Week 1 - Principles & Practices
This week lays the foundation for ethics, safety, and governance in biotechnology — and we get hands-on with lab basics.
Table of Contents
- 1. Project idea
- 2. Governance and policy goals
- 3. Governance actions
- 4. Scoring of governance options
- 5. Prioritized options and trade‑offs
- 6. Ethical concerns and governance ideas
- 7. Use of AI
1. Project idea
- First, describe a biological engineering application or tool you want to develop and why.
So far, one idea I have is to develop an alternative to coffee and tea based on modified bacteria or mushrooms that synthesize caffeine. This would be interesting because it wouldn’t require the extensive transportation, human labor, land use, and resources that coffee and tea currently do. Given the scale of global consumption of these two beverages, their impact is far from negligible. I personally enjoy tea and coffee quite a lot (which is probably what led me to think about this idea). I don’t plan on replacing them entirely, but I think that being able to offer alternatives could only be beneficial.
2. Governance and policy goals
- Next, describe one or more governance/policy goals related to ensuring that this application or tool contributes to an “ethical” future, like ensuring non‑malfeasance (preventing harm). Break big goals down into two or more specific sub‑goals.
- Safety and security
- Equity through open development
- Transparency and information sharing
3. Governance actions
- Next, describe at least three different potential governance “actions” by considering the four aspects below (Purpose, Design, Assumptions, Risks of Failure & “Success”).
| Governance “action” | Actors | Purpose | Design | Assumptions | Risks of Failure & “Success” |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Follow established biosafety best practices when working with living organisms | Researchers / academics | Avoid major problems, assess risks in advance, and be prepared if issues arise | Based on existing knowledge and trust in established standards | Error probability is never zero, so being prepared for most plausible scenarios is necessary | Still having biosafety problems; “success” could be not detecting or recognizing that a problem is occurring |
| Developing a viable solution and undergoing regulatory review | Researchers / academics | Some blends of mushrooms and coffee exist with unproven benefits. Modifying E. coli to synthesize caffeine has been done (e.g. this paper: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2017/ra/c7ra10986e), but an accessible synthetic biology–based alternative for consumers does not yet exist | Requires sufficient knowledge and resources to carry out effective research and development | The main assumption is that it is feasible to develop a viable solution; it might not yet be possible in a sufficiently interesting or practical way | Failure: not being able to create it; or creating it but being unable to certify that it is safe for human consumption |
| Develop safe and sustainable pathways to scale the technology through hubs/micro‑factories | Company / co‑producers | Make the solution impactful by making it accessible to consumers and replacing a significant share of coffee/tea consumption to reduce environmental impact | Requires international partnerships, building trust, and the ability to share systems while growing the consumer base | Collaborators and consumers will be interested in adopting the solution | Failure: not being able to scale at all or by this model; low interest limiting impact; “success” risk: the solution being appropriated and developed by another actor with harmful or misaligned objectives |
4. Scoring of governance options
- Next, score (from 1–3, with 1 as the best, or n/a) each of your governance actions against your rubric of policy goals.
| Does the option: | Option 1 | Option 2 | Option 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enhance Biosecurity | |||
| • By preventing incidents | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| • By helping respond | 1 | n/a | n/a |
| Foster Lab Safety | |||
| • By preventing incidents | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| • By helping respond | 1 | 2 | n/a |
| Protect the environment | |||
| • By preventing incidents | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| • By helping respond | 1 | n/a | n/a |
| • By reducing environmental impact | n/a | 3 | 1 |
| Other considerations | |||
| • Minimizing costs and burdens to stakeholders | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| • Feasibility | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| • Not impeding research | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| • Promoting constructive applications | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| • Protecting the consumer | 1 | 1 | 2 |
5. Prioritized options and trade‑offs
- Last, drawing upon this scoring, describe which governance option, or combination of options, you would prioritize, and why. Outline any trade‑offs you considered as well as assumptions and uncertainties.
The main priority is the strict application of established biosafety and biosecurity practices. This option scores best across safety, feasibility, and environmental protection, and it is essential given that the project involves genetically modified organisms and potential human consumption. Preventing harm, avoiding accidental release, and maintaining public trust are prerequisites for any further development.
The second priority is regulated development and verification. Regulatory oversight is necessary to demonstrate that the technology is safe, transparent, and credible beyond the lab. While this step may slow progress, it protects consumers and ensures that any claims about safety or sustainability are evidence‑based.
Scaling the technology through hubs or micro‑factories would only be considered at a later stage. Although this option offers the greatest potential environmental benefits, it also carries higher risks related to misuse, safety, and governance. Scaling should therefore depend on strong biosafety records and regulatory approval.
Overall, prioritizing biosafety first, regulation second, and scaling last offers the most ethically robust path forward. It aligns with non‑malfeasance, protects consumers and the environment, and still leaves room for meaningful impact if the technology proves viable.
6. Ethical concerns and governance ideas
Reflecting on what you learned and did in class this week, outline any ethical concerns that arose, especially any that were new to you. Then propose any governance actions you think might be appropriate to address those issues.
An important ethical concern discussed this week is the risk of monopolies in synthetic biology. When a small number of actors control key technologies or biological systems, access to solutions like treatments can become limited or too expensive, increasing inequalities, as has already been the case with insulin.
To address this, governance actions could include avoiding exclusive control over essential technologies, encouraging open research and knowledge sharing, and ensuring public oversight in the development of synthetic biology–based treatments. Educating the general public about these technologies and their implications is also important to support informed debate and fair access.
7. Use of AI
Can you correct the English mistakes: […] How to better format the markdown