There is no one single type of code that might be adopted in response to concerns about biological weapons. Professional codes are often classified according to whether they aim to be aspirational (often designated as ‘codes of ethics’), educational/advisory (often designated as ‘codes of conduct’), enforceable (often designated as ‘codes of practice’), or a combination of these.
Follow the links for codes that could be classified as examples of these three different types:
Aspirational
- Ethical Code of the Australian Society for Microbiology
- Ethical Principles of BIOTECanada
- EuropaBio Core ethical values
- Malcolm, D. and J. Revill. 2005. Raising Awareness: A Hippocratic Oath for Life Scientists. Bradford Briefing Paper No. 18
- International Union of Microbiological Societies Code of Ethics for the Prevention of the Misuse of Scientific Knowledge, Research & Resources
Educational/Advisory
- Somerville, M and R. Atlas. 2005. Ethics: A weapon to counter bioterrorism. Science 307(5717):1881-1882
- World Medical Association Declaration of Washington on Biological Weapons (2002)
Enforceable
- Pearson, G. 2005. A Code of Conduct for the Life Sciences: A Practical Approach. Bradford Briefing Paper No. 15
- In preparation for the June 2005 Meeting of Experts, the BTWC Secretariat produced four background papers:
- Existing Codes of Conduct which Refer to Biological and Toxin Weapons,
- Codes of Conduct Relevant to the Life Sciences or Biotechnology Which Do Not Refer to Biological and Toxin Weapons,
- Review and Analysis of Relevant Elements of Existing Codes of Conduct in Other Fields, and
- Relevant Organisations, Associations, Professional Bodies and Institutions Which Might Serve as Sources of Guidance on the Formulation of Codes of Conduct and as Agents for Adopting and Promulgating Such Codes.