Impacts of Contradictory Assumptions in Science and Technology Policy: the Case of Biosafety Legislation in Iran

The biosafety law of Iran was passed by Parliament on May 2009 after nearly 8 years of disputes and disagreements between the ministries and other organizations involved. Biosafety is related to regulating biotechnology and its possible risks. However, the evidence suggests that this law might not be a helpful basis for resolving controversies, but it might also raise the profile of the issue further. This paper seeks to analyze the widespread controversies over the Biosafety Law of Iran. Analyzing controversies has been an interesting topic for scholars of science and technology policy, especially when the regulation of technology hinges on risk and science. This paper argues that the persistence of some contradictory framing assumptions engender the current controversies and have hindered the shaping of a convergence within the system over the Biosafety Law. The paper will develop a framework suitable for the situation of Iran that could identify those framing assumptions. This understanding suggests that controversies will persist as long as those framing assumptions remained unchanged. Therefore, rather than discussing the operational mechanisms of biosafety, it is pivotal to turn to the discussion over the framing assumptions that could pave the way for reaching an agreement over the biosafety law.