Biotechnology regulation: is policy transfer an appropriate answer?

In the world of biotechnology regulation, one often encounters the suggestion that the legislation of other countries should be consulted. Known as "policy transfer" in the field of public policy analysis, the purpose of such a recommendation is for policymakers to use the experiences of other States as a basis for developing appropriate regulatory frameworks in a timely manner. This paper examines whether policy transfer is relevant as an instrument for biotechnology regulation, and if it is, to what extent. Our analysis uses the example of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART), and unfolds according to the following argumentative steps. We will begin by discussing policy transfer as a recognized feature of policymaking in the literature pertaining to public policy analysis. We will then introduce a distinction between the technical dimension of policymaking and its political component. We will refer to "morality policy" as an illustration of policymaking directed toward its political component. We will show that, in the case of morality policy, States have moved away from a policy transfer approach. We will then establish that ART qualifies as morality policy, suggesting that policy transfer is most likely not the optimal policymaking tool for dealing with biotechnology regulation. Moving beyond the issue of ART in order to expand our reasoning to biotechnology regulation as a whole, we will conclude that, although the experiences of other States may be useful, policy transfer does not suffice in terms of informing policymaking in the case of biotechnology advances.