Towards inclusive social appraisal: risk, participation and democracy in governance of synthetic biology

Scientists' Views on the Ethics, Promises and Practices of Synthetic Biology: A Qualitative Study of Australian Scientific Practice

Synthetic biology is a broad term covering multiple scientific methodologies, technologies, and practices. Pairing biology with engineering, synbio seeks to design and build biological systems, either through improving living cells by adding in new functions, or creating new structures by combining natural and synthetic components. As with all new technologies, synthetic biology raises a number of ethical considerations. In order to understand what these issues might be, and how they relate to those covered in ethics literature on synbio, we conducted an interview study with practicing synthetic biologists affiliated with a synthetic biology centre in Australia. Scientists identified a range of ethical challenges germane to the field, including precarious employment, pressures from industry, gender inequity, and the negative effects of the hyping of synbio. These challenges differed markedly from those identified in the ethics literature, whose treatment of the harms and benefits of synbio remains largely speculative and abstract. In our discussion of the pragmatic, every day ethical issues synthetic biologists face, we illustrate how issues of waste or research integrity play pivotal roles in everything from lived experiences in the laboratory, to long-term research trajectories guiding the field. In a confirmation of the ethical relevance of our participant's views on the field, we argue that the subjects they raise must be included in any ethical analysis of synbio as a field.

Conceptual risk assessment of mosquito population modification gene-drive systems to control malaria transmission: preliminary hazards list workshops

The field-testing and eventual adoption of genetically-engineered mosquitoes (GEMs) to control vector-borne pathogen transmission will require them meeting safety criteria specified by regulatory authorities in regions where the technology is being considered for use and other locales that might be impacted. Preliminary risk considerations by researchers and developers may be useful for planning the baseline data collection and field research used to address the anticipated safety concerns. Part of this process is to identify potential hazards (defined as the inherent ability of an entity to cause harm) and their harms, and then chart the pathways to harm and evaluate their probability as part of a risk assessment. The University of California Malaria Initiative (UCMI) participated in a series of workshops held to identify potential hazards specific to mosquito population modification strains carrying gene-drive systems coupled to anti-parasite effector genes and their use in a hypothetical island field trial. The hazards identified were placed within the broader context of previous efforts discussed in the scientific literature. Five risk areas were considered i) pathogens, infections and diseases, and the impacts of GEMs on human and animal health, ii) invasiveness and persistence of GEMs, and interactions of GEMs with target organisms, iii) interactions of GEMs with non-target organisms including horizontal gene transfer, iv) impacts of techniques used for the management of GEMs and v) evolutionary and stability considerations. A preliminary hazards list (PHL) was developed and is made available here. This PHL is useful for internal project risk evaluation and is available to regulators at prospective field sites. UCMI project scientists affirm that the subsequent processes associated with the comprehensive risk assessment for the application of this technology should be driven by the stakeholders at the proposed field site and areas that could be affected by this intervention strategy.

"That was not the discussion we wanted to have": Engagement of civil society organizations with synthetic biology

Responsible Research and Innovation calls for comprehensive public and stakeholder involvement. Its specific requirements, however, have raised criticism concerning the limitation of engagement opportunities for actors like Civil Society Organizations that do not share mainstream perspectives on technological innovations. Our article investigates the engagement of critical Civil Society Organizations in public debates and dialogues on synthetic biology and asks how they contribute to opening up respective debates. Based on three case studies, we show how Civil Society Organizations engage in and frame the debate on synthetic biology in different organizational formats. We find that Civil Society Organizations have explicitly challenged visions of a sustainable future by airing concerns about its risks and adverse impacts and engage in ontological debates about synthetic biology. Yet, we argue that different engagement formats are needed to ensure a diverse public debate on synthetic biology.

Is Public Engagement in Bioengineering and Synthetic Biology Improving Research Outcomes?

Engaging diverse publics on the acceptability of large-scale biology applications such as gene drives is held in high regard by the international research community. The development of gene drives to suppress invasive and pest species and improvements to the sustainability of food systems are examples of integrative biology applications in engineering and ecology with the potential for large-scale research impact. Despite a global collective intention to ensure disruptive technologies are in broad alignment with wider social and public values, evidence of applied research organizations integrating the knowledge acquired from social research is hard to find. Concrete mechanisms to ensure public perspectives affect science decision-making are yet to emerge. We offer avenues for making inroads in what we identify as a remaining gap in public engagement research in the fields of synthetic biology and bioengineering.

Recommendations for environmental risk assessment of gene drive applications for malaria vector control

Building on an exercise that identified potential harms from simulated investigational releases of a population suppression gene drive for malaria vector control, a series of online workshops identified nine recommendations to advance future environmental risk assessment of gene drive applications.

Stakeholder engagement to inform the risk assessment and governance of gene drive technology to manage spotted-wing drosophila

Emerging biotechnologies, such as gene drive technology, are increasingly being proposed to manage a variety of pests and invasive species. As one method of genetic biocontrol, gene drive technology is currently being developed to manage the invasive agricultural pest spotted-wing drosophila (Drosophila suzukii, SWD). While there have been calls for stakeholder engagement on gene drive technology, there has been a lack of empirical work, especially concerning stakeholder engagement to inform risk assessment. To help address this gap and inform future risk assessments and governance decisions for SWD gene drive technology, we conducted a survey of 184 SWD stakeholders to explore how they define and prioritize potential benefits and potential adverse effects from proposed SWD gene drive technology. We found that stakeholders considered the most important potential benefits of SWD gene drive technology to be: 1) Decrease in the quantity or toxicity of pesticides used, and 2) Decrease in SWD populations. Stakeholders were most concerned about the potential adverse effects of: 1) Decrease in beneficial insects, 2) Increase in non-SWD secondary pest infestations, and 3) Decrease in grower profits. Notably, we found that even stakeholders who expressed support for the use of SWD gene drive technology expressed concerns about potential adverse effects from the technology, emphasizing the need to move past simplistic, dichotomous views of what it means to support or oppose a technology. These findings suggest that instead of focusing on the binary question of whether stakeholders support or oppose SWD gene drive technology, it is more important to identify and assess the factors that are consequential to stakeholder decision making - including, for example, exploring whether and under what conditions key potential adverse effects and potential benefits would result from the use of SWD gene drive technology.

Public Deliberation about Gene Editing in the Wild

Genetic editing technologies have long been used to modify domesticated nonhuman animals and plants. Recently, attention and funding have also been directed toward projects for modifying nonhuman organisms in the shared environment-that is, in the "wild." Interest in gene editing nonhuman organisms for wild release is motivated by a variety of goals, and such releases hold the possibility of significant, potentially transformative benefit. The technologies also pose risks and are often surrounded by a high uncertainty. Given the stakes, scientists and advisory bodies have called for public engagement in the science, ethics, and governance of gene editing research in nonhuman organisms. Most calls for public engagement lack details about how to design a broad public deliberation, including questions about participation, how to structure the conversations, how to report on the content, and how to link the deliberations to policy. We summarize the key design elements that can improve broad public deliberations about gene editing in the wild.

Gene drive strategies of pest control in agricultural systems: Challenges and opportunities

Recent advances in gene-editing technologies have opened new avenues for genetic pest control strategies, in particular around the use of gene drives to suppress or modify pest populations. Significant uncertainty, however, surrounds the applicability of these strategies to novel target species, their efficacy in natural populations and their eventual safety and acceptability as control methods. In this article, we identify issues associated with the potential use of gene drives in agricultural systems, to control pests and diseases that impose a significant cost to agriculture around the world. We first review the need for innovative approaches and provide an overview of the most relevant biological and ecological traits of agricultural pests that could impact the outcome of gene drive approaches. We then describe the specific challenges associated with using gene drives in agricultural systems, as well as the opportunities that these environments may offer, focusing in particular on the advantages of high-threshold gene drives. Overall, we aim to provide a comprehensive view of the potential opportunities and the remaining uncertainties around the use of gene drives in agricultural systems.

Integrating Philosophy of Science into Research on Ethical, Legal and Social Issues in the Life Sciences

This paper argues that research on normative issues in the life sciences will benefit from a tighter integration of philosophy of science. We examine research on ethical, legal and social issues in the life sciences (“ELSI”) and discuss three illustrative examples of normative issues that arise in different areas of the life sciences. These examples show that important normative questions are highly dependent on epistemic issues which so far have not been addressed sufficiently in ELSI, RRI and related areas of research. Accordingly, we argue for the integration of research on the epistemic aspects of the relevant areas of science into ELSI research to provide a better basis for addressing normative questions.

Non-safety Assessments of Genome-Edited Organisms: Should They be Included in Regulation?

This article presents and evaluates arguments supporting that an approval procedure for genome-edited organisms for food or feed should include a broad assessment of societal, ethical and environmental concerns; so-called non-safety assessment. The core of analysis is the requirement of the Norwegian Gene Technology Act that the sustainability, ethical and societal impacts of a genetically modified organism should be assessed prior to regulatory approval of the novel products. The article gives an overview how this requirement has been implemented in the regulatory practice, demonstrating that such assessment is feasible and justified. Even in situations where genome-edited organisms are considered comparable to non-modified organisms in terms of risk, the technology may have-in addition to social benefits-negative impacts that warrant assessments of the kind required in the Act. The main reason is the disruptive character of the genome editing technologies due to their potential for novel, ground-breaking solutions in agriculture and aquaculture combined with the economic framework shaped by the patent system. Food is fundamental for a good life, biologically and culturally, which warrants stricter assessment procedures than what is required for other industries, at least in countries like Norway with a strong tradition for national control over agricultural markets and breeding programs.

Mainstreaming Microbes across Biomes

Bacteria, fungi, and other microorganisms in the environment (i.e., environmental microbiomes) provide vital ecosystem services and affect human health. Despite their importance, public awareness of environmental microbiomes has lagged behind that of human microbiomes. A key problem has been a scarcity of research demonstrating the microbial connections across environmental biomes (e.g., marine, soil) and between environmental and human microbiomes. We show in the present article, through analyses of almost 10,000 microbiome papers and three global data sets, that there are significant taxonomic similarities in microbial communities across biomes, but very little cross-biome research exists. This disconnect may be hindering advances in microbiome knowledge and translation. In this article, we highlight current and potential applications of environmental microbiome research and the benefits of an interdisciplinary, cross-biome approach. Microbiome scientists need to engage with each other, government, industry, and the public to ensure that research and applications proceed ethically, maximizing the potential benefits to society.

Controlling the Implementation of Transgenic Microbes: Are We Ready for What Synthetic Biology Has to Offer?

Synthetic biology has promised and delivered on an impressive array of applications based on genetically modified microorganisms. While novel biotechnology undoubtedly offers benefits, like all new technology, precautions should be considered during implementation to reduce the risk of both known and unknown adverse effects. To achieve containment of transgenic microorganisms, confidence to a near-scientific certainty that they cannot transfer their transgenic genes to other organisms, and that they cannot survive to propagate in unintended environments, is a priority. Here, we present an in-depth summary of biological containment systems for micro-organisms published to date, including the production of a genetic firewall through genome recoding and physical containment of microbes using auxotrophies, regulation of essential genes, and expression of toxic genes. The level of containment required to consider a transgenic organism suitable for deployment is discussed, as well as standards of practice for developing new containment systems.

The potential of genomics for restoring ecosystems and biodiversity

Billions of hectares of natural ecosystems have been degraded through human actions. The global community has agreed on targets to halt and reverse these declines, and the restoration sector faces the important but arduous task of implementing programmes to meet these objectives. Existing and emerging genomics tools offer the potential to improve the odds of achieving these targets. These tools include population genomics that can improve seed sourcing, meta-omics that can improve assessment and monitoring of restoration outcomes, and genome editing that can generate novel genotypes for restoring challenging environments. We identify barriers to adopting these tools in a restoration context and emphasize that regulatory and ethical frameworks are required to guide their use.

Two unresolved issues in community engagement for field trials of genetically modified mosquitoes

There is an emerging consensus among scientists, ethicists, and public health officials that substantive and effective engagement with communities and the wider public is required prior to releasing genetically modified mosquitoes into the environment. While there is little disagreement about the need for community and public engagement prior to releasing genetically modified mosquitoes into the environment, two important issues have not been resolved, namely: defining the community and dealing with potential conflicts between the community and the wider public. This commentary addresses these unresolved issues.

An Introduction to the Proceedings of the Environmental Release of Engineered Pests: Building an International Governance Framework

In October 2016, a two-day meeting of 65 academic, government and industry professionals was held at North Carolina State University for early-stage discussions about the international governance of gene drives: potentially powerful new technologies that can be used for the control of pests, invasive species and disease vectors. Presenters at the meeting prepared seven manuscripts elaborating on the ideas raised. This BMC Proceedings issue presents the collection of these peer-reviewed manuscripts.