Study title

Over a prolonged period of time, bionetworkers create links between institutions in various countries and regions: hospitals, patient groups and research centres are linked into large medical networks. At the same time, government institutions, universities, and international research and funding agencies provide knowledge and support sustaining the networks. While an ideal-typical clinical trial is based on the reciprocal, participatory engagement across different worlds of experience, bionetworking works through the competition, differences and polarised interests across national and regional boundaries. To understand the reasons for the differences in the quality of therapy provision we need to grasp (a) the tension between the reputation and expertise of scientist; (b) the quality of the research environments; (c) the scientific aims behind clinical trials and therapies; and (d) the needs and preferences of patients. Our main research questions are: 1. What kind of exchange networks are forged around stem cell science, banking and therapy provision? 2. What are the socio-cultural and politico-economic processes that underlie patient recruitment strategies? 3. What are the consequences of the unequal position of negotiation in international science collaborations for the development of stem cell therapies and research? 4. How does bionetworking in patient recruitment affect bioethics interpretation, such as notions of informed consent and patient autonomy in different settings? 5. How can we harmonise local definitions of bioethics without damaging the only ‘viable’ options available to the resource poor and desperate? In short, the data collections contains interview and group-meeting data on the networks between research centres, companies and tissue banks, collecting information on the kinds of exchanges and aims of these exchanges. The project Bionetworking in Asia aims to uncover how international life science collaborations deal with ‘differences’...