Ownership and sharing in synthetic biology: A ‘diverse ecology’ of the open and the proprietary?

Ethical and social insights into synthetic biology: predicting research fronts in the post-COVID-19 era

As a revolutionary biological science and technology, synthetic biology has already spread its influence from natural sciences to humanities and social sciences by introducing biosafety, biosecurity, and ethical issues to society. The current study aims to elaborate the intellectual bases and research front of the synthetic biology field in the sphere of philosophy, ethics, and social sciences, with knowledge mapping and bibliometric methods. The literature records from the Social Sciences Citation Index and Arts & Humanities Citation Index in the Web of Science Core Collection from 1982 to 2021 were collected and analyzed to illustrate the intellectual structure of philosophical, ethical, and social research of synthetic biology. This study profiled the hotspots of research focus on its governance, philosophical and ethical concerns, and relevant technologies. This study offers clues and enlightenment for the stakeholders and researchers to follow the progress of this emerging discipline and technology and to understand the cutting-edge ideas and future form of this field, which takes on greater significance in the post-COVID-19 era.

An economy of details: standards and data reusability

Reusability has been a key issue since the origins of the parts-based approach to synthetic biology. Starting with the BioBrick™ standard part, multiple efforts have aimed to make biology more exchangeable. The reusability of parts and other deoxyribonucleic acid-based data has proven over time to be challenging, however. Drawing on a series of qualitative interviews and an international workshop, this article explores the challenges of reusability in real laboratory practice. It shows particular ways that standards are experienced as presenting shortcomings for capturing the kinds of contextual information crucial for scientists to be able to reuse biological parts and data. I argue that researchers in specific laboratories develop a sense of how much circumstantial detail they need to share for others to be able to make sense of their data and possibly reuse it. When choosing particular reporting formats, recharacterizing data to gain closer knowledge or requesting additional information, researchers enact an 'economy of details'. The farther apart two laboratories are in disciplinary, epistemological, technical and geographical terms, the more detailed information needs to be captured for data to be reusable across contexts. In synthetic biology, disciplinary distance between computing science and engineering researchers and experimentalist biologists is reflected in diverging views on standards: what kind of information should be included to enable reusability, what kind of information can be captured by standards at all and how they may serve to produce and circulate knowledge. I argue that such interdisciplinary tensions lie at the core of difficulties in setting standards in synthetic biology.

Beyond natural: synthetic expansions of botanical form and function

Powered by developments that enabled genome-scale investigations, systems biology emerged as a field aiming to understand how phenotypes emerge from network functions. These advances fuelled a new engineering discipline focussed on synthetic reconstructions of complex biological systems with the goal of predictable rational design and control. Initially, progress in the nascent field of synthetic biology was slow due to the ad hoc nature of molecular biology methods such as cloning. The application of engineering principles such as standardisation, together with several key technical advances, enabled a revolution in the speed and accuracy of genetic manipulation. Combined with mathematical and statistical modelling, this has improved the predictability of engineering biological systems of which nonlinearity and stochasticity are intrinsic features leading to remarkable achievements in biotechnology as well as novel insights into biological function. In the past decade, there has been slow but steady progress in establishing foundations for synthetic biology in plant systems. Recently, this has enabled model-informed rational design to be successfully applied to the engineering of plant gene regulation and metabolism. Synthetic biology is now poised to transform the potential of plant biotechnology. However, reaching full potential will require conscious adjustments to the skillsets and mind sets of plant scientists.

Private and public values of innovation: A patent analysis of synthetic biology

•

Patent documents are a signalling mechanism about innovation values.

•

Extant patent valuation literature tends to overlook the public value of innovation.

•

Both private and public value propositions are found in patent documents.

•

Public value propositions are less frequent but more diverse.

•

Analysing private and public values in patents offers innovation policy insights.

Emerging science and technology fields are increasingly expected to provide solutions to societal grand challenges. The promise of such solutions frequently underwrites claims for the public funding of research. In parallel, universities, public research organizations and, in particular, private enterprises draw on such research to actively secure property rights over potential applications through patenting. Patents represent a claim to garner financial returns from the novel outcomes of science and technology. This is justified by the potential social value promised by patents as they encourage information sharing, further R&D investment, and the useful application of new knowledge. Indeed, the value of patents has generated longstanding academic interest in innovation studies with many scholars investigating its determinants based on econometric models. Yet, this research has largely focused on evaluating factors that influence the market value of patents and the gains from exclusivity rights granted to inventions, which reflect the private value of a patent. However, the patent system is a socially shaped enterprise where private and public concerns intersect. Despite the notion of the social utility of inventions as a patenting condition, and evidence of disconnection between societal needs and the goals of private actors, less attention has been paid to other interpretations of patent value. This paper investigates the various articulations of value delineated by patents in an emerging science and technology domain. As a pilot study, we analyse patents in synthetic biology, contributing a new analytical framework and classification of private and public values at the intersections of science, economy, and society. After considering the legal, business, social and political dimensions of patenting, we undertake a qualitative and systematic examination of patent content in synthetic biology. Our analysis probes the private and public value propositions that are framed in these patents in terms of the potential private and public benefits of research and innovation. Based on this framework, we shed light on questions of what values are being nurtured in inventions in synthetic biology and discuss how attention to public as well as private values opens up promising avenues of research in science, technology and innovation policy.

How Does One "Open" Science? Questions of Value in Biological Research

Open Science policies encourage researchers to disclose a wide range of outputs from their work, thus codifying openness as a specific set of research practices and guidelines that can be interpreted and applied consistently across disciplines and geographical settings. In this paper, we argue that this "one-size-fits-all" view of openness sidesteps key questions about the forms, implications, and goals of openness for research practice. We propose instead to interpret openness as a dynamic and highly situated mode of valuing the research process and its outputs, which encompasses economic as well as scientific, cultural, political, ethical, and social considerations. This interpretation creates a critical space for moving beyond the economic definitions of value embedded in the contemporary biosciences landscape and Open Science policies, and examining the diversity of interests and commitments that affect research practices in the life sciences. To illustrate these claims, we use three case studies that highlight the challenges surrounding decisions about how--and how best--to make things open. These cases, drawn from ethnographic engagement with Open Science debates and semistructured interviews carried out with UK-based biologists and bioinformaticians between 2013 and 2014, show how the enactment of openness reveals judgments about what constitutes a legitimate intellectual contribution, for whom, and with what implications.

DIY-Bio - economic, epistemological and ethical implications and ambivalences

Since 2008, we witness the emergence of the Do-It-Yourself Biology movement, a global movement spreading the use of biotechnology beyond traditional academic and industrial institutions and into the lay public. Practitioners include a broad mix of amateurs, enthusiasts, students, and trained scientists. At this moment, the movement counts nearly 50 local groups, mostly in America and Europe, but also increasingly in Asia. Do-It-Yourself Bio represents a direct translation of hacking culture and practicesfrom the realm of computers and software into the realm of genes and cells. Although the movement is still in its infancy, and it is even unclear whether it will ever reach maturity, the contours of a new paradigm of knowledge production are already becoming visible. We will subsequently sketch the economic, the epistemological and the ethical profile of Do-It-Yourself Bio, and discuss its implications and also its ambivalences.

The Pharmaceutical Commons: Sharing and Exclusion in Global Health Drug Development

In the last decade, the organization of pharmaceutical research on neglected tropical diseases has undergone transformative change. In a context of perceived "market failure," the development of new medicines is increasingly handled by public-private partnerships. This shift toward hybrid organizational models depends on a particular form of exchange: the sharing of proprietary assets in general and of intellectual property rights in particular. This article explores the paradoxical role of private property in this new configuration of global health research and development. Rather than a tool to block potential competitors, proprietary assets function as a lever to attract others into risky collaborative ventures; instead of demarcating public and private domains, the sharing of property rights is used to increase the porosity of that boundary. This reimagination of the value of property is connected to the peculiar timescape of global health drug development, a promissory orientation to the future that takes its clearest form in the centrality of "virtual" business models and the proliferation of strategies of deferral. Drawing on the anthropological literature on inalienable possessions, we reconsider property's traditional exclusionary role and discuss the possibility that the new pharmaceutical "commons" proclaimed by contemporary global health partnerships might be the precursor of future enclosures.

Developments in the tools and methodologies of synthetic biology

Synthetic biology is principally concerned with the rational design and engineering of biologically based parts, devices, or systems. However, biological systems are generally complex and unpredictable, and are therefore, intrinsically difficult to engineer. In order to address these fundamental challenges, synthetic biology is aiming to unify a “body of knowledge” from several foundational scientific fields, within the context of a set of engineering principles. This shift in perspective is enabling synthetic biologists to address complexity, such that robust biological systems can be designed, assembled, and tested as part of a biological design cycle. The design cycle takes a forward-design approach in which a biological system is specified, modeled, analyzed, assembled, and its functionality tested. At each stage of the design cycle, an expanding repertoire of tools is being developed. In this review, we highlight several of these tools in terms of their applications and benefits to the synthetic biology community.

Designing synthetic biology

Synthetic biology is frequently defined as the application of engineering design principles to biology. Such principles are intended to streamline the practice of biological engineering, to shorten the time required to design, build, and test synthetic gene networks. This streamlining of iterative design cycles can facilitate the future construction of biological systems for a range of applications in the production of fuels, foods, materials, and medicines. The promise of these potential applications as well as the emphasis on design has prompted critical reflection on synthetic biology from design theorists and practicing designers from many fields, who can bring valuable perspectives to the discipline. While interdisciplinary connections between biologists and engineers have built synthetic biology via the science and the technology of biology, interdisciplinary collaboration with artists, designers, and social theorists can provide insight on the connections between technology and society. Such collaborations can open up new avenues and new principles for research and design, as well as shed new light on the challenging context-dependence-both biological and social-that face living technologies at many scales. This review is inspired by the session titled "Design and Synthetic Biology: Connecting People and Technology" at Synthetic Biology 6.0 and covers a range of literature on design practice in synthetic biology and beyond. Critical engagement with how design is used to shape the discipline opens up new possibilities for how we might design the future of synthetic biology.

Biological diversity in the patent system

Biological diversity in the patent system is an enduring focus of controversy but empirical analysis of the presence of biodiversity in the patent system has been limited. To address this problem we text mined 11 million patent documents for 6 million Latin species names from the Global Names Index (GNI) established by the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) and Encyclopedia of Life (EOL). We identified 76,274 full Latin species names from 23,882 genera in 767,955 patent documents. 25,595 species appeared in the claims section of 136,880 patent documents. This reveals that human innovative activity involving biodiversity in the patent system focuses on approximately 4% of taxonomically described species and between 0.8–1% of predicted global species. In this article we identify the major features of the patent landscape for biological diversity by focusing on key areas including pharmaceuticals, neglected diseases, traditional medicines, genetic engineering, foods, biocides, marine genetic resources and Antarctica. We conclude that the narrow focus of human innovative activity and ownership of genetic resources is unlikely to be in the long term interest of humanity. We argue that a broader spectrum of biodiversity needs to be opened up to research and development based on the principles of equitable benefit-sharing, respect for the objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity, human rights and ethics. Finally, we argue that alternative models of innovation, such as open source and commons models, are required to open up biodiversity for research that addresses actual and neglected areas of human need. The research aims to inform the implementation of the 2010 Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization and international debates directed to the governance of genetic resources. Our research also aims to inform debates under the Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore at the World Intellectual Property Organization.

Left to their own devices: Post-ELSI, ethical equipment and the International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) Competition

In this article, we evaluate a novel method for post-ELSI (ethical, legal and social implications) collaboration, drawing on 'human practices' (HP) to develop a form of reflexive ethical equipment that we termed 'sociotechnical circuits'. We draw on a case study of working collaboratively in the International Genetically Engineered Machine Competition (iGEM) and relate this to the parts-based agenda of synthetic biology. We use qualitative methods to explore the experience of undergraduate students in the Competition, focussing on the 2010 University of Sheffield team. We examine how teams work collaboratively across disciplines to produce novel microorganisms. The Competition involves a HP component and we examine the way in which this has been narrowly defined within the ELSI framework. We argue that this is a much impoverished style of HP when compared with its original articulation as the development of 'ethical equipment'. Inspired by this more theoretically rich HP framework, we explore the relations established between team members and how these were shaped by the norms, materials and practices of the Competition. We highlight the importance of care in the context of post-ELSI collaborations and report on the implications of our case study for such efforts and for the relation of the social sciences to the life sciences more generally.