This research examines how different justifications for public involvement and engagement (PIE) in genomics research contribute to establishing social license to operate (SLO) - the public's acceptance and trust necessary for legitimate research activities.
The study focuses on two competing justifications for PIE: democratic approaches emphasizing procedural fairness and public rights versus pragmatic approaches prioritizing research outcomes and risk management. Using Singapore's genomics initiatives as a case study, this research explores how these different approaches align with conditions necessary for maintaining SLO: reciprocity, protection against exploitation, and delivery of societal benefits. As genomics research expands globally, maintaining public legitimacy becomes crucial for ethical and practical success. However, limited understanding exists regarding which approaches to PIE best builds long-term trust and acceptance, particularly in non-Western governance contexts.
The study uses normative analysis to develop theoretical propositions about PIE-SLO relationships, followed by qualitative interviews with diverse stakeholders including researchers, policymakers, community representatives, and public contributors to test these propositions empirically.
Preliminary analysis suggests democratic PIE more reliably sustains SLO, though implementation requires cultural adaptation. The research aims to develop context-sensitive guidelines for legitimate genomics governance that preserve democratic principles while respecting Singapore's communitarian values, offering insights for other countries navigating similar challenges in emerging biotechnology governance.