IDENTIFYING DATA

2017_18

Subject (*)

LEGAL, SOCIAL AND COMMUNICATIVE ASPECTS

Code

19204124

Study programme

Bachelor's Degree in Biotechnology (2009)

Cycle

1st

Descriptors

Credits

Type

Year

Period

Compulsory

Fourth

Language

Català

Department

Public Law
Communication Studies

Coordinator

GALIANA SAURA, VERONICA

PRADES TENA, JORDI

FARRÉ COMA, JORGE

E-mail

veronica.galiana@urv.cat
jordi.prades@urv.cat

Lecturers

GALIANA SAURA, VERONICA

PRADES TENA, JORDI

Web

General description and relevant information

Biotechnology is changing the world of s. XXI, for which it is necessary to carry out a rigorous social debate that analyzes its ethical, legal, social and communicative repercussions so that citizens can participate and guide the changes. For this debate to be truly fruitful, information and analytical and comprehensive tools are required to understand the communication processes. Precisely for this reason, our universities are obliged to offer adequate training in these issues to their students that enable them to participate in this debate. The origin of life, the concept of death, the ability to rationally make difficult decisions, the value of the principle of autonomy, the role of the State in health policy, the specific social problems derived from poverty, or the destruction of the environment , are good examples to illustrate the importance of the new problems that have led to the emergence of biolaw and the growing importance of the relationships between biology, new technologies, society, communication, ethics and law in the last two decades.

Competences

Type A	Code	Competences Specific
	A14	Assess the socio-economic impact and the bioethical implications of the different biotechnological processes and assure the current legal dispositions.
Type B	Code	Competences Transversal
	B2	Learning to learn
	B4	Autonomy, responsibility and initiative
	B5	Teamwork, collaboration and sharing of responsibility
Type C	Code	Competences Nuclear
	C3	Be able to manage information and knowledge
	C4	Be able to express themselves correctly both orally and in writing in one of the two official languages of the URV
	C5	Be committed to ethics and social responsibility as citizens and professionals

Learning outcomes

Type A	Code	Learning outcomes
	A14	Stimulate the ability to communicate efficiently, orally and in writing, in a variety of ways and in different audiences.
Type B	Code	Learning outcomes
	B2	Adapt the learning objectives put forward by the teaching staff.
	B4	Present results in the appropriate way in accordance with the bibliography provided and before the deadline.
	B5	Ensure that the way they communicate and relate to others contributes to the cohesion of the group.
Type C	Code	Learning outcomes
	C3	Have a full understanding of the economic, legal, social and ethical implications of accessing and using information.
	C4	Produce written texts that are appropriate to the communicative situation
	C5	Be respectful of and promote human rights and the principles of universal accessibility, equal opportunities, non-discrimination and universal accessibility for th ose with special educational needs.

Contents

Topic

Sub-topic

1. The biolaw: concept and fundamentals

2. Genetics and law

3. Environment and food law

4. Biotechnological patents

5. The social environment in the era of globalization

6. The cultural environment in the sociatas of risk

7. The opinion published shortly

8. The processes of formation of public opinion

1.1. Human rights, biolaw and bioethics
1.2. General principles of law applicable to biotechnology
1.3. Legal norms and biolaw
1.4. The fields of application of the biolaw

2.1. Biomedicine and eugenics: general aspects
2.2. Human genome, genetic manipulations and biological diversity
2.3. Reproduction rights, human embryos and "stem cells"
2.4. Databases, DNA analysis and criminality

3.1. Protection of the environment and sustainable development
3.2. The principles of prevention and precaution: risks and legal regulation
3.3. Food safety and food labeling processes
3.4. Genetically modified organisms: legal regulation

4.1. Patents: concept and criteria of patentability
4.2. Origin of biotechnological patents
4.3. International legal framework and / or Spanish of biopatents
4.4. Arguments for and against of biotechnological patents

5.1. Information society, knowledge society. Globalization, technology and science.
5.2. The political and social ideologies around the society of complexity.
5.3. Social groups and organizations before biotechnology.
5.4. The North-South conflicts.

6.1. The social perception of science and technology.
6.2. Study and interpretation of public perception of biotechnology.
6.3. The social, cultural and communicative construction of biotechnology.
6.4. Who, how, why should we communicate scientific innovations?

7.1. The apocalyptic and integrated biotechnological applications: agriculture, environment and health. The century of biotechnology.
7.2. Models and debates on scientific communication. The media and journalists: the study of the effects and productive routines.
7.3. The media representation of biotechnology: the construction of social images. The journalistic coverage of science and scientists. The dilemmas of journalistic disclosure. Interaction between scientists and journalists: how do the others look?
7.4. Media coverage does not determine public opinion although it helps to build it

8.1. Genetic engineering, life sciences and communication sciences.
8.2. Social dialogue around genetically modified foods.
8.3. The configuration of opinion climates.
8.4. Public opinion for and against of biotechnological applications.

Planning

Methodologies :: Tests

Competences

(*) Class hours

Hours outside the classroom

(**) Total hours

Introductory activities

Debates

Lecture

Seminars

A14

Personal tuition

Oral tests

Mixed tests

A14

Mixed tests

(*) On e-learning, hours of virtual attendance of the teacher.
(**) The information in the planning table is for guidance only and does not take into account the heterogeneity of the students.

Methodologies

Methodologies

	Description
Introductory activities	Expose the objectives of the subject, highlighting the interest of knowing the legal, ethical, social and communicative implications of biotechnological applications
Debates	This methodology aims to sharpen the reflective and discursive abilities of the students. They have to achieve oral and argumentative skills and lose the panic to speak in public.
Lecture	The main trends and dilemmas in contemporary societies will be presented: globalization, identity, culture, communication
Seminars	It will be worked texts that must be writting in groups and then make a public presentation to the rest of the students.
Personal tuition	It will be promoted the oral defense of the projects, as well as the elaborated and nuanced discourse around the themes worked on.

Personalized attention

Description

The teachers of the subject will arrange appointments for students through email: veronica.galiana@urv.cat jordi.prades@urv.cat

Assessment

Methodologies

Competences

Description

Weight

Oral tests

The active participation in the development of the discussions in class as well as the public defense of elaborated arguments on the proposed topics will be valued particularly (part of legal and legal aspects).

20%

Mixed tests

A14

Written work, individual or in small groups, which must be presented publicly in class (legal and legal aspects).

30%

Mixed tests

Written work, individual or in small groups, which must be presented publicly in class (Social and communicative aspects)

30%

Oral tests

Active participation in the development of class discussions as well as the public defense of arguments elaborated on the thematic proposals will be valued particularly (part of social and communicative aspects).

20%

Others

Other comments and second exam session

Students who do not follow the continuous assessment must submit to an exam of the whole subject in the second call, and must also submit the two mixed tests that have been worked and documented in ''moodle'' on the space of the subject.

During evaluation tests, mobile phones, tablets and other devices not expressly authorized by the test must be switched off and out of sight. The demonstration of fraudulent conduct of some evaluative activity of some subject in both material and virtual and electronic support leads to the student the suspension note of this evaluation activity. Regardless of this, in view of the seriousness of the facts, the center may propose the initiation of a disciplinary file, which will be initiated by resolution of the rector.

Sources of information

Basic

BIBLIOGRAFIA

1ª part. Aspectes legals de la biotecnologia

Abellán, Fernando, Reproducción humana asistida y responsabilidad médica, Comares, Granada, 2001.

Autores varios, Bases de datos de perfiles de ADN y criminalidad, Comares, Granada, 2002.

Autores varios, Biotecnología y derecho. Perspectivas en el derecho comparado, Comares, Granada, 1998.

Autores varios, El Convenio de Derechos Humanos y Biomedicina. Su entrada en vigor en el ordenamiento jurídico español, Comares, Granada, 2002.

Autores varios, Genética y Derecho penal. Previsiones en el Código Penal español de 1995, Comares, Granada, 2001.

Autores varios, Genética, Ariel, Barcelona, 2003.

Autores varios, La eugenesia hoy, Comares, Granada, 1999.

Autores varios, Los genes y sus leyes. El Derecho ante el genoma humano, Comares, Granada, 2002.

Autores varios, Los retos de la genética en el siglo XXI: genética y bioética, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, 1999.

Blázquez Ruiz, Javier, Derechos Humanos y proyecto genoma, Comares, Granada, 1999..

Casado, M. (coord.), Manual de Bioética y Derecho, Titant lo blanch, Valencia, 2004.

Emaldi Cirion, Aitziber, El Consejo Genético y sus implicaciones jurídicas, Comares, Granada, 2001.

Etxeberría Guridi, José, Los análisis de ADN y su aplicación al proceso penal, Comares, Granada, 2000.

Galán Cortés, Julio César, Responsabilidad médica y consentimiento informado, Cívitas, Madrid, 2001.

McGee, Glenn, El bebé perfecto. Tener hijos en el nuevo mundo de la clonación y la genética, Gedisa, Barcelona, 2003.

Osset Hernández, Miguel, Ingeniería genética y derechos humanos. Legislación y ética ante el reto de los avances biotecnológicos, Icaria, Barcelona, 2000.

Pérez Salom, José, Recursos genéticos. Biotecnología y Derecho Internacional. La distribución justa y equitativa de beneficios en el Convenio sobre Biodiversidad, Aranzadi, Navarra, 2002.

Recuerda Girela, M.A., Seguridad alimentaria y nuevos alimentos: régimen jurídico administrativo, Thomson Aranzadi, Madrid, 2006.

Romeo Casabona, C.M., (ed.), Biotecnología, Derecho y dignidad humana, Comares, Granada, 2004.

Sádaba, J., Principios de bioética laica, Editorial Gedisa, Barcelona, 2002.

Valls, R., Ética para la bioética, Editorial Gedisa, Barcelona, 2002.

Zarraluqui, Luis, Procreación asistida y derechos fundamentales, Tecnos, Madrid, 1988.

2ª part. Debats socials i processos de comunicació de la biotecnologia

Alcíbar, Miguel (2004) “La divulgaciónmediática de la ciencia y la tecnología como recontextualización discursiva”. Anàlisi,31, 43-70.

http://www.raco.cat/index.php/analisi/article/viewFile/15153/14994

Bates, Benjamin R. (2005) “Public culture and publicunderstanding of genetics: a focus group study”. Public Understanding ofScience, 14, 47-65. http://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/bitstream/handle/document/22373/ssoar-2005-1-bates-public_culture_and_public_understanding.pdf?sequence=1

Bergoglio,J.M. (2015). Laudatio si: http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/es/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html

Carbonell, Eudald;Sala, Robert (2002) Encara no som humans. Propostes d'humanització per al tercermil·leni. Barcelona: Empúries.

Ceballos,G. et al. (2015) Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Enteringthe sixth mass extinction: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/1/5/e1400253

Espluga, Josep (2005) “Els debats socials de la biotecnologia”. Papers de la Fundació/144, Fundació Rafael Campalans,1-29. http://www.fcampalans.cat/uploads/publicacions/pdf/paper_biotecnologia.pdf

Gunter, Barrie et al. (1999) “The Media and Public Understanding of Biotechnology: A Survey of Scientists and Journalists”. Science Communication,vol. 20 Nº 4, 373-394. http://scx.sagepub.com/content/20/4/373.abstract

Hornig Priest, Susanna (2006) “Public Discourse and Scientific Controversy. A Spiral-of-Silence Analysis of Biotechnology Opinion in the United States”. Science Communication, Vol. 28 Nº 2, 195-215. http://scx.sagepub.com/content/28/2/195.refs

Muñoz,Emilio (2002). La cultura científica, la percepción pública y el caso de la biotecnología http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/1503/1/dt-0207.pdf

Piguem, Jordi(2010). Revalorar el món. Els valors de la sostenibilitat. http://cads.gencat.cat/web/.content/Documents/Publicacions/pds_15_web.pdf

Punset, E. (entrevista a Edward O. Wilson): "No somos un superorganismo": http://www.eduardpunset.es/431/charlas-con/no-somos-un-superoganismo

Complementary

Bauman, Z. (1998). Globalització. Les conseqüències humanes. Barcelona: EdiUOC, Proa. 2001.

Beck, U. (2002): La sociedad del riesgo global. Madrid: Siglo XXI.

Beck, U. (2004): Poder y contrapoder en la era global. Barcelona: Editorial Paidos.

Besley, John C., J. Shanahan (2005) “Media Attention and Exposure in Relation to Support for Agricultural Biotechnology”. Science Communication, Vol. 26 Nº 4, 347-367.

Bonfadelli, Heinz (2005) “Mass media and biotechnology: knowledge gaps within and between European countries”. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, vol. 17 Nº 1, 42-62.

Burchell, Kevin (2007) “Boundary Work, Associative Argumentation and Switching in the Advocacy of Agricultural Biotechnology”. Science as Culture, Vol. 16, Nº 1, 49-70.

Castells, M. (1997): La era de la información. Economía, sociedad y cultura. Volúmenes 1, 2, y 3. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.

DD.AA. (2004) Opinión pública y biotecnología. Sistema, nº 179-180 (exemplar monogràfic).

Dreyer, Marion & O. Renn, (2009) Food safety governance: integrating science, precaution and public involvement. Berlun, Springer.

Farré, Jordi & Fernández, J. (eds.) Comunicació i risc petroquímic a Tarragona. De les definicions a les pràctiques institucionals. Tarragona: Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

López Cerezo, J. L. (2001). Ciencia, tecnología, sociedad y cultura. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva.

Muñoz, Emilio (2001). Biotecnología y sociedad. Madrid: Cambridge University Press.

Nisbet, Mattthew C. And B. V. Lewenstein (2002) “Biotechnology and the American Media: The Policy Process and the Elite Press, 1970 to 1999”. Science Communication, Vol. 23 Nº 4, 359-391.

Pavone, Vicente (2006) “Science, Eugenics and Utopia. Comparing scientific humanism and liberal eugenics on human genetic enhancement”. Documento de trabajo 06-14. Madrid: CSIC, Unidad de Políticas Comparadas (UPC).

Plaza, Marta i E. Muñoz (2003) “La biotecnología en la prensa española en el año 2002”. Documento de Trabajo 03-16. Madrid: Grupo de ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad (CSIC).

Rubia Vila, F. J. (Dir.) Percepción social de la ciencia. Academia Europea de Ciencias y Artes. Ediciones UNED.

Sjöberg, Lennart (2005) “Gene Technology in the eyes of the public and experts. Moral opinions, attitudes and risk perception”. Working Paper: 7. Stockholm: Center for Risk Research.

Wilson, E.O. (2006). La creació. Una crida per salvar la vida a la terra. Barcelona: Empúries.

Recommendations

(*)The teaching guide is the document in which the URV publishes the information about all its courses. It is a public document and cannot be modified. Only in exceptional cases can it be revised by the competent agent or duly revised so that it is in line with current legislation.