Symbolic Legislation Theory and Developments in Biolaw

This edited volume covers new ground bybringing together perspectives from symbolic legislation theory on the onehand, and from biolaw and bioethics on the other hand. 

Symbolic legislation has a bad name. It usually refers toinstances of legislation which are ineffective and that serve other politicaland social goals than the goals officially stated. Recently, a more positivenotion of symbolic legislation has emerged in legislative theory. From thisperspective, symbolic legislation is regarded as a positive alternative to themore traditional, top-down legislative approach. The legislature no longer merely issuescommands backed up with severe sanctions, as in instrumental legislation.Instead, lawmakers provide open and aspirational norms that are meant to changebehavior not by means of threat, but indirectly, through debate and socialinteraction. 

Since the 1990s, biomedical developments have revived discussionson symbolic legislation. One of the reasons is that biomedical legislationtouches on deep-rooted, symbolic-cultural representations of the biologicalaspects of human life. Moreover, as it is often impossible to reach consensuson these controversial questions, legislators have sought alternative ways todevelop legal frameworks. Consequently, communicative and interactive approachesto legislation are prominent within the governance of medical biotechnology. 

The symbolic dimensions of biolaw are often overlooked. Yet,it is clear that the symbolic is at the heart of many legal-political debateson bioethical questions. Since the rise of biomedical technologies, human bodymaterials have acquired a scientific, medical and even commercial value. Thesenew approaches, which radically question existing legal symbolizations of thehuman body, raise the question whether and how the law should continue toreflect symbolic values and meanings. Moreover, how can we decide what thesesymbolic values are, given the fact that we live in a pluralistic society?

Bart van Klinkis Professor of Legal Methodology at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, TheNetherlands. He has published several articles and books on symboliclegislation theory, among which his dissertation De wet als symbool (Lawas a Symbol, 1998) and, together with Nicolle Zeegers and Willem Witteveen,the edited volume Social and Symbolic Effects of Legislation under the Ruleof Law (2005). He is co-founder of the research group Biolaw and SymbolicInteraction (BioSI). ?

Britta van Beers is Associate Professor at the Department of LegalTheory at VU University, Amsterdam. Her research involves thelegal-philosophical aspects of the regulation of medical biotechnology. Recentpublications include the edited volume Humanity across International Law andBiolaw (with Luigi Corrias and Wouter Werner, Cambridge University Press2014); and 'Is Europe ‘Giving in to Baby Markets’? Reproductive Tourism inEurope and the Gradual Erosion of Existing Legal Limits to ReproductiveMarkets’ (Medical Law Review, 2015).

LonnekePoort is assistant professorat Erasmus School of Law in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. She is also member ofthe subcommittee on social and ethical aspects of genetic modification of theNetherlands Commission on Genetic Modification (COGEM). She published severalarticles and a book on the interactive approach to law among which herdissertation Consensus & Controversies in Animal Biotechnology. AnInteractive Legislative Approach to Animal Biotechnology in Denmark,Switzerland, and the Netherlands (Den Haag: Eleven International Publishing2013).?