National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Safeguarding the Bioeconomy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2020. Accessed January24, 2022. https://doi.org/10.17226/25525
2.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Gene Drives on the Horizon: Advancing Science, Navigating Uncertainty, and Aligning Research with Public Values. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2016. Accessed January24, 2022. https://doi.org/10.17226/23405
KelseyA, StillingerD, PhamTB, MurphyJ, FirthS, Carballar-LejarazúR. Global governing bodies: a pathway for gene drive governance for vector mosquito control. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2020; 103(3):976-985.
7.
GloverB, AkinboO, SavadogoM, et al.Strengthening regulatory capacity for gene drives in Africa: leveraging NEPAD's experience in establishing regulatory systems for medicines and GM crops in Africa. BMC Proc. 2018; 12(suppl 8):11.
8.
Convention on Biological Diversity. Parties to the Cartagena Protocol and its Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress. Updated March 5, 2018. Accessed January18, 2022. https://bch.cbd.int/protocol/parties/
GoldsmithCL, KangKE, HeitmanE, et al.Stakeholder views on engagement, trust, performance, and risk considerations about use of gene drive technology in agricultural pest management. Health Secur. 2022; 20(1):6-15.
11.
OvercashJ, GolnarA. Facilitating the conversation: gene drive classification. Health Secur. 2022; 20(1):16-25.
12.
MillettP, AlexanianT, PalmerMJ, EvansSW, KuikenT, OyeK. iGEM and gene drives: a case study for governance. Health Secur. 2022; 20(1):26-34.
13.
VinkeS, RaisI, MillettP. The dual-use education gap: awareness and education of life science researchers on nonpathogen-related dual-use research. Health Secur. 2022; 20(1):35-42.
14.
WarmbrodKL, KobokovichAL, WestR, GronvallGK, MontagueM. The need for a tiered registry for US gene drive governance. Health Secur. 2022; 20(1):43-49.