[Not Available]. / Abordando la problemática de las armas biológicas en el siglo XXI: el papel de una red de prevención 2.0.

The strategic use of disease in warfare has long proven a menace to humankind; however, the changing nature of both science and security has the potential to encourage the assimilation of new (and old) biological weapons. This short article begins by outlining some of these changes before considering the means and measures in place to deal with the challenge of biological weapons. It proceeds to outline a Web of Prevention 2.0, comprised of mutually reinforcing strands that are intended to form a framework for a more holistic approach to dealing with the challenge of biological weapons around the globe in the 21st century.

From cases to capacity? A critical reflection on the role of 'ethical dilemmas' in the development of dual-use governance.

The dual-use issue is often framed as a series of paralyzing 'dilemmas' facing the scientific community as well as institutions which support innovation. While this conceptualization of the dual-use issue can be useful in certain contexts (such as in awareness-raising and as part of educational activities directed at the scientific community) its usefulness is more limited when reflecting on the governance and politics of the dual-use issue. Within this paper, key shortcomings of the dilemma framing are outlined. It is argued that many of the issues raised in the most recent debates about 'dual-use' bird flu research remain unresolved. This includes questions about the trajectories of certain lines of research, as well as broader trends in the practice and governance of science. This leads to difficult questions about current approaches to the dual-use issue within the US, as well as internationally.

Chemical and biological weapons in the 'new wars'.

The strategic use of disease and poison in warfare has been subject to a longstanding and cross-cultural taboo that condemns the hostile exploitation of poisons and disease as the act of a pariah. In short, biological and chemical weapons are simply not fair game. The normative opprobrium is, however, not fixed, but context dependent and, as a social phenomenon, remains subject to erosion by social (or more specifically, antisocial) actors. The cross cultural understanding that fighting with poisons and disease is reprehensible, that they are taboo, is codified through a web of interconnected measures, principal amongst these are the 1925 Geneva Protocol; the Biological Weapons Convention; and the Chemical Weapons Convention. Whilst these treaties have weathered the storm of international events reasonably well, their continued health is premised on their being 'tended to' in the face of contextual changes, particularly facing changes in science and technology, as well as the changed nature and character of conflict. This article looks at the potential for normative erosion of the norm against chemical and biological weapons in the face of these contextual changes and the creeping legitimization of chemical and biological weapons.

Lessons learned from implementing education on dual-use in Austria, Italy, Pakistan and Sweden.

This paper provides insights into the achievements and challenges of implementing education on dual-use in four countries: Austria, Italy, Pakistan and Sweden. It draws attention to the different institutional mechanisms through which dual-use education may be introduced into academic curricula and some of the difficulties encountered in this process. It concludes that there is no 'one size fits all' approach to the implementation of dual-use education. Rather, initiatives must be tailored to suit the teaching traditions, geographical and historical context in which they are being delivered. However, a number of common principles and themes can be derived from all four cases. All these courses bring together a number of different topics that place 'dual-use' in the broader context of biosafety, biosecurity, ethics, law and the environment. The case studies suggest that success in this area depends largely on the leadership and commitment of individuals directly involved in teaching, who are active within the scientific community.