Assessing the Risks and Benefits of Advances in Science and Technology: Exploring the Potential of Qualitative Frameworks.

Continuing rapid advances in science and technology both pose potential risks and offer potential benefits for the effective implementation of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC). The lack of commonly accepted methods for assessing relevant risks and benefits present significant challenges to building common understandings that could support policy choices. This article argues that qualitative frameworks can provide the basis to structure BWC discussions about potential risks and benefits, reveal areas of agreement and disagreement, and provide a basis for continuing dialogue. It draws on the results of a workshop held in Geneva during the 2019 BWC Meetings of Experts. A diverse group of international experts were given the opportunity to apply 2 qualitative frameworks developed specifically to assess potential biosecurity concerns arising from emerging science and technology to BWC-relevant case examples. Participants discussed how such frameworks might be adapted and put into action to help support the BWC. They also began a discussion of how a comparable framework to assess potential benefits could be developed.

The challenge of framing for efforts to mitigate the risks of "dual use" research in the life sciences.

Drawing upon insights from research in the social sciences about the role of "issue framing" in policy debates, the paper presents an argument for employing "Responsible Science" as the fundamental frame for strategies to engage scientists and scientific organizations in issues related to the potential risks posed by "dual use" research in the life sciences. It argues that this focus on responsibilities rather than requirements will be more effective, particularly in initial engagement efforts. The work of several international scientific organizations to employ this framing in their education and outreach activities is presented to illustrate the advantages of such an approach. The paper also includes a case study of a controversy over dual use research with highly pathogenic avian influenza to illustrate the power of framing in policy debates.

Engaging actively with issues in the responsible conduct of science: lessons from international efforts are relevant for undergraduate education in the United States.

Numerous studies are demonstrating that engaging undergraduate students in original research can improve their achievement in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields and increase the likelihood that some of them will decide to pursue careers in these disciplines. Associated with this increased prominence of research in the undergraduate curriculum are greater expectations from funders, colleges, and universities that faculty mentors will help those students, along with their graduate students and postdoctoral fellows, develop an understanding and sense of personal and collective obligation for responsible conduct of science (RCS). This Feature describes an ongoing National Research Council (NRC) project and a recent report about educating faculty members in culturally diverse settings (Middle East/North Africa and Asia) to employ active-learning strategies to engage their students and colleagues deeply in issues related to RCS. The NRC report describes the first phase of this project, which took place in Aqaba and Amman, Jordan, in September 2012 and April 2013, respectively. Here we highlight the findings from that report and our subsequent experience with a similar interactive institute in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Our work provides insights and perspectives for faculty members in the United States as they engage undergraduate and graduate students, as well as postdoctoral fellows, to help them better understand the intricacies of and connections among various components of RCS. Further, our experiences can provide insights for those who may wish to establish "train-the-trainer" programs at their home institutions.