82 | 审计到期 |
| 生物制造场所 | 组建中 | 无 | 46 | 支持 |
| 诊断网络 | 活跃 | Q3 | 81 | 当前 |
范围说明
- 涵盖
- 治理、培训、审查能力
- 不包括
- 技术方法与智能体
- 权限
- 国家监督机构
- 标签
- SURVEY
Dual-use governance applies wherever life-science research touches the domains.
Governance analyses are designed for the 指数级技术系列. The WHO framework (2022) and the Biological Weapons Convention set the frame; GCRI publishes governance analysis, never methods of concern.
- Governance comparisons.
- Ethics review lessons.
How dual use and ethics is modelled, measured and tested.
模型、其假设、数据和不确定性，以科学家或工程师会核查的形式呈现。结构遵循已发表的方法。所取数值仅为示意，不是研究发现。
不确定性区间
How far the outlook for dual use and ethics could spread, shown as ranges rather than a single line.
- 中心估计值
- 集合的中位数
- 范围
- IPCC 校准用语中的“可能”和“很可能”
- 集合
- 明示成员、情景和初始条件
- 配合阅读
- 结果对每项输入的敏感性
驱动因素与动态。
Dual-use concerns arise because the same experiments that reveal how biological 系统 work can, in rare cases, produce knowledge or materials that could be misused. Policies in several countries define categories of research that require additional review, and funders and journals have developed processes for assessing sensitive work. These processes depend heavily on the judgement and awareness of researchers themselves.
Ethics in biotechnology extends beyond misuse: consent for the use of genetic data, equitable access to benefits, fair sharing of benefits from genetic resources, and respect for communities and ecosystems. A culture of responsibility, in which researchers consider consequences and feel able to raise concerns, is widely regarded as the foundation of effective governance. The platform works at the level of governance, evaluation and risk methods. It publishes no protocols, techniques or information that would increase anyone’s capacity to cause harm.
How it is studied.
- 01
Policy analysis
Comparative studies of dual-use review policies, funder conditions and publication practices.
- 02
Ethics frameworks
Structured approaches for weighing benefits, risks and responsibilities in research decisions.
- 03
Education research
Studies of how training and culture influence awareness and reporting.
- 04
局限
Misuse potential is hard to judge in advance, review processes vary in rigour, and discussions of risk must avoid creating the hazards they seek to prevent.
What it informs and who decides.
This evidence informs institutional review processes, funder and publisher policies, training and national oversight frameworks. Researchers, institutional review committees, funders, publishers and regulators decide within their roles. Governance dialogue is convened by 全球风险论坛（Global Risks Forum，GRF）的卫生与生物安全治理. Concerns can be raised through 更正与关切. Related topics are 实验室生物安全与生物安保, synthetic biology and biological threats; methods sit on molecular and life sciences.
Published analysis on this topic is designed to carry a named subject reviewer, its references and the views of independent specialists, including biosafety professionals and those who disagree.
Where this page’s references lead.
阅读本页时所对照的机构和文件。状态和版本会变化；每个链接都指向发布机构。
问题与解答。
Does dual use mean research should stop?
Who is responsible for identifying research of concern?
How can I raise a concern about research?
由谁审查该主题的覆盖范围？
从本页贡献证据。
报告 is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
- 电子邮件网关 GW-GCRI从本页发送证据、更正、案例、方法、审查、翻译或概况投稿。它会带上本页标签送达，由负责的编辑接收。
- Zenodo开放存缴存缴并提交到社区用您的 ORCID iD 在 Zenodo 上发布您自己的记录，然后提交到那里的 Reports 社区。由策展人审核；DOI 仍归您所有。
- 报告GCRI查看所有贡献方式贡献类型、各自的评审方式、您获得的署名、许可协议，以及绝不接受的内容。
切勿发送个人数据、敏感基础设施细节或您无权分享的任何内容。贡献在使用前会经过审查；发送贡献不赋予署名权或编辑权，赞助也绝不能换取研究结论。
法律文件。
本网站上的地图、数据和图表仅作为背景和一般信息展示。它们不是建议、预测或预警；信息的局限见免责声明和数据说明。