Engagement for genetic modification technologies in conservation: For whom, how, and for what ends?

Questions of engagement loom large for the use of genetic modification technologies in conservation. As scientific teams rapidly move towards implementing changes that will fundamentally alter entire species, concerns are regularly raised that associated engagement activities are inadequate. It is therefore vital to take stock of recent social research that critically examines how engagement is being enacted: who is engaged and by whom, how and on what terms, and for whom or what those processes serve. Despite a rise in calls for engagement, our review shows emergent gestures towards engagement by developers and regulators lean strongly towards narrow instrumental approaches that reinforce knowledge hierarchies and existing power imbalances. It contributes to engagement practices that are often vague and tokenistic, and focused on one-way education and snapshots of opinion, rather than mutual reciprocity and dialogue. To counter these undercurrents, our review draws attention to the ways social researchers are seeking to reorient engagement for genetic modification towards its more substantive and democratic possibilities, through articulating process, amplifying plurality, and acknowledging contestation.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
PubData
Published
2025-08-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48548/pubdata-3137
Primary Topic
Genetically Modified Organisms Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Engagement for genetic modification technologies in conservation: For whom, how, and for what ends?

Riley Taitingfong, Franca Buelow, Sylvia Nissen, Amanda Black
PubData
Genetically Modified Organisms Research
article

Engagement for genetic modification technologies in conservation: For whom, how, and for what ends?

Riley Taitingfong, Franca Buelow, Sylvia Nissen, Amanda Black
article en

Abstract

Questions of engagement loom large for the use of genetic modification technologies in conservation. As scientific teams rapidly move towards implementing changes that will fundamentally alter entire species, concerns are regularly raised that associated engagement activities are inadequate. It is therefore vital to take stock of recent social research that critically examines how engagement is being enacted: who is engaged and by whom, how and on what terms, and for whom or what those processes serve. Despite a rise in calls for engagement, our review shows emergent gestures towards engagement by developers and regulators lean strongly towards narrow instrumental approaches that reinforce knowledge hierarchies and existing power imbalances. It contributes to engagement practices that are often vague and tokenistic, and focused on one-way education and snapshots of opinion, rather than mutual reciprocity and dialogue. To counter these undercurrents, our review draws attention to the ways social researchers are seeking to reorient engagement for genetic modification towards its more substantive and democratic possibilities, through articulating process, amplifying plurality, and acknowledging contestation.

PubData
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Genetically Modified Organisms Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Engagement for genetic modification technologies in conservation: For whom, how, and for what ends? — Riley Taitingfong, Franca Buelow, et al. · PubData (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS