Abstract
Despite the fact that Dual Use (DU) research and related ethical dilemmas are almost as old as modern science, the debate concerning Dual Use issues has been going on with increasing intensity during the first two decades of the new millennium. The anthrax terrorist attacks in 2001 and the experimental derivation of mammalian transmissible H5N1 influenza in 2012 posed as ominous milestones, reflecting the possibility of misuse of technological advances in biotechnology. New discussions among scientists, policy makers, and society are underway, in order to find new solutions to long-standing, acute concerns. In this chapter, we discuss the latest developments in the Dual Use debate, focusing on policy issues concerning the governance of publicly funded Dual Use research.
Potential Dual Use concerns arise when a number of critical decisions must be made, for example, about controlling the balance between openness and confidentiality of research data, about regulating synergies between research for civilian and military applications, and about resolving the conundrum of who is to be held responsible: the individual scientist or the overarching legal framework. This chapter is based on an extensive survey of the relevant literature, including EU and US legal frameworks controlling Dual Use research, and the latest findings of an EU-funded study that has delivered a set of best practices for identifying and assessing Dual Use issues in technological research.
References
Acosta M, Coronado D, Marín R (2010) Potential DU of military technology: citing patents shed light on this process. Def Peace Econ 22:335–349
Acosta M, Coronado D, Ferrandiz E et al (2017) Patents and dual-use technology: an empirical study of the world’s largest defense companies. Def Peace Econ. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2017.1303239
Aicardi C, Bitsch L, Bang Bådum N et al (2018) Opinion of “responsible dual use”, ethics and society division. Hum Brain Project. https://sos-ch-dk-2.exo.io/public-website-production/filer_public/f8/f0/f8f09276-d370-4758-ad03-679fa1c57e95/hbp-ethics-society-2018-opinion-on-dual-use.pdf. Accessed 6 May 2019
ALLEA (2017). https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/hi/h2020-ethics_code-of-conduct_en.pdf. Accessed 23 Mar 2019
Bezuidenhout L (2013) Data sharing and dual-use issues. Sci Eng Ethics 19:83–92
Cami G (ed) (2015) Dual use technologies in the European Union – prospects to the future. Friend of Europe, Brussels
Casadevall A, Dermody TS, Imperiale MJ et al (2015) Dual-use research of concern (DURC) review at American Society for microbiology journals. MBio 6:e01236-15
Charitidis C (2018) Best practice for identifying and assessing the dual-use issues in enabling technologies research, JANUS. Directorate-general for research and innovation, Key Enabling Technologies. Available via EUROPA, EU law and publications. https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/3e312d8e-8a35-11e8-ac6a-01aa75ed71a1/language-en. Accessed 5 Oct 2018
Cirigliano A, Cenciarelli O, Malizia A et al (2017) Biological dual-use research and synthetic biology of yeast. Sci Eng Ethics 23:365–374
De Grasse TN, Lang A (2018) Accessory to war (2018). W.W. Norton
Droff J (2014) The economic and spatial sides of defence support. Evol Bound Def 23:51–73
Dubov A (2014) The concept of governance in dual-use research. Med Health Care Philos 17:447–457
Ehni HJ (2008) Dual use and the ethical responsibility of scientists. VARIA-Ethics Sci 56:147–152
Godecharle S, Nemery B, Dierickx K (2013) Guidance on research integrity: no union in Europe. Lancet 381:1097–1098
H2020 programme “Guidelines to the Rules on Open Accessto Scientific Publications and Open Access to Research Datain Horizon 2020” European Commission, Directorate-General for Research & Innovation (2017) http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilot-guide_en.pdf. Accessed 23 Mar 2019
H2020 21 2019. http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilot-guide_en.pdf. Accessed 23 Mar 2019
HBP (2018) Human brain project. https://sos-ch-dk-2.exo.io/public-website-production/filer_public/f8/f0/f8f09276-d370-4758-ad03-679fa1c57e95/hbp-ethics-society-2018-opinion-on-dual-use.pdf. Accessed 23 Mar 2019
Imperiale MJ, Casadevall A (2015) A new synthesis for dual use research of concern. PLoS Med 12:e1001813
ISESG International Space Exploration Coordination Group (2013) Benefits stemming from space exploration. https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Benefits-Stemming-from-Space-Exploration-2013-TAGGED.pdf. Accessed 23 Mar 2019
Kennedy P (1989) The rise and fall of the great powers. Fontana Press. Hammersmith, London.
Kuhlau F, Hoglund AT, Evers K et al (2011) A precautionary principle for DU research in the life sciences. Bioethcs 25:1–8
Lee BK, Sohn SY (2017) Exploring the effect of dual use on the value of military technology patents based on the renewal decision. Scientometrics 112:1203–1227
Marchant G, Gulley L (2010) National security neuroscience and the reverse dual-use dilemma. AJOB Neurosci 1:20–22
Mark JH (2010) A Neuroskeptic’s guide to Neuroethics and national security. Neuroscience 1:4–12
Miller S, Selgelid MJ (2007) Ethical and philosophical consideration of the dual-use dilemma in the biological sciences. Sci Eng Ethics 13:523–580
NASA (1976). https://spinoff.nasa.gov. Accessed 23 Mar 2019
NASA (2007). https://web.archive.org/web/20141004003618/http://www.techbriefs.com/legal. Accessed 23 Mar 2019
Oltmann SM (2015) Dual use beyond the life sciences: an LIS perspective. Libr Inf Sci Res 37:176–188
Owen R, Macnaghten PM, Stilgoe J (2012) Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with society. Sci Public Policy 39:751–760
Patrone D, Resnik D, Chin L (2012) Biosecur Bioter 10:290–298
Pustovit SV, Williams ED (2010) Philosophical aspects of dual use technologies. Sci Eng Ethics 16:17031
Resnik DB (2009) What is dual use research: a response to Miller and Selgelid. Sci Eng Ethics 15:3–5
Salloch S (2018) The dual use of research ethics committees: Why professional self-governance falls short in preserving biosecurity. BMC Med Ethics 19:53
Selgelid MJ (2007) Bioterrorism, society and health care ethics. In: Ashcroft RE, Dawson A, Draper H, JR MM (eds) Principles of health care ethics. Wiley, Hammersmith, London. pp 631–637
Selgelid MJ (2009) Dual-use research codes of conduct: lessons from the life sciences. NanoEthics 3:175–183
Van der Bruggen K (2012) Possibilities, intentions and threats: dual use in the life sciences reconsidered. Sci Eng Ethics 18:741–756
Watkins TA (1990) Beyond guns and butter: managing dual-use technologies. Technovation 6:389–406
Williams-Jones B, Olivier C, Smith E (2014) Governing DU research in Canada: a policy review. Sci Public Policy 41:76–93
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Kavouras, P., Charitidis, C.A. (2019). Dual Use in Modern Research. In: Iphofen, R. (eds) Handbook of Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76040-7_7-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76040-7_7-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-76040-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-76040-7
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities