DickensonD.Property in the Body: Feminist Perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
2.
LaurieG.Genetic Privacy. A Challenge to Medico-Legal Norms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2002.
3.
HoeyerK.Exchanging Human Bodily Material: Rethinking Bodies and Markets. New York: Springer; 2013.
4.
SharpLA.Bodies, Commodities, and Biotechnologies. Death, Mourning, and Scientific Desire in the Realm of Human Organ Transfer. New York: Columbia University Press; 2007.
5.
Dixon-WoodsM, WilsonD, JacksonCJ, CaversD, Pritchard-JonesK.Human tissue and 'the public': The case of childhood cancer tumour banking. BioSocieties, 2008; 3:57–80.
6.
HoeyerK.Tradable body parts? How bone and recycled prosthetic devices acquire a price without forming a 'market'. BioSocieties, 2009; 4:239–256.
7.
HoeyerK.Conflicting notions of personhood in genetic research. Anthropology Today, 2002; 18(5):9–13.
8.
GoodwinM.Black Markets: The Supply and Demand of Body Parts. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006.
9.
TaylorJ.Stakes and Kidneys. Why Markets in Human Body Parts Are Morally Imperative. Hampshire, UK: Ashgate; 2005.
10.
SatelS.Introduction. In: SatelS, editor. When Altruism Isn't Enough. The Case for Compensating Kidney Donors. Washington DC: The AEI Press; 2008. p. 1–10.
11.
ParryB.Entangled exchange: Reconceptualising the characterisation and practice of bodily commodification. Geoforum, 2008; 39:1133–1144.
12.
ClarkBJ, BaustJM, StaceyG.How much will biobanking industry come to rely on private companies?. Biopreserv Biobanking, 2010; 8:179–180.
13.
EversK, ForsbergJ.What are your views on commercialization of tissues for research? “The best possible use”: Against commercilization of tissue samples. Biopreserv Biobanking, 2012; 10:476–477.
14.
HoeyerK, SchicktanzS, DeleuranI.Public attitudes to financial incentive models for organs: a literature review suggests that it is time to shift the focus from 'financial incentives' to 'reciprocity'. Transplant Intern, 2013; 26:350–357.
15.
PatraPK, Sleeboom-FaulknerM.Informed consent and benefit sharing in genetic research and biobanking in India: Some common impediments in practice. In: DabrockP, TaupitzJ, RiedJ, eds. Trust in Biobanking. Heidelberg: Springer; 2012. p. 237–256.
16.
KowalE, RadinJ, ReardonJ.Indigenous body parts, mutating temporalities, and the half-lives of postcolonial technoscience. Social Studies Sci, 2013; 43:465–483.
17.
HaydenC.Taking as giving: Bioscience, exchange, and the politics of benefit-sharing. Social Studies Sci, 2007; 37:729–758.
18.
StegmayrB, AsplundK.Informed consent for genetic research on blood stored for more than a decade: A population based study. BMJ, 2002; 325:634–635.
19.
SteinsbekkKS, UrsinLØ, SkolbekkenJ-A, SolbergB.We're not in it for the money—lay people's moral intuitions on commercial use of ‘their’ biobank. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 2011; 16(2):151–162.
20.
WinickoffD, NeumannL.Towards a social contract for genomics: Property and the public in the 'biotrust' model. Genomics, Society and Policy, 2005; 1(3):8–21.
21.
AnderlikMR.Commercial biobanks and genetic research: Ethical and legal issues. Am J Pharmacogenomics, 2003; 3:203–215.
22.
SahlinsM.Stone Age Economics. New York: Aldine Artherton; 1972.