Team:UCopenhagen/HP/Silver
Incell’s human practices explore the ethical, legal, social, economic, safety and security components of our work. They enshroud the beginning, middle and projected future of our work and Incell would not be what it is without.
Our goal is to actively engage the scientific community and general public through diverse communications and activities to guarantee our project is safe, responsible and good for the world.
We include a summary of our progress so far, what we have learned and what we plan to do with it.
We have learned and grown in the direction of the insights, knowledge and perspective gleaned from the humans which have shone on us. This is not a recent behaviour. We were we born and raised in human practices too, which you can read more about here.
What have we done?
We engaged the scientific community and the public, conjuring an incredible and reciprocated curiosity. Platforms including conferences, social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and LinkedIn), the Incell podcast, public presentations and interactive events have been spun together to form a warm, wool-like, structural skeleton around the team — a feeling we see as Incell’s moral compass.
We are creative, targeted and context appropriate with all communications and outreach. We have ferociously adapted to what works and what does not. It is entirely the point, upon seeing the reflection of our work in the face of humanity, to be sincerely changed by it.
What have we learned?
The take home message: for many, synthetic biology is unfamiliar and unless careful with wording — frightening. Many drew from their knowledge and misinformation of GMOs, and seeing SMOs as an unchartered extension, allow their scepticism to peak. Even after safety fears and dystopian nightmares are quashed, a more complicated question remains. The philosopher Sune Holm, speaking at our recent public forum on ethics in synthetic biology, said, “from a moral perspective, the main challenge is the question of who actually benefits from the creation of SMOs?”
These notes aside, the overarching vibe from the public has been, and hopefully continues to be, genuine curiosity. Moreover, some excitedly begin to formulate possible functions and applications. This is hugely rewarding feedback and evidence for Incell’s value as a technology in development.
The scientific community were free of safety fears and less astonished by the scientific objectives for Incell’s first phase. Importantly, they were equally excited, if not more so, by the vision and opportunities all of a sudden imaginable.
It is exceptionally important and too often given too little weight in science: communication and public engagement. Creating, organising and participating in public events is what has made Incell real — before it ever was.
