Abstract
Based on the concept of an imagined future community, this article analyzes the relationship between the establishment of a national biobank (Taiwan Biobank) and nation-building. This article examines (1) the shift in state policy from pursuing a Sci-Tech Island to an Island of Biomedical Technology for the purpose of strengthening the national economy and Taiwan’s global competitiveness in biomedicine, (2) the discourses about the uniqueness of the Taiwanese genome as a niche in the competitive global biomedical market, and (3) scientists’ imaginary of the necessity of a national genetic project for the health of Taiwan’s future generations. By exploring how the discourse of the Taiwanese genome as a niche has been constructed, this article reveals that life science and scientists’ imaginary of the futurity who have played important roles in Taiwan’s nation-building. We argue that the future imaginaries contained in the scientific discourse regarding Taiwan Biobank reflect the ideas of global scientific competition, connections between genetic distinctness and nationality, and the health of future generations in Taiwan.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The proposed work included the following: (1) to convene a conference of Taiwanese scientists, physicians, and ethicists to set up a plan for establishing a population genetic database in Taiwan; (2) to establish a population genetic database in Taiwan, which includes permanent DNA samples from all Taiwanese who agree to participate; (3) to make the population genetic database available to qualified researchers to study (a) the effects of gene variants on Taiwanese health and well-being, (b) the effects of gene variants on medication response, and (c) the genetic relationship of Taiwanese with other population groups; (4) to educate the Taiwanese about the genetic contribution to health and well- being, and (5) to study ethical issues raised by a population genetic database and its impact on the Taiwanese (Tsuang 2000).
Inspired by the literature, we use the term futurity instead of future to capture the interactions between past, present, and future. In other words, futurity does not just mean a particular moment in the future but also refers to dynamics and performativity that shapes the present in multiple ways. See more discussion in the Science, Imaginary, and Futurity section.
Through the scientific method of prospective cohort study, TBB aims to record participants’ health, disease, and lifestyle information for the long term as part of the infrastructure for medical and pharmaceutical research that could benefit future generations of national population. See more discussion in the section on Taiwan must have its own lab.
This bionationalistic support for Hwang was halted after Hwang's lab was embroiled in a scientific misconduct scandal in 2015. The scandal brought the Korean scientific community into worldwide discredit and also damaged the entire Korean biotechnology sector. In contrast to the previously unreserved support from the political and institutional realms, including public funding, loose legal and ethical governance, and the mobilization of female oocyte from the Korean society, this scandal shocked the political system, national self-esteem, and Korean identity (Gottweis and Kim 2010).
There has also been growing literature on futurity in relation to technoscientific innovation in the past two decades, such as the sociology of expectations (Borup et al. 2006; Brown and Michael 2003), and studies about promise, anticipation or hope (Brown and Michael 2003; Hedgecoe and Martin 2003; Adams et al. 2009). Compared to the other future-oriented notions, the concept of imaginaries pays particular attention to how technoscientific futures are interconnected with political and cultural practices.
We also interviewed social scientists who help establish the ethical and governance framework, and those who challenge the ELSI problems of TBB. However, scientists regarded the social scientists who critically debate on TBB as anti-science and irrational, resulting in the neglect of diverse values underlying public controversy, and in restrictions on innovative governance practices. In considering the main research questions and arguments of this article, we did not include the interviews with social scientists. More discussion can be seen in Lee and Tsai (2018).
There were only a few subjects discussed in STAG relevant to biomedicine such as the prevention of Hepatitis B and biopharmaceutical industry.
Lee participated the meetings of STAG in 1994, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, and 2007. The meeting was held annually with an exception of 2007. He was the head of STAG from 1999 to 2007 and Chi-Huey Wong was his successor, serving from 2008 to 2011. http://www.bost.ey.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=F0558A90D837D63E (cited on October 28, 2015).
“Sep 2015 J2” denotes that the interview with J2 in September 2015. See the interview list in the Appendix.
In the SRB on biotechnology, 5 out of the 14 specialists who participated in the first SRB meeting in 1997 were Academicians of Academia Sinica.
Please visit the official website of BOST. http://www.bost.ey.gov.tw/news.aspx?n=BBF2DDAD69A41B16&sms=E1CE7A91363ABB7D (cited on October 28, 2015).
Stage 1: the pre-feasibility project (from September to December 2003); Stage 2: the feasibility project (from August 2005 to July 2007); Stage 3: the preparatory phase of the establishment of Taiwan Biobank (the pilot study project, December 2005 to October 2010); and Stage 4: the extension project of the pilot study (from December 2010 to December 2011).
Before 1971, China’s representation by either the Republic of China and the Peoples Republic of China had been disputed in the UN. The UN once suggested that Chiang Kai-shek, the Kuomintang government (KMT) of the Republic of China, should change the name of the nation from China to Taiwan, which would allow the ROC using the name of Taiwan to stay in the UN. However, the KMT government refused to accept the concept of dual representation under a two Chinas option in the UN because it insisted on declaring itself the sole legitimate government of China. By contrast, the KMT government proposed that the UN should exclude the participation of Communist China. The Beijing government (the People’s Republic of China) took over the seat of Taiwan on the UN Security Council.
iPSC stands for induced pluripotent stem cells.
APOLLO stands for Applied Proteogenomics Organizational Learning and Outcomes.
Now the project is named Cancer Breakthroughs 2020. For more detail see http://www.cancermoonshot2020.org/home/ (accessed 29 October 2016).
Taiwanese subjectivity is based on a political and cultural discourse of Taiwan-centeredness through multiculturalism and Taiwanese nationalism to challenge Chinese nationalism and to establish the Taiwanese identity as an independent country.
Tsai’s research (2014) also points out that the scientific research regarding the rediscovery of Taiwanese ancestry and the genetic attributes of the Taiwanese appeared since the late 1990s after the martial law ended. She argues that the scientific knowledge produced in the lab has spilled over into the Taiwanese society in general through conferences, journals, media, and the like since the 1990s and brought about significant social impacts as part of the phenomena of the ethnicization of biomedicine and the biomedicalization of ethnicity. Furthermore, Liu (2010) also explored the construction of Taiwanese identity based on aboriginal genetic research to illustrate how the production of scientific knowledge is taken up in identity making and nation-building.
See the research conducted by the Election Study Center of National Chengchi University. (accessed on October 28, 2015).
The new immigrants refers to a group of new residents who have either migrated to Taiwan or intermarried with local Taiwanese. Foreign brides means those who originated mainly from certain countries in Asia, such as China, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Thailand, and Philippines since the 1990s, which form the majority of new immigrants. From foreign brides to new immigrants, this illustrates social and political attempts to conceal the potential stigma inherent in the term foreign brides and to recognize them as part of Taiwan.
To illustrate the promising nature of the Taiwanese population at the global level of bioeconomy, the example of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS) was often invoked. Yuan-Tsong Chen, the leading scientist of TBB, published an article, "Medical genetics: a marker for Stevens-Johnson syndrome" in Nature with his colleagues in 2004 (Chung et al. 2004). That article shows there is a strong association in Han Chinese between a genetic marker, HLA-B*1502, and SJS induced by carbamazepine, a drug commonly prescribed for the treatment of seizure disorders. The biological samples used in the research were collected in Taiwan, but the conclusion of that article refers to the Chinese population around the world. Accordingly, the FDA of the United States, based on the conclusion of this article, recommended genotyping all Asians before the prescription of carbamazepine, to avoid medical risk (Ferrell and Mcleod 2008). It constitutes distinct Han Chinese bodies or Asian bodies through Taiwanese ones and mobilizes the Taiwanese into both global and local domains as a good population and a valuable resource.
We are not going to examine the human classification in biomedical research. However, many STS studies have pointed out that human classification, in terms of race, ethnicity, and nationality in science is not pure science but is deeply rooted in the social, cultural, and political context (Duster 2005; Epstein 2007; Fujimura et al. 2008; Goodman 2000). The human classification in biomedical research is always politically referential (Bliss 2012, p. 204).
Taiwan Biobank, Latest News. http://www.twBiobank.org.tw/new_web/news.php?article_option=news&article_add= (accessed on October 26, 2015).
Taiwan Biobank, Recruiting Videos: the Seeds and the Best https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xkg_hXJrlhk (accessed on October 26, 2015) (Taiwan Biobank 2013).
Taiwan Biobank, Latest News, http://www.twBiobank.org.tw/new_web/news.php?article_option=news&article_add= (accessed on October 26, 2015).
See the unpublished results of the participant satisfaction survey administered by TBB in September 2016.
References
Academia Sinica. 2007. The Taiwan Biobank Project: For the Health of Future Generations. Academia Sinica E-news, April 19. http://newsletter.sinica.edu.tw/en/file/file/1/125.pdf. Accessed Oct 2017. (in Chinese).
Adams, V., M. Murphy, and A. Clarke. 2009. Anticipation: Technoscience, Life, Affect, Temporality. Subjectivity 28: 246–265.
Anderson, B. 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.
Anderson, W. 2003. The Cultivation of Whiteness: Science, Health, and Racial Destiny in Australia. New York: Basic Book.
Arnason, A., and B. Simpson. 2003. Refractions Through Culture: The New Genomics in Iceland. Ethnos 68 (4): 533–553.
Atkinson, P., P. Glasber, and H. Greenslade. 2007. New Genetics, New Identites. New York: Routledge.
Benjamin, R. 2009. A Lab of Their Own: Genomic Sovereignty as Post Colonial Science Policy. Policy and Society 28: 341–355.
Biotech East. 2001. Vita Genomics Ready to Mind the Genetic Gold in Asia. August 10, http://www.biotecheast.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=785&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0&topic=3. Accessed 23 Mar 2015.
Bliss, C. 2012. Race Decoded: The Genomic Fight for Social Justice. CA: Stanford University Press.
Board of Science and Technology, Executive Yuan. The Minutes of BioTaiwan Committee (BTC), http://www.bost.ey.gov.tw/news.aspx?n=BBF2DDAD69A41B16&sms=E1CE7A91363ABB7D. Accessed 28 Oct 2015. (in Chinese).
Board of Science and Technology, Executive Yuan. http://www.bost.ey.gov.tw/Content_List.aspx?n=F0558A90D837D63E. Accessed 28 Oct 2016. (in Chinese).
Brown, N. 2005. Shifting Tenses: Reconnecting Regimes of Truth and Hope. Configurations 13 (3): 331–355.
Borup, M., N. Brown, K. Konrad, and H. Van Lente. 2006. The Sociology of Expectations in Science and Technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 18 (3–4): 285–298.
Brown, N., and M. Michael. 2003. A Sociology of Expectations: Retrospecting Prospects and Prospecting Retrospects. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 15 (1): 3–18.
Brubaker, R. 2015. Grounds for Differences. MA: Harvard University Press.
Busby, H., and P. Martin. 2006. Taiwan Biobanks, National Identity and Imagined Communities: The Case of UK Biobank. Science as Culture 15 (3): 237–251.
Cancer Breakthroughs 2020. 2016. Cancer Breakthroughs 2020, http://www.cancermoonshot2020.org/home/. Accessed 29 Oct 2016.
Chang, L.W. 2000a. Academia Sinica Initiates National Genetic Bank. China Times, July 5: 5. (in Chinese).
Chang, L.W. (2000b) Whose Genes are Representative of the Taiwanese People? China Times, July 5: 5. (in Chinese).
Chatterjee, P. 1986. Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse?. London: Zed Books.
Chen, Y.T., and Shen, C.Y. 2006. Planning Taiwan Biobank carefully. China Times, April 2: 5. (in Chinese).
Chen, Y.T., Shen, C.Y., Wu, S.M., Gong, R.W., and Huang, J.L. 2006. The Preparatory Phase of the Establishment of Taiwan Biobank (the Second Year). Taipei: Ministry of Health, The Project Report of the Ministry of Health. Executive Yuan: DOH95-TD-M-113-B001. (in Chinese).
Chen, Y.T., Shen C.Y, Wu, S.M., Chen, K.L. and Chen, C.S. 2009. The Preparatory Phase of the Establishment of Taiwan Biobank (the Third Year). Taipei: Ministry of Health, Project Report of the Ministry of Health, Executive Yuan: DOH96-TD-M-113-B001. (in Chinese).
Chen, Y.T., Shen, C.Y., Chen, K.L., and Chen, C.S. 2010. The Preparatory Phase of the Establishment of Taiwan Biobank (the Fourth year). Taipei: Ministry of Health, Project Report of the Ministry of Health, Executive Yuan: DOH98-TD-M-113-B001. (in Chinese).
Chung, W.H., S.I. Hung, H.S. Hong, M.S. Hsih, L.C. Yang, H.C. Ho, J.Y. Wu, and Y.T. Chen. 2004. Medical Genetics: A Marker for Stevens-Johnson Syndrome. Nature 428 (6982): 486.
Council for Economic Planning and Development. 2002. Challenge 2008: National Development Plan. Taipei: Council for Economic Planning and Development. (in Chinese).
Cyranoski, D. 2002. Genomics Firm Aims to Fill Asian Gene Gap. Nature 416: 115.
Duster, T. 2005. Race and Reification in Science. Science 307 (5712): 1050–1051.
Epstein, S. 2007. Inclusion: The Politics of Difference in Medical Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ferrell, B.P., and H.L. McLeod. 2008. Carbamazepine, HLA-B* 1502 and Risk of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis: US FDA Recommendations. Pharmacogenomics 9 (10): 1543–1546.
Fletcher, A. 2004. Field of Genes: the Politics of Science and Identity in the Estonian Genome Project. New Genetics and Society 23 (3): 3–14.
Fortun, M. 2008. Promising Genomics: Iceland and deCODE Genetics in a World of Speculation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Fortun, K., and M. Fortun. 2005. Scientific Imaginaries and Ethical Plateaus in Contemporary US Toxicology. American Anthropologist 107 (1): 43–54.
Fujimura, J. 2003. Future Imaginaries: Genome Scientists as Sociocultural Entrepreneurs. In Genetic Nature/Culture: Anthropology and Science Beyond the Two Culture Divide, ed. A.H. Goodman, D. Heath, and S.M. Lindee, 176–199. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Fujimura, J.H., T. Duster, and R. Rajagopalan. 2008. Race, Genetics and Disease: Questions of Evidence, Matters of Consequence. Social Studies of Science 38 (5): 643–656.
Gellner, E. 1983. Nations and Nationalism. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
Gong, J.R. 2001. Academia Sinica to Establish Genomic Research Center on Asian Illness. China Times, February 13: 13. (in Chinese).
Goodman, A.H. 2000. Why Genes Don’t Count for Racial Differences in Health. American Journal of Public Health 90 (11): 1699–1702.
Gottweis, H., and B. Kim. 2010. Explaining Hwang-Gate: South Korean Identity Politics between Bionationalism and Globalization. Science Technology Human Values 35 (4): 501–524.
Harrison, C.E., and A. Johnson. 2009. National Identity: The Role of Science and Technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hedgecoe, A., and P. Martin. 2003. The Drugs Don’t Work: Expectations and the Shaping of Pharmacogenetics. Social Studies of Science 33 (3): 327–364.
Hinterberger, A. 2010. The Genomics of Difference and the Politics of Race in Canada. In What’s the Use of Race? Modern Governance and the Biology of Difference, ed. I. Whitmarsh and D.S. Jones, 147–168. Cambridge: MIT University Press.
Hobsbawm, E., and T. Ranger (eds.). 1983. The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hroch, M. 1996. From National Movement to the Fully-Formed Nation: The Nation-Building Process in Europe. In Becoming National: a Reader, ed. G. Eley and R.G. Suny, 60–78. New York and London: Oxford University Press.
Hsiau, A.C. 2000. Contemporary Taiwanese Cultural Nationalism. London/New York: Routledge.
Jasanoff, S. 2004. The Idiom of Co-production. In State of Knowledge: the Co-production of Science and Social Order, ed. S. Jasanoff, 1–12. London: Routledge.
Jasanoff, S., and S.H. Kim. 2009. Containing the Atom, Sociotechnical Imaginaries and Nuclear Power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva 47 (2): 119–146.
Kuo, W.H. 2011. Techno-Politics of Genomic Nationalism: Tracing Genomics and Its Use in Drug Regulation in Japan and Taiwan. Social Science and Medicine 73: 1200–1207.
Lee, M.Y. 2001. Yuan-Tseh Lee’s Message to the Government: More Investment in Biotech. Taiwan to Become Filipino Domestic Worker of Genetic Studies if It Does Not Work Hard. United Daily News, July 5: 3. (in Chinese).
Lee, W.J., and Y.Y. Tsai. 2018. Absent Publics: Taiwan Biobank, Controversy, and Scientific Governance. Taiwanese Journal of Socology 64: 49–110. (in Chinese).
Lee, S., and Yang, Y.L. 1999. From Economic Superpower to Health Superpower. Common Health Magazine, May 1, 8:22–29. (in Chinese).
Lin, Y.C. 1997. Taiwan has a Beachhead-Strategy for Biotech. Common Wealth Magazine, April 1, 191:100–106. (in Chinese).
Liu, A.J. 2010. Making Taiwanese (Stem Cells): Identity, Genetics, and Hybridity. In Asian Biotech: Ethics and Communities of Fate, ed. O. Aihwa and N.N. Chen. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
Makeham, J., and A.C. Hsiau. 2005. Cultural, Ethnic, and Political Nationalism in Contemporary Taiwan. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Marcus, G.E. (ed.). 1995. Technoscientific Imaginaries: Conventions, Profiles, and Memoirs. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Martin, P., N. Brown, and A. Kraft. 2008. From Bedside to Bench? Communities of Promise, Translational Research and the Making of Blood Stem Cells. Science as Culture 17 (1): 29–41.
Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan. 2012. The Full Proposal of National Research Program for Biopharmaceuticals, http://117.56.91.94/KMPublic/readdocument.aspx?documentId=208032. Accessed 26 Oct 2015. (in Chinese).
Novas, C. 2006. The Political Economy of Hope: Patients’ Organizations, Science, and Biovalue. Biosocieties 1: 289–305.
Ong, A. 2016. Fungible Life: Experiment in the Asian City of Life. Durham: Duke University Press.
Prainsack, B., and A. Buyx. 2011. Solidarity: Reflections on an Emerging Concept in Bioethics. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.
Shen, C.Y. 2010. Taiwan Biobank and its Purposes. Law and Life Science 4 (4): 1–6. (in Chinese).
Sleeboom-Faulkner, M. 2006. How to Define a Population: Cultural Politics and Population Genetics in the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of China. BioSocieties 1 (4): 399–419.
Simpson, B. 2000. Imagined Genetic Communities: Ethnicity and Essentialism in the Twenty-First Century. Anthropology Today 16 (3): 3–6.
Smith, A.D. 1989. The Origins of Nations. Ethnic and Racial Studies 12 (3): 340–367.
Smith, E. 2009. Imaginaries of Development: The Rockefeller Foundation and Rice Research. Science as Culture 18 (4): 461–482.
Sunder Rajan, K. 2008. The Constitution of Postgenomic Life. USA: Duke University Press Books.
Taiwan Biobank. 2011. Strategic Plan and its Execution for the Taiwan Biobank. (in Chinese).
Taiwan Biobank. 2013. Recruiting Video: the Seeds and the Best. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xkg_hXJrlhk. Accessed 26 Oct 2015. (in Chinese).
Taiwan Biobank. Latest News. http://www.twBiobank.org.tw/new_web/news.php?article_option=news&article_add=1. Accessed 26 Oct 2015. (in Chinese).
Tarkkala, H. 2019. Reorganizing Biomedical Research: Biobanks as Conditions of Possibility for Personalized Medicine. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Helsinki, Helsinki.
Tarkkala, H., and A. Tupasela. 2018. Shortcut to Success? Negotiating Genetic Uniqueness in Global Biomedicine. Social Studies of Science 48 (5): 740–761.
The Election Study Center of National Chengchi University. 2015. Changes in the Taiwanese/Chinese Identity of Taiwanese. http://esc.nccu.edu.tw. Accessed 28 Oct 2015. (in Chinese).
Tsai, Y.Y. 2010. Geneticizing Ethnicity: A Study on the “Taiwan Bio-Bank”. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal (EASTS) 4(3): 433–455. (in Chinese).
Tsai, Y.Y. 2014. Genetic Science and Identity Politics: Indigenous DNA, the Origin of the Taiwanese, and the Emergence of Bio-multiculturalism. Taiwanese Sociology 28: 1–58. (in Chinese).
Tsuang, M.T. 2000. Research Proposal: A Population Genetic Data Base for Taiwan. In Proceeding of the Minutes of the 24th Academicians Meeting, July 3. Taipei: Academia Sinica. (in Chinese).
Tupasela, A. 2016. Genetic Romanticism—Constructing the Corpus in Finnish Folklore and Rare Diseases. Configurations 24 (2): 121–143.
Verran, H. 1998. Re-imagining Land Ownership in Australia. Postcolonial Studies 1 (2): 237–254.
Wang, F.C. 2005. From Chinese Original Domicile to Taiwanese Ethnicity: An Analysis of Census Category Transformation in Taiwan. Taiwanese Sociology 9: 59–117. (in Chinese).
Wang, C.H. 2010. The Limits of Fast Follower: Taiwan’s Economic Transition and Innovation. Taipei: Chuliu Book Company. (in Chinese).
Wong, J. 2005. Re-Mak the Developmental State in Taiwan: The Challenges of Biotechnology. International Political Science Review 26 (2): 169–191.
Yang, Z.M. 2000. A Taiwanese Genetic Database, Great Initial Controversy. United Daily News, July 5: 6. (in Chinese).
Acknowledgements
An earlier version of this paper was presented at The Society for Social Studies of Science (4S) annual conference (Australia, Sydney 2008). The authors sincerely thank Joel F. Stocker, Shun-Nan Chiang, Jia-Shin Chen, Sean Hsiang-Lin Lei, and three anonymous reviewers for their useful comments and suggestions. Yu-yueh Tsai would like to thank Professor Joan Fujimura (Department of Sociology, University of Wisconsin-Madison) for her inspiring guidance and encouragement. This research is part of the project funded by first author’s “Outstanding Young Scholar Research Project” from Taiwan’s National Science Council (NSC102-2628-H001-006-MY2).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendix: The interview list
Appendix: The interview list
Interviewee | Background | Interview date |
|---|---|---|
Scientist A | Genetics, Epidemiology | November 2012 October 2015 |
Scientist B | Biomedicine, Immunology | October 2015 August 2016 |
Scientist C | Genomic Medicine, Epidemiology | February 2011 October 2012 September 2015 August 2016 |
Scientist D | Genomic Medicine, Epidemiology | March 2011 |
Scientist E | Genomic Medicine, Immunology | September 2012 |
Scientist F | Genomic Medicine, Epidemiology | January 2013 |
Scientist G | Statistical Genetics, Epidemiology | October 2016 |
Scientist H | Biomedicine, Internal medicine | November 2016 |
Clinician H1 | TBB Advisory Committee Member, Public Health, Epidemiology | December 2012 |
Clinician H2 | TBB Advisory Committee Member, Public Health, Epidemiology | November 2012 |
Clinician H1 | EGC member, Genetics | January 2011 |
Clinician H2 | EGC member, Community Medicine Practitioner | March 2011 December 2012 |
Administrator J1 | Former Ministry of Health, Hospital Director | January 2013 October 2015 |
Administrator J2 | Former Official of the Ministry of Health, Researcher of National Research Program for Biopharmaceuticals | March 2011 September 2015 January 2016 November 2016 |
Administrator J3 | Researcher of the Department of Technology and Development, the Ministry of Health | November 2016 |
Administrator J4 | Former Official of the Biotechnology, Health, Medicine and Agriculture Division of the BOST, Executive Yuan | October 2016 |
Industry Representative K1 | Industry Representative in TBB, Former Official of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Microbiology | March 2011 September 2015 |
Industry Representative K2 | Industry Representative in TBB. President of a Genomic Medicine | March 2011 October 2012 August 2016 |
Industry Representative K3 | Principal Engineer of the TBB Information Platform, Former Researcher of the Institute for Information Industry | March 2011 July 2016 |
Public Participant R1 | From Chaiyi | February 2016 |
Public Participant R2 | From Chaiyi | February 2016 |
Public Participant R3 | From HsinChu | October 2016 |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tsai, YY., Lee, WJ. An imagined future community: Taiwan Biobank, Taiwanese genome, and nation-building. BioSocieties 16, 88–115 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-019-00179-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-019-00179-z