New Genomic Techniques and civil society: towards a new transnational social movement?

Some recent breakthroughs in genome editing techniques had opened new perspectives. The use (and impact) of genome editing on humans, animals, and plants life could increase significantly compared to the past, with related consequences on societies and ecosystems around the world. The use and the rules on the use of new genomic techniques (NGTs) are issues that necessarily have a global scale, and at this moment involves scientists, governments, but also supranational institutions such as WHO. Issues related to biodiversity conservation, risks due to off-target effects, benefits for ecosystems and health have been raised by scientists and experts. Among the debate on the use of NGTs, the point of view of civil society organizations has been underestimated, if not even ignored, despite the widespread need and wish to involve civil society in discussing on such themes. This paper aims at shedding a light on civil society organizations that deal with NGTs issues, and answers to two main questions: is there any global network of civil society organizations that mobilize around NGTs? Which kind of network has been built around NGTs? What are the main claims? Through an extensive online research with a global scope, civil society organizations have been mapped, collecting data on some important features but, most of all, on their online networks. Namely, this article employs the Hyperlink Network Analysis (HNA) among the 77 collective actors mapped. Results shows that a transnational network exists, even if much of the actors mapped are mainly based in Europe and North America. The network is not very big or dense, but it is composed of many kinds of civil society organizations (such as research groups, advocacy groups, community groups). Despite the small size of the network, emerge different roles and centralities in the network that seems to be linked to the scale of action of the actors. Using theoretical frameworks from social movements studies, an explanation of such differences will be provided, also outlining future research perspectives. Namely, resource mobilization theory and concept of social capital will be used to explain the roles among the network. What emerges is that the existing network cannot be listed as a proper social movement network, but more as a coalitional network against or strongly critical of the use of NGTs, as also confirmed by some recent transnational campaigns against the use of genome editing.