Y. Barthe, provides an account of 'responsibilization' and its relationship with 'victimization' in his book about the victims of nuclear tests. He outlines the process of responsibilization: i.e. identification of a responsible entity from which accountability is demanded, demonstration of a link between a specific cause and a damage done, tension between responsibilization and deresponsibilization. The similarities and differences between responsibilization and what I call irresponsibilization need to be further explored, pp.231-239, 2017.

. Rose, , 2017.

. Rosemann, whose online survey shows rather This working paper has benefited from discussions with several colleagues. I am, in particular, grateful to Cornelius Heimstädt, Brice Laurent, Evan Fisher and Florence Paterson for their very rapid and incisive feedback. Special and stylish thanks are due to Frédéric Vergnaud with whom, 2016.

D. Baltimore, A prudent path forward for genomic engineering and germline gene modification, Science, vol.348, issue.6230, pp.36-38, 2015.
DOI : 10.1126/science.aab1028
URL : http://europepmc.org/articles/pmc4394183?pdf=render

D. Baltimore, Why We Need a Summit on Human Gene Editing, Issues in Science and Technology, vol.32, issue.3, p.35, 2016.

Y. Barthe, Les retombées du passé-Le paradoxe de la victime, 2017.

B. Bartkowski, I. Theesfeld, F. Pirscher, and J. Timaeus, Snipping around for food: Economic, ethical and policy implications of CRISPR/Cas genome editing, Geoforum, vol.96, pp.172-180, 2018.
DOI : 10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.07.017

I. Dussauge and C. Helgesson, Value Practices in the Life Sciences and Medicine, 2015.

S. Fox, Irresponsible Research and Innovation? Applying Findings from Neuroscience to Analysis of Unsustainable Hype Cycles, Sustainability, vol.10, issue.10, 2018.

E. Frow, Reframing the Debate around CRISPR and Genome Editing, 2009.

L. Galanopoulo, CRISPR-Cas9 : des ciseaux génétiques pour le cerveau, Le Journal du CNRS, 2016.

T. F. Gieryn, Cultural boundaries of science: Credibility on the line, 1999.

A. Grunwald, In Proceed with caution? Concept and application of the precautionary positive attitudes towards health-related applications, but negative attitudes regarding non-health, 2012.

, Further work could examine in more detail how values and positions are articulated by various kinds of actors (biologists, ethicists, policy-makers, NGOs, industry, etc.) and examine whether there are differences across national contexts (see O'Mahony and Schäfer (2005) and the issue on 'Stem Cell Technologies 1998-2008: controversies and silences, 2008.

, Proceedings of the Winter School course, pp.243-259

T. Hellström, Systemic innovation and risk: technology assessment and the challenge of responsible innovation, Technology in Society, vol.25, issue.3, pp.369-384, 2003.

S. Jasanoff, B. J. Hurlbut, and S. Krishanu, CRISPR democracy: Gene editing and the need for inclusive deliberation, Issues in Science and Technology, vol.32, issue.1, pp.37-49, 2015.

L. Jiang and H. Stevens, Chinese biotech versus international ethics? Accounting for the China-America CRISPR ethical divide, BioSocieties, vol.10, issue.4, pp.483-488, 2015.

L. Jiang and A. Rosemann, Human embryo gene editing in China: the uncertain legal status of the embryo, BioSocieties, 2018.

E. Kirksey, The CRISPR Hack: Better, Faster, Stronger, Anthropology Now, vol.8, issue.1, pp.1-13, 2016.

E. Lanphier, Don't edit the human germ line, Nature, vol.519, issue.7544, p.410, 2015.

B. Laurent, Boundary-making in the International Organization: Public Engagement Expertise at the OECD, pp.217-235, 2016.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01430573

J. Law and W. Y. Lin, Provincializing STS: Postcoloniality, Symmetry, and Method, East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal, vol.11, issue.2, pp.211-227, 2017.

H. Ledford, Bitter fight over CRISPR patent heats up, Nature, vol.529, issue.7586, p.265, 2016.

H. Ledford, CRISPR, the disruptor, Nature, vol.522, issue.7554, pp.20-24, 2015.

H. Ledford, Biohackers gear up for genome editing, Nature, vol.524, issue.7566, pp.398-399, 2015.

J. Lezaun, Seminar at the Centre for the Sociology of Innovation, Mines ParisTech, 2017.

P. Liang, CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes, Protein & cell, vol.6, issue.5, pp.363-372, 2015.

A. Mantovani, Cina, i figli della follia genetica, La Reppublica, 2018.

G. E. Marchant and W. Wallach, Coordinating Technology Governance, Issues in Science and Technology, vol.31, issue.4, pp.43-50, 2015.

M. Marchione, Chinese researcher claims first gene-edited babies, 2018.

M. Meyer, Devices and Trajectories of Responsible Innovation: Problematising synthetic biology, Journal of Responsible Innovation, vol.2, issue.1, pp.100-103, 2015.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01623499

T. Mccaughey, A global social media survey of attitudes to human genome editing, Cell Stem Cell, vol.18, issue.5, pp.569-572, 2016.

M. Morange, What history tells us XXXVII. CRISPR-Cas: The discovery of an immune system in prokaryotes, Journal of Biosciences, vol.40, issue.2, pp.221-223, 2015.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01483829

P. O'mahony and M. S. Schäfer, The 'Book of Life' in the press: Comparing German and Irish media discourse on human genome research, Social Studies of Science, vol.35, issue.1, pp.99-130, 2005.

, Organizing Committee of the Second International Summit on Human Genome Editing, 2018.

R. Owen and N. Goldberg, Responsible Innovation: A Pilot Study with the U.K. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Risk Analysis, vol.30, issue.11, pp.1699-1707, 2010.
DOI : 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01517.x

R. Owen, P. Macnaghten, and J. Stilgoe, Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society, Science and public policy, vol.39, issue.6, pp.751-760, 2012.
DOI : 10.1093/scipol/scs093

S. Parthasarathy, Governance Lessons for CRISPR/Cas9 From the Missed Opportunities of Asilomar, Ethics in Biology, Engineering and Medicine, vol.6, issue.3-4, pp.305-312, 2015.

A. Regalado, EXCLUSIVE: Chinese scientists are creating CRISPR babies, MIT Technology Review, 2018.

A. Rip, Technology Assessment as Part of the Co-Evolution of Nanotechnology and Society: The Thripust of the TA Program, Nanotechnology in Science, Economy and Society, pp.13-15, 2005.

M. Roberts, China baby gene editing claim 'dubious', BBC News online, 2018.

K. M. Rose, Engaging the public at a science festival: Findings from a panel on human gene editing, Science Communication, vol.39, issue.2, pp.250-277, 2017.

A. Rosemann, X. Zhang, and L. Jiang, Human germ line gene editing: Why comparative, cross-national studies on public viewpoints are important, Anthropology, vol.5, issue.1, 2017.
DOI : 10.4172/2332-0915.1000175

R. Schomberg and . Von, Responsible Innovation. The New Paradigm for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy, Responsible Innovation: Neue Impulse fur die Technikfolgenabschatzung, pp.47-71, 2015.

D. Stark, The sense of dissonance: Accounts of worth in economic life, 2011.

F. Vatin, Évaluer et valoriser : une sociologie économique de la mesure, 2009.

S. L. Wee and E. Chen, In China, Sacrificing Ethics for Scientific Glory, The New York Times, 2018.

H. Wolinsky, The FBI and biohackers: An unusual relationship, EMBO reports, vol.17, issue.6, pp.793-796, 2016.
DOI : 10.15252/embr.201642483
URL : http://embor.embopress.org/content/17/6/793.full.pdf

S. Yang, G. E. Lee, and D. Yi, Blinded by Technology? Genome Editing for Blindness and the Articulation of an Off-Target Problem, 2018.