Government funding for synthetic biology is on the rise, but the way in which society responds to new technologies is an important factor in their success or failure. With synthetic biology, so far, civil society organizations (CSOs) seem to build on their 1980’s genetic engineering strategy: they focus on the risks of synthetic biology, and call for a moratorium and stricter regulation. Scientists and public policy authorities seem to have learned their GMO lessons. There is an increased awareness of the importance of public engagement in potentially controversial technological developments.

A new and first-of-its-kind analysis by the US Woodrow Wilson Center found that the U.S. government has spent around $430 million on research related to synthetic biology since 2005, with the Department of Energy funding a majority of the research. By comparison, the analysis indicated that the European Union and three individual European countries – the Netherlands, United Kingdom, and Germany – had spent approximately $160 million during that same period. Estimates have placed the current annual synthetic biology research market at $600 million, a sum that has the potential to exceed $3.5 billion over the next decade. The list of potential applications in energy, environment, health and other areas is long and growing. Along with its potential benefits, there are also concerns about the ethical, legal and social implications of synthetic biology. In response to these concerns, approximately 4 percent of the U.S. funding and 2 percent of the European funding is being spent for so-called ELSI research.

CSO testimony

Synthetic biology is also increasingly grasping attention from CSOs. In a hearing by the U.S. House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Committee, Friends of the Earth, the ETC Group and the International Center for Technology Assessment sent a testimony to the committee’s chairman, calling on the Congress to implement a moratorium on the release of synthetic organisms into the environment and also their use in commercial settings. This moratorium should remain in place until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities, and until due consideration of the associated risks for the environment, biodiversity, and human health, and all associated socio-economic repercussions, are fully and transparently considered. Testbiotech, a German CSO concerned with the ecological, social and ethical aspects of biotechnology, has launched an initiative with more or less the same demands.

Public dialogue

Besides CSO’s responses and activities, there are strong calls for more effective public engagement, without which “there will be no synthetic biology in Europe” according to Colin Macilwain in a column in Nature of June 16^th, 2010. This lesson, learnt from the European debate on genetically modified crops, is at the heart of Academies of Science, Research Councils and Technology Assessment institutes in several European countries. Recently, a public panel debate in Berlin, hosted by the German Ethics Council, attracted several hundreds of people. The most extensive public involvement activity to date, is the British Synthetic Biology Dialogue, which engaged both stakeholders and citizens all over the country in a debate on synthetic biology. It resulted in a broad spectrum of conclusions. Strikingly, apart from the issues of newness and risks, most conclusions are related to the governance of science and technology in a more general sense.

More about funding

Pauwels, Eleonore. Review of quantitative and qualitative studies on U.S. public perceptions of synthetic biology. SystSynth Biol (2009) 3:37–46 DOI 10.1007/s11693-009-9035-6

More about CSO’s responses

Friends of the Earth, International Center for Technology Assessment, ETC group, Offering Testimony from Civil Society on the Environmental and Societal Implications of Synthetic Biology,  May 26, 2010

Christoph Then, Sylvia Hamberger, Synthetische Biologie Teil 1: Synthetische Biologie und künstliches Leben – Eine kritsiche Analyse, München, Juni 2010

More about public dialogue

Colin Macilwain, World view: Talking the talk, Nature 465, 867 (2010) | doi:10.1038/465867a

BBRSC Synthetic Biology Dialogue

Nicole Kronberger et.al.. Communicating Synthetic Biology: from the lab via the media to the broader public, Syst Synth Biol (2009) 3:19–26 DOI 10.1007/s11693-009-9031-x

The announcement of the first self-replicating synthetic bacterial cell by the J. Craig Venter Institute (JCVI) in May 2010 caught worldwide media coverage. ‘This is not (yet) new life’, the general comments read. Or, as Craig Venter put it himself: “It is not life from scratch.”

Venter called the work “a baby step” in the field of synthetic biology. But ultimately, as he explained to the Health and Energy Committee on Energy and Commerce in the US House of Representatives, “Synthetic genomics is different [from standard molecular biology/genetic engineering] in that scientists start with digital information in the computer, which allows for the design of entire synthetic chromosomes to replace existing chromosomes in cells.”

Disruptive character

The question of ‘newness’ and the revolutionary or even disruptive character of synthetic biology is not only a purely scientific issue. It is highly relevant for society, and has strategic dimensions. For instance: the answer to the question of newness is decisive for decisions on research and regulatory policies. On the one hand, scientists and research institutes will tend to define synthetic biology as ‘new’ when they want to attract new investments. On the other hand, really new approaches in biology will trigger policy makers to call for stricter or new regulation. Moreover, the question whether ‘new life forms’ can be created or not, will influence public perception and acceptance.

Philosophical watershed?

A comment in the Vatican’s official newspaper (L’Osservatore Romano) on the self-replicating synthetic bacterium, stated that “It is not the creation of life, but the replacement of one of its motors”. It is illustrative for the majority of the institutional comments that JCVI’s achievement is not a philosophical watershed. In a public panel discussion about synthetic biology organised by the German Ethics Council, some of the participants likewise called for a “de-dramaticising” of the issue. On the other hand, President Obama asked his bioethics commission to study the implications of the JCVI research in a broad sense, suggesting that synthetic biology may raise new issues. This commission is expected to make recommendations on "any actions the Federal government should take to ensure that America reaps the benefits of this developing field of science while identifying appropriate ethical boundaries and minimizing identified risks" before the end of the year.

More about JVCI’s achievement

Alla Katsnelson. Nature News, 20 May, 2010

Craig Venter. The implications of our Synthetic cell, New Scientist 2762, p. 3, 26 May 2010.

More about comments

Mildred K. Cho and David A. Relman. Synthetic “Life,” Ethics, National Security, and Public Discourse, Science Vol 329, pp 38-39, 2 July 2010, DOI: 10.1126/science.1193749

Gregory Kaebnik. Is the “Synthetic Cell” about life?, The Scientist Vol. 24, Issue 7, p. 27, 1 July, 2010

Synthetic Bacteria Cell ‘Not Life’, Says Vatican, Arab Times, May 21

Nanowerk. "Synthetic biology and life: German Ethics Council encourages debate." March 24, 2010. Accessed April 29, 2010

More about Obama’s bioethics commission

Barack Obama, Letter to the Presidential Commission for the Study on Bioethical issues, May 20, 2010

Jocelyn Kaiser, Bioethics Council Hears Pleas for More Oversight of Synthetic Biology, Science, July 9, 2010

In 2007 British Petroleum selected the University of California, Berkeley to lead the Energy Biosciences Institute. It is a $500 million energy research consortium with partners Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and the University of Illinois. A year ago, Craig Venter’s company, Synthetic Genomics announced a $300 million deal with Exxon Mobil. The plan is to create fuel-producing algae, in part by using synthetic genes.

On May 27, in a hearing for the Health and Energy Committee on Energy and Commerce of the U.S. House of Representatives, Jay Keasling told how the Joint BioEnergy Institute (JBEI) is exploring the potential of synthetic biology to advance the development of next generation advanced “drop-in” fuels that perform better than ethanol.

From petroleum to sugar?

Keasling is also the founder of Amyris Biotechnologies Inc. This company is one of the key players that projects the global synthetic biology market to exceed $ 4.5 billion by the year 2015. Amyris is specialized in applying synthetic biology to provide alternatives to petroleum-sourced fuels and chemicals. A brief overview of Amyris’s activities demonstrates that apart from biofuels, synthetic biology will be applied to pave the way for a bio-based economy.

The idea is to replace molecules that might otherwise be produced from petroleum, with sugarbased products. Amyris is not only applying a type of biological pathway engineering that still looks like a sophisticated mode of genetic engineering, it also builds on established interests in sugar cane production. The company demonstrates that commercial strategies are built on existing technologies and economic infrastructures.

Radical approach

Meanwhile, far more radical approaches of synthetic biology are being developed. Think of a new artificial photosynthetic material. It uses plant, bacterial, frog and fungal enzymes, by trapping them within a foam housing. Such artificial energy production platforms are more radical because they do not rely on plants or algae. They are not competing with food production, since they do not use soil. And they are far more efficient in capturing and converting energy from the sunlight since they do not have to maintain life and reproduce. But, these more radical applications may require fundamental transitions in the structure of energy production and distribution. That makes commercial incentives like the ones BP and ExxonMobil are involved in, less likely.

More about Amyris and artificial photosynthesis

Amyris Paves the Way for Sustainable Fuels and Chemical Production (PDF file)

Frogs, Foam and Fuel (PDF file)

References

Energy Biosciences Institute website: https://www.energybiosciencesinstitute.org/

Testimony by Dr. Jay Keasling, Hearing on Developments in Synthetic Genomics and Implications for Health and Energy, Committee on Energy and Commerce U.S. House of Representatives, May 27, 2010 https://energycommerce.house.gov/documents/20100527/Keasling.Testimony.05.27.2010.pdf

Global Synthetic Biology Market to Exceed $4.5 Billion by 2015, According to New Report by Global Industry Analysts, Inc., PRWeb, July 13, 2010

Antonia Regalado, Reinventing the Leaf, Scientific American (Web only), October 2010http://www.scientificamerican.com/assets/zemi/files/pdf/Reinventing_the_Leaf.pdf