Kuzma

Jennifer Kuzma

Goodnight-North Carolina GlaxoSmithKline Foundation Distinguished Professor of Social Sciences and Co-Director of the Genetics Engineering and Society Center, North Carolina State University at Raleigh
Chapter Member: North Carolina SSN
Areas of Expertise:

Connect with Jennifer

(919) 515-2592

About Jennifer

Kuzma’s work focuses on the interactions among science; technology and society; particularly the governance of emerging technologies. As a subset of this work; she is interested in public and stakeholder engagement in decision-making about emerging technologies; such as genetic engineering; nanotechnology and synthetic biology. Kuzma regularly works with science museums as a speaker and participant in their science cafes; public forums; and meetings on technology and society; and she serves as an adviser to several public agency groups. She also serves on the Food and Drug Administration’s Blood Product’s Advisory Committee.

Contributions | No Jargon Podcast | In the News | Publications

Contributions

Should Citizens Have a Say about Emerging Technologies?

Basic Facts Brief,

In the News

Research discussed by Ashley P. Taylor, in "Companies Use CRISPR to Improve Crops," The Scientist, February 1, 2019.
Research discussed by Caitlin Dewey, in "The Future of Food," The Washington Post, August 11, 2018.
Quoted by Aki Ito in "This Man Rewrites the Genetic Code of Animals," Bloomberg, July 19, 2018.
Quoted by in "Pesticide Resistance Needs Attention, Large-Scale Study," Phys.org, May 17, 2018.
Quoted by Paul McDivitt in "USDA Scraps Overhaul of GMO and Gene Edited Crop Regulations That Biotech Advocates Viewed as ‘Unscientific’," Genetic Literacy Project, November 7, 2017.
Quoted by Kelly Servick in "Trump’s Agriculture Department Reverses Course on Biotech Rules," Science Magazine, November 6, 2017.
Guest on Genetic Literacy Project, October 20, 2016.
Quoted by Nash Dunn in "Mosquitoes, Zika and Biotech Regulation," NC State News, September 16, 2016.
Guest on National Public Radio, January 21, 2015.
Quoted by Andrew Pollack in "By ‘Editing’ Plant Genes, Companies Avoid Regulation," New York Times, January 1, 2015.
Research discussed by Matt Shipman, in "Nutrition, Safety Key to Consumer Acceptance of Nanotech, Genetic Modification in Foods," Phys.org, December 2, 2014.
Interviewed in Take a Nanooze Break Walt Disney World, February 2010.
Guest on MPR’s Midmorning with Kerri Miller, November 2006.
Research discussed by Daniel Cressey, in "The ‘Most Important Questions’ in Science Policy Shortlisted," Nature, March 9, 2012.
Research discussed by Emily Waltz, in "Tiptoeing around Transgenics," Nature Biotechnology, March 7, 2012.
Interviewed in A Biotech Road Map? New Haven Independent, December 10, 2010.
Research discussed by Andrew Schneider, in "Why Nanotech Hasn't (Yet) Triggered 'The Yuck Factor'," AOL News, March 24, 2010.
Interviewed in "Nanotechnology: Revolution and Pollution," The Bloomington Alternative, June 28, 2009.
Interviewed in "As Nanotechnology Hits the Marketplace, Safety is a Growing Issue," Minneapolis Post, May 14, 2009.
Interviewed in Jennifer Kuzma on Nanotechnology Earth&Sky Radio, March 16, 2009.
Research discussed by Barnaby J. Feder, in "Engineering Food at Level of Molecules," New York Times, October 10, 2006.

Publications

"Hungry for Information: Public Attitudes toward Food Nanotechnology and Labeling" (with Jonathan Brown). Review of Policy Research (forthcoming).
Reports on public attitudes toward food nanotechnology and labeling in the United States. Was the first study in the U.S. to use dialogue-based research to discover what people think about different types of food nanotechnology products and how they would like to see them governed. Important theoretical contributions to risk perception of emerging technologies are also presented.
"Nanotech Oversight, Voluntary Data Submission, and Corporate Social Performance: Does Company Size Matter?" (with Aliya Kuzhabekova). Journal of Nanoparticle Research 13, no. 4 (2011): 1499-1512.
Takes a careful look at the participation of companies in a voluntary EPA program for nanotechnology governance. We took a close look at the quantity and quality of data submitted for assessing safety and discovered that older and larger companies participated more, and claimed less information as “confidential business information”. We also review policies and programs that could help encourage companies to participation in voluntary governance programs as a part of corporate social performance.
"The ‘Revolving Door’ between Regulatory Agencies and Industry: A Problem That Requires Reconceptualizing Objectivity" (with Zahra Meghani). Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24, no. 6 (2011): 575-599.

Argues that regulatory agencies would be more, not less, objective with the consultation of groups and citizens outside of industry and regulatory agencies. We draw upon the notion of “strong objectivity” and a reconceptualization of objectivity.

"Unpacking Synthetic Biology for Oversight Policy" (with Todd Tanji). Regulation & Governance 4 (2010): 92-112.
Analyzes governance for synthetic biology and presents a new typology of products for thinking in more nuanced ways about our approach and values in oversight. Makes an argument for “unpacking” synthetic biology in such ways so that conversations about governance can move forward.
"Evaluating Oversight Systems for Emerging Technologies: A Case Study of Genetically Engineered Organisms" (with Pouya Najmaie and Joel Larson). Journal of Law Medicine and Ethics 37, no. 4 (2009): 546-586.
Uses a multi-criteria and stakeholder elicitation approach to evaluate the oversight system for genetically engineered organisms and draw lessons for emerging nanobiotechnology products. Describes a new and more holistic approach to evaluating oversight systems – one based not only on “scientific risk” and cost-benefit – named “integrated oversight assessment” as a subset of anticipatory governance.
"Upstream Oversight Assessment for Agrifood Nanotechnology" (with James Romanchek and Adam Kokotovich). Risk Analysis 28, no. 4 (2008): 1081-1098.

Uses a database and case-study approach to analyze potential future agrifood nanotechnology products, governance and policy issues. Describes “upstream oversight assessment” as a subset of anticipatory governance. Anticipatory governance and UOA are designed to prepare for, not predict, futures of technological governance.