SNAGE I SLABOSTI REPRODUKTIVNOG BIOEKONOMSKOG TRŽIŠTA: UVIDI IZ PREGLEDA LITERATURE
Sažetak
Uvod: Ekonomija je oblast koja obuhvata proizvode, usluge i trgovinu, a reproduktivna bioekonomija se odnosi na oblast reprodukcije i načine proizvodnje, usluga, kupaca i trgovine sa reproduktivnim ćelijama i tkivima. Svrha ovog istraživanja je da se identifikuju ključni faktori na tržištu reproduktivne bioekonomije koji je oblikuju, kako bi se prepoznale mogućnosti za unapređenje, i uočili potencijalni izazovi. U skladu s tim, cilj rada podrazumeva sprovođenje analize za opisivanje snaga, slabosti, mogućnosti i pretnji (SWOT analize) na tržištu reproduktivne bioekonomije, što će omogućiti formulisanje strategijskih smernica za dalji razvoj.
Metode: Sproveden je pregled literature objavljene od 2017. do 2024. Sprovedena je pretraga akademskih i naučnih radova korišćenjem baze podataka PubMed, Springer i Elsevier, kao i alata Google Scholar za identifikaciju dodatnih relevantnih izvora. Korišćen je sledeći string za pretragu: (("donacija reproduktivnih ćelija" ILI "donacija gameta" ILI "donacija jajnih ćelija" ILI "donacija sperme") AND ("biomedicinski inženjering" ILI "biotehnologija proizvodnje gameta" ILI "kriobiologija gameta" ILI "banke gameta" ILI "gamete banks" ILI "gamete banks" OR "gamete banks" OR "gamete cross-border game") roditeljstvo“ ILI „uticaj karijere na reprodukciju“ ILI „pojedinačni donator donira više banaka“ ILI „netradicionalna porodica“ ILI „altruizam“ ILI „reproduktivni rad“ ILI „bioetika u doniranju reproduktivnih ćelija“)). Faktori koji imaju najveći uticaj na razvoj reproduktivnog bioekonomskog tržišta su identifikovani korišćenjem PRISMA vodiča za izveštavanje (engl, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses), i klasifikovani uz pomoć SWOT instrumenta za stratešku analizu u snage, slabosti, mogućnosti i pretnje.
Rezultati: Pregledom literature pokazano je da su najuticajnije (i) snage reproduktivne bioekonomije: postojanje i razvoj biomedicinskog inženjerstva, razvoj novih tehnologija u biotehnologiji – Kriobiologija, distribucija i biodostupnost proizvoda – kriobanke; (ii) tržišne mogućnosti: prekogranična reproduktivna zdravstvena zaštita (eng., Cross Border Reproductive Care), transnacionalni program donacije gameta (eng., Transnacional Gamete Donation) i raznolikost potrošača koji učestvuju na tržištu reproduktivne bioekonomije; ali i (iii) slabosti: odlaganje roditeljstva na starije životne dobi, regulisanje broja porodica po davaocu gde različiti standardi otežavaju praćenje, buduće formiranje složene, netradicionalne, moderne porodice; kao i (iv) potencijalne pretnje u vidu nepoznatog kvaliteta i budućih rezultata, bioetičke dileme i da komercijalizacija reproduktivnog rada predstavlja pretnju altruizmu.
Zaključak: Rezultati ovog istraživanja su pokazali značajan potencijal reproduktivne bioekonomije za lečenje neplodnosti i diversifikaciju porodice. Neophodno je da regulatorni okvir bude transparentan, u skladu sa etičkim i normativnim propisima, pre sprovođenja programa doniranja reproduktivnog materijala, i uvođenja nacionalnog registra za domaće i strane državljane, sve potencijalne korisnike programa donacije.
Reference
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The Bioeconomy to 2030: Designing a Policy Agenda (Internet). Paris: OECD; 2009 (cited 2025 Feb 7). Available from: https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2009/04/the-bioeconomy-to-2030_g1gha07e/9789264056886-en.pdf
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA). World population ageing 2019. New York: United Nations; 2020.
Birch K, Tyfield D. Theorizing the bioeconomy: biovalue, biocapital, bioeconomics or... what?. Sci Technol Hum Values. 2013;38(3):299-327. doi: 10.1177/0162243912442398.
Zilberman D, Kim E, Kirschner S, Kaplan S, Reeves J. Technology and the future bioeconomy. Agric Econ. 2013 Nov;44(Suppl 1):95-102. doi: 10.1111/agec.12054.
Marelli L, Testa G. Bioeconomies: Life, Technology, and Capital in the 21st Century. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2017. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55651-2.
Priefer C, Jörissen J, Frör O. Pathways to shape the bioeconomy. Resources. 2017;6(1):10. doi: 10.3390/resources6010010.
Vertommen S, Pavone V, Nahman M. Global fertility chains: an integrative political economy approach to understanding the reproductive bioeconomy. Sci Technol Hum Values. 2022;47(1):112-45. doi: 10.1177/0162243921996460.
Saitou M, Hayashi K. Mammalian in vitro gametogenesis. Science. 2021;374(6563). doi: 10.1126/science.aaz6830.
Sehic E, Brännström M, Hellström M. Progress in preclinical research on uterus bioengineering that utilizes scaffolds derived from decellularized uterine tissue. Biomed Mater Devices. 2023;1(1):66-73. doi: 10.1007/s44174-022-00036-x.
Dzobo K, Thomford NE, Senthebane DA, Shipanga H, Rowe A, Dandara C, et al. Advances in regenerative medicine and tissue engineering: innovation and transformation of medicine. Stem Cells Int. 2018;2018:2495848. doi: 10.1155/2018/2495848.
Tober D, Pavone V, Lafuente-Funes S, Konvalinka N. Eggonomics: vitrification and bioeconomies of egg donation in the United States and Spain. Med Anthropol Q. 2023;37(3):248-63. doi: 10.1111/maq.12767.
Homanen R. Reproducing whiteness and enacting kin in the Nordic context of transnational egg donation: matching donors with cross-border traveller recipients in Finland. Soc Sci Med. 2018;203:28-34. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.03.012.
Kroløkke C, Petersen TS, Herrmann JR, Bach AS, Adrian SW, Klingenberg R, et al. The cryopolitics of reproduction on ice: a new Scandinavian ice age. Emerald Publishing Limited; 2019. doi:10.1108/978-1-83867-042-920191010.
Pande A. “Mix or Match?”: transnational fertility industry and white desirability. Med Anthropol. 2021;40(4):335-47. doi: 10.1080/01459740.2021.1877289.
Ignjatović S. Bioetičke dileme i regulacija reproduktivnih prava u Srbiji i Evropskoj uniji u komparativnoj perspektivi (Internet). Academia.edu;2019 (cited 2025 Jan 9). Available from: https://www.academia.edu/105916645/Bioeti%C4%8Dke_dileme_i_regulacija_reproduktivnih_prava_u_Srbiji_i_Evropskojuniji_u_komparativnoj_perspektivi
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
Zoltnere V, Laca Z. Factors affecting the development of the bioeconomy in Latvia. In: Economic Science for Rural Development: Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference; 2021. p. 26-34. Available from: https://llufb.llu.lv/conference/economic_science_rural/2021/Latvia_ESRD_55_2021-26-34.pdf
Zhu Y, Kong B, Liu R, Zhao Y. Developing biomedical engineering technologies for reproductive medicine. Smart Med. 2022;1(1). doi: 10.1002/smmd.20220006.
Weerarathna IN, Kumar P, Luharia A, Mishra G. Engineering with Biomedical Sciences Changing the Horizon of Healthcare-A Review. Bioengineered. 2024 Dec;15(1):2401269. doi: 10.1080/21655979.2024.2401269.
Chattopadhyay S, Goswami A, Sil M. Nanobiotechnology: traditional re-interpreting personalized medicine through targeted therapies and regenerative solutions. Naunyn Schmiedeberg's Arch Pharmacol. 2025. doi: 10.1007/s00210-025-04038-6.
Cobo A, García-Velasco JA, Coello A, Domingo J, Pellicer A, Remohí J. Oocyte vitrification as an efficient option for elective fertility preservation. Fertil Steril. 2016 Mar;105(3):755-764.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.11.027.
Zhang PY, Fan Y, Tan T, Yu Y. Generation of artificial gamete and embryo from stem cells in reproductive medicine. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020;8:781. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00781.
Eyni H, Ghorbani S, Nazari H, Hajialyani M, Razavi Bazaz S, Mohaqiq M, et al. Advanced bioengineering of male germ stem cells to preserve fertility. J Tissue Eng. 2021;12:20417314211060590. doi: 10.1177/20417314211060590.
Sciorio R, Pluchino N, Fuller BJ. Review of human oocyte cryopreservation in ART programs: Current challenges and opportunities. Cryobiology. 2023;104590. doi: 10.1016/j.cryobiol.2023.104590.
Buriak I, Fleck RA, Goltsev A, Shevchenko N, Petrushko M, Yurchuk T, et al. Translation of cryobiological techniques to socially economically deprived populations – Part 1: Cryogenic preservation strategies. Journal of Medical Devices. 2020;14(1):010801. doi: 10.1115/1.4045878.
ESHRE Working Group on Oocyte Cryopreservation in Europe, Shenfield F, De Mouzon J, Scaravelli G, Kupka M, Ferraretti AP, et al. Oocyte and ovarian tissue cryopreservation in European countries: statutory background, practice, storage and use. Hum Reprod Open. 2017;2017(1). doi: 10.1093/hropen/hox003.
Salama M, Isachenko V, Isachenko E, Rahimi G, Mallmann PM, Westphal LM, Inhorn MC, Patrizio P. Cross border reproductive care (CBRC): a growing global phenomenon with multidimensional implications (a systematic and critical review). J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35:1277-88. doi: 10.1007/s10815-018-1181-x.
Tsekouropoulos G, Vasileiou A, Hoxha G, Dimitriadis A, Zervas I. Sustainable approaches to medical tourism: strategies for Central Macedonia/Greece. Sustainability. 2023;16(1):121. doi: 10.3390/su16010121.
Whittaker A, Inhorn MC, Shenfield F. Globalised quests for assisted conception: reproductive travel for infertility and involuntary childlessness. Glob Public Health. 2019;14(12):1669-88. doi: 10.1080/17441692.2019.1627479.
Alkorta I. Spanish legal reproscape: the making of a bio-industry. Law, Tech. & Hum. 2021;3:123. doi: 10.5204/lthj.1489.
Schurr C. Multiple mobilities in Mexico’s fertility industry. Mobilities. 2019;14(1):103-19. doi: 10.1080/17450101.2019.1522881.
Schurr C. The baby business booms: economic geographies of assisted reproduction. Geogr Compass. 2018;12(8). doi: 10.1111/gec3.12395.
Coccia ME, Rizzello F, Wakunga S, Badolato L, Evangelisti P, Bertocci F, et al. ‘Two countries-two labs’: the transnational gamete donation (TGD) programme to support egg donation. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020 Dec;37(12):3039-49. doi: 10.1007/s10815-020-01961-w.
Sciorio R, Pluchino N, Fuller BJ. Review of human oocyte cryopreservation in ART programs: current challenges and opportunities. Cryobiology. 2023;104590. doi: 10.1016/j.cryobiol.2023.104590.
Reeves M. Vital labors: transacting oocytes across borders in the post-Soviet space. Cult Anthropol. 2022;37(1):23-9. doi: 10.14506/ca37.1.04.
Di Battista S, Pivetti M. “Non-traditional” parents in contemporary societies. Soc Sci. 2024;13(1):2. doi: 10.3390/socsci13010002.
Miner SA. “I would want to pay her”: challenging altruistic egg exchanges in Canada through moral patchworks. Soc Sci Med. 2021;272:113733. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113733.
Bonan S, Chapel‐Lardic E, Rosenblum O, Dudkiewicz‐Sibony C, Chamouard L, Wolf JP, et al. Characteristics and intentions of heterosexual couples comprising a transgender man awaiting sperm donation to conceive a child. Andrology. 2021;9(6):1799-807. doi: 10.1111/andr.13103.
Gil-Arribas E, Blockeel C, Pennings G, Nekkebroeck J, Velasco JAG, Serna J, et al. Oocyte vitrification for elective fertility preservation: a SWOT analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2022;44(6):1005-14. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.02.001.
Molina-García L, Hidalgo-Ruiz M, Cocera-Ruíz EM, Conde-Puertas E, Delgado-Rodríguez M, Martínez-Galiano JM. The delay of motherhood: reasons, determinants, time used to achieve pregnancy, and maternal anxiety level. PLoS One. 2019;14(12). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227063.
ESHRE Working Group on Reproductive Donation, Kirkman-Brown J, Calhaz-Jorge C, Dancet EAF, Lundin K, Martins M, Tilleman K, et al. Good practice recommendations for information provision for those involved in reproductive donation. Hum Reprod Open. 2022 Feb 16;2022(1):hoac001. doi: 10.1093/hropen/hoac001.
Stookey J. Sperm you can bank on: a proposed federal regulatory scheme to increase consumer protection in the sperm donation industry (Internet). Newark (NJ): Seton Hall University School of Law; 2021 (cited 2025 Jan 9). Available from: https://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2254&context=student_scholarship
Tober D, Kroløkke C. Emotion, embodiment, and reproductive colonialism in the global human egg trade. Gend Work Organ. 2021;28(5):1766-86. doi: 10.1111/gwao.12637.
Pennings G. A SWOT analysis of unregulated sperm donation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2023;46(1):203-9. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.09.013.
Homanen R. Creatively becoming a family in the fertility clinic? Matching donors with non-heterosexual and single recipients in commercial care. In: Andreassen R, Nebeling Petersen M, Harrison K, Andreassen C, editors. Creative Families: gender and technologies of everyday life. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2021. p. 19-41. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-70803-0_2.
Gameiro S. Technology-assisted parenthood and modern families in the 21st century. In: Hojjat M, Moyer A, editors. Modern relationships: romance, friendship, and family in the 21st century. New York (NY): Oxford University Press; 2024. p. 308. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780197655504.003.0018.
Cutas D, Smajdor A. Reproductive technologies and the family in the twenty-first century. In: Borovecki A, ten Have H, editors. The freedom of scientific research. Manchester: Manchester University Press; 2020. p. 57-70. doi: 10.7765/9781526146472.00014.
Pai HD, Baid R, Palshetkar NP, Pai A, Pai RD, Palshetkar R. Oocyte cryopreservation-current scenario and future perspectives: a narrative review. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2021;14(4):340-9. doi: 10.1016/j.cryobiol.2023.104590.
Canosa S, Maggiulli R, Cimadomo D, Innocenti F, Fabozzi G, Gennarelli G, et al. Cryostorage management of reproductive cells and tissues in ART: status, needs, opportunities, and potential new challenges. Reprod Biomed Online. 2023;47(5):103547. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2023.06.007.
Estudillo E, Jiménez A, Bustamante-Nieves PE, Palacios-Reyes C, Velasco I, López-Ornelas A. Cryopreservation of gametes and embryos and their molecular changes. Int J Mol Sci. 2021;22(19):10864. doi:1 0.3390/ijms221910864.
Perler L, Schurr C. Geographies of assisted reproduction: The Spanish egg donation economy as a global/intimate contact zone. Documents d'Anàlisi Geogràfica. 2022;68(2):313-33. doi: 10.5565/rev/dag.725.
Lafuente-Funes S, Pérez Orozco A. On (global) care chains in times of crisis: egg donation and domestic work in Spain. Tapuya: Latin Am Sci Technol Soc. 2020;3(1):354-76. doi: 10.1080/25729861.2020.1796326.
Pennings G. Should a gamete bank verify the non-medical information provided by a donor? Hum Reprod. 2024;39(1):deae004. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deae004.
Levin AT. The evolving ethics of sperm donation [dissertation]. Baltimore (MD): Johns Hopkins University; 2022.
Rocha DO, Melamed RMM, Braga DPD A F, Setti AS, Iaconelli Jr A, Borges Jr E. The child’s right to know versus the parents’ right not to tell: the attitudes of couples undergoing fertility treatments towards identity-release gamete donation. J Reprod Infertil. 2023;24(3):198. doi: 10.18502/jri.v24i3.13276.
Correia M, Rego G, Nunes R. The right to be forgotten versus the right to disclosure of gamete donors' ID: ethical and legal considerations. Acta Bioeth. 2021;27(1):69-76. doi: 10.4067/S1726-569X2021000100069.
Mulligan A. Anonymous gamete donation and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights: The case for incompatibility. Med Law Int. 2022;22(2):119-46. doi: 10.1177/096853322210096.
Kool EM, Bos AME, van der Graaf R, Fauser BCJM, Bredenoord AL. Ethics of oocyte banking for third-party assisted reproduction: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update. 2018 Sep 1;24(5):615-35. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmy016.
