|
|
|
| Subjects， Procedures and Method Optimization in the Construction of Science and Technology Ethical Review System |
| Cao Yiyang |
| (School of Law, Central China Normal University,Wuhan 430079,China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract The rapid development of science and technology, especially the emergence of new technologies, has brought benefits to the whole society. However, the ethical risks it brings have become increasingly prominent. The ethical and moral issues are mainly related to nuclear technology, biotechnology and information technology. How to promote scientific and technological ethical governance and prevent scientific and technological ethical risks have become the new mission. For this reason, it is of great significance to strengthen the ethical review of science and technology. Ethical review is an effective means of scientific and technological ethics governance, and ethical review of science and technology follows the concept of “science and technology for good”. Ethical review is served as gatekeeper and has a very important normative effect on research and innovation in cutting-edge scientific and technological fields.In order to give full play to the role of ethical review in the governance of scientific and technological ethics, attention should be paid to the construction and improvement of relevant mechanisms for ethical review.#br#There are still some deficiencies in China's construction mechanisms of the ethics committee, the operation of the ethical review procedures and the application of the ethical review methods. For example, the standardization and homogeneity of the ethics committee construction are still insufficient, which affects the overall level of the ethics committee construction. The procedures and mechanisms for avoiding conflicts of interest are far from satisfactory, and this may lead to unfair ethical review results. Due to the lack of homogeneous review standards, mutual recognition of the ethical review results is highly affected. The mechanism for the construction of information technology for ethical review is not good enough, leading to a generally low level of information management. These problems will influence the quality and efficiency of the ethical review of science and technology. Therefore, it is necessary to find the countermeasures and optimize relevant mechanisms.#br#By using the research methodology of case study, data analysis, overseas experience, and other methods and approaches, this study concludes the following countermeasures for further improvement and optimization. (1) Regarding the construction of the ethics committee, the relevant certification mechanism should be built, and the entry threshold should be raised to comprehensively improve the strength of the committee. The independence of the ethics committee should be enhanced from three aspects of personnel recruitment, independent establishment and financial support. The review capacity of the ethics committee should be continuously strengthened through system constraints, business training, guidance and supervision. (2) As to the operation of ethical review procedures, the conflict of interest avoidance mechanism should be improved, and the scope of the avoidance subject should be reasonably determined. Scientific and technological ethical risk assessment standards should be set to define the risk classification and its connotation, and corresponding review procedures should be used according to the risk levels of research projects in the hierarchical and classified management. (3)With regarding to the ethical review methods, the mutual recognition mechanism of review results should be optimized to improve review efficiency and quality through mutual recognition. It is necessary to strengthen the construction of ethical review information, promote the standardization of electronic data, and improve the authority management system of the information system.#br#In conclusion, the above research can solve the specific problems existing in the practice of the ethical review of science and technology in China. By multi-party exploration, especially by drawing on the successful experience abroad, the corresponding countermeasures with strong feasibility and certain novelty are proposed. Ethical review of science and technology can effectively avoid scientific and technological ethics and safety risk. By optimizing the related mechanism of ethical review of science and technology, the good governance of science and technology can be realized.#br#
|
|
Received: 18 September 2022
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 刘益东.致毁知识增长与科技伦理失灵：高科技面临的巨大挑战与机遇[J].中国科技论坛，2019，35（2）：1-3.
[2] 李建军.如何强化科技伦理治理的制度支撑[J].国家治理，2021，42（2）：33-37.
[3] 陈书全，王开元.国家治理视域下科技伦理审查的制度路径[J].科技进步与对策，2022，39（18）：110-120.
[4] 习近平.在中国科学院第二十次院士大会、中国工程院第十五次院士大会、中国科协第十次全国代表大会上的讲话[N].人民日报，2021-05-29（2）.
[5] 徐明.论生命科技的挑战与立法应对[J].科技进步与对策，2013，30（5）：106-110.
[6] 樊景辉，张文洁，苏健芬，等.基层医院伦理委员会建设存在问题及对策[J].医学与哲学，2020，41（6）：29-31.
[7] 李建军，王添.科研机构伦理审查机制设置的历史动因及现实运行中的问题[J].自然辩证法研究，2022，38（3）：51-57.
[8] 姜慧，张皓，朱旭迪，等.共同富裕示范区科创高地建设科技伦理反思性高阶“元治理”路径[J].科技管理研究，2022，42（10）：211-219.
[9] 张维，熊鸿燕，邓强庭，等.医学论文中涉及动物实验和临床试验的伦理规范调查及案例分析[J].中国科技期刊研究，2017，28（4）：300-305.
[10] ARTHUR BENZ. Governance: a political science perspective[M]//JANSEN D. New forms of governance in research organizations：from disciplinary theories towards interfaces and integration. New York: Springer，2007.
[11] 吴爵，孙云，蒋辉.影响伦理审查工作独立性的因素及对策分析[J].中国医学伦理学，2019，32（11）：1383-1387.
[12] MARKMAN MAURIE."Conflict-of-Interest" and participation in IRB deliberations: an alternative perspective[J]. Cancer Investigation，2008，26（2）：115-117.
[13] 吕刚.浅析临床研究伦理审查的个人利益冲突对策[J].知识经济，2016，18（16）：54-55.
[14] MARTIN TOLICH，BARRY SMITH. Evolving ethics envy-New Zealand sociologists reading the Canadian tri-council policy statement: ethical conduct for research involving humans[J]. New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences，2014，9（1）：1-10.
[15] 朱炳成.环境健康风险预防原则的理论建构与制度展开[J].暨南学报（哲学社会科学版），2019，41（11）：51-62.
[16] 金玲.全球首部人工智能立法：创新和规范之间的艰难平衡[J].人民论坛，2022，15（4）：44-47.
[17] JESSICA MORLEY, LUCIANO FLORIDI,LIBBY KINSEY. From what to how: an initial review of publicly available AI ethics tools, methods and research to translate principles into practices[J].Science and Engineering Ethics，2020，26（4）：2141-2168.
[18] 曾雄，梁正，张辉.欧盟人工智能的规制路径及其对我国的启示——以《人工智能法案》为分析对象[J].电子政务，2022，19（9）：63-72.
[19] 曹奕阳.人工智能时代司法裁判的机遇、挑战及应对[J].法治论坛，2019，14（3）：278-290.
[20] 何金玉，陈洁纯，李婷，等.新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情期间定点收治患者的医院应急科研管理实践与思考[J].中国医学工程，2020，28（8）：15-19.
[21] 于量.优化“两链”，强固补紧密协同[N].解放日报，2022-08-17（3）.
[22] 王群，饶昇苹.高校科研伦理审查工作回顾与思考——以华东师范大学为例[J].中国高校科技，2021，35（S1）：70-72.
[23] 田亦尧，李欣冉.科技伦理治理机制的法治因应与逻辑转换——由生物技术科技伦理规制问题展开[J].科技进步与对策，2021，38（2）：121-127.
[24] 佘志华，陈舟，梁松岳.基于云架构的药物临床试验伦理审查信息化体系建设[J].中国临床药理学与治疗学，2021，26（9）：1023-1030.
[25] SAND MARTIN，DURAN JUAN MANUEL. Responsibility beyond design: physicians′ requirements for ethical medical AI[J].Bioethics，2022，36（2）：162-169.
[26] 曹奕阳.手机取证与隐私权保护的平衡——以现代公法比例原则为视点[J].科技与法律，2019，31（6）：68-76.
|
|
|
|
