This paper explores how institutional frameworks compromised the potential for public engagement on clinical xenotransplantation in Australia. Through critical discourse analysis, these limitations are exposed through two factors: the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Act, which limits public consultation to being responsive; and the terms of reference provided to the Xenotransplantation Working Party, which constrained their consultative practices. These findings contribute towards understandings of public participatory practices by examining how frameworks that exist prior to public involvement, including institutional acts and terms of reference, can marginalize the publics and continue to give authority to those voices that already hold privilege. As a result, there is a need to alter how public consultation is framed in the NHMRC Act, which will provide an opportunity to reframe and improve consultative practices and potentially facilitate meaningful discursive public debate and engagement on scientific matters in Australia.

Item Type:	Refereed Article
Keywords:	public consultation; science communication; xenotransplantation; public engagement; participatory practices
Research Division:	Human Society
Research Group:	Sociology
Research Field:	Sociology and social studies of science and technology
Objective Division:	Expanding Knowledge
Objective Group:	Expanding knowledge
Objective Field:	Expanding knowledge in human society
UTAS Author:	Cook, PS (Dr Peta Cook)
ID Code:	94287
Year Published:	2014
Web of Science® Times Cited:	5
Deposited By:	School of Social Sciences
Deposited On:	2014-09-05
Last Modified:	2015-05-04
Downloads:	0