This PDF is available from The National Academies Press at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?

record_id=13316

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st

Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium
Series

ISBN
Stephanie Joyce, Anne-Marie Mazza, and Steven Kendall, Rapporteurs;
978-0-309-22583-0 Committee on Science, Technology, and Law; Policy and Global Affairs;
Board on Life Sciences; Division on Earth and Life Sciences; National
80 pages Academy of Engineering; National Research Council
6x9
PAPERBACK (2013)

Visit the National Academies Press online and register for...

Instant access to free PDF downloads of titles from the

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING

INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL

10% off print titles

Custom notification of new releases in your field of interest

Special offers and discounts

Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the National Academies Press.
Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences.
Request reprint permission for this book

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Step
phanie Joyce, Anne-Marie Mazza,
M and Stteven Kendall,, Rapporteurs

mmittee on Science, Technollogy, and Law

Com w
Policy and Global Afffairs

Board on
o Life Sciencces
Division on Earth
E and Lifee Studies

National Acaademy of Enggineering

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing
Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of
the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Insti-
tute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen
for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.

This study was supported by Contract/Grant No. 2011-3-04 between the National Acad-
emy of Sciences and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclu-
sions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do
not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support
for the project.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-22583-0

International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-22583-3

Additional copies of this report are available for sale from the National Academies Press,
500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-
3313; http://www.nap.edu.

Copyright 2013 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

The Na ational Academy of Sciences iss a private, nonpprofit, self-perpeetuating societyy of

distingu
uished scholars engaged in scieentific and enginneering researchh, dedicated to the
furtheraance of science and
a technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the
authoritty of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Acadeemy has a manddate
that req
quires it to advisse the federal goovernment on sccientific and techhnical matters. D
Dr.
Ralph J. Cicerone is preesident of the Naational Academyy of Sciences.

The Nattional Academy y of Engineering was establisheed in 1964, undeer the charter of the
Nationaal Academy of Sciences,
S as a paarallel organizattion of outstandiing engineers. Itt is
autonom
mous in its adm
ministration and in i the selection of its memberss, sharing with tthe
Nationaal Academy of Sciences
S the ressponsibility for advising the feederal governmeent.
The Naational Academy y of Engineerin ng also sponsorss engineering pprograms aimedd at
meeting
g national needs, encourages edu ucation and reseearch, and recoggnizes the superrior
achievements of engineeers. Dr. C. D. (DDan) Mote, Jr., is president of tthe National Acaad-
emy of Engineering.

The Insstitute of Mediccine was established in 1970 by tthe National Accademy of Sciencces
to securre the services of
o eminent memb bers of appropri ate professions in the examinatiion
of policcy matters pertaiining to the heaalth of the publiic. The Institute acts under the re-
sponsibility given to thee National Acaddemy of Sciencess by its congresssional charter to be
an adviser to the federal government and, a upon its owwn initiative, too identify issues of
medicall care, research, and education. Dr.
D Harvey V. Fiineberg is presiddent of the Instituute
of Mediicine.

The National Research h Council was organized

o by thee National Acadeemy of Sciencess in
1916 too associate the broad
b community y of science andd technology wwith the Academyys
purposees of furthering knowledge and advising the feederal governmeent. Functioningg in
accordaance with generaal policies deterrmined by the A Academy, the Coouncil has become
the prin
ncipal operating agency
a of both the
t National Acaademy of Sciencces and the Natioon-
al Acaddemy of Engineeering in providin ng services to thhe government, tthe public, and tthe
scientifiic and engineerring communitiees. The Councill is administereed jointly by booth
Academ mies and the Insstitute of Mediccine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone andd Dr. C. D. (Daan)
Mote, Jrr., are chair and vice chair, respeectively, of the N
National Researcch Council.

www.nation
nal-academies.oorg

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

PLANNING COMMITTEE ON SIX PARTY

SYMPOSIA ON SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY

Drew Endy (Chair), Assistant Professor, Bioengineering, Stanford University

and President, The BioBricks Foundation
Michael Elowitz, Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator and Associate
Professor of Biology, Bioengineering, and Applied Physics, California
Institute of Technology
Richard Johnson, Chief Executive Officer, GlobalHelix LLC and Counsel
and Senior Partner (retired), Arnold & Porter, LLP
Wendell Lim, Professor of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University
of California, San Francisco
Pamela Silver, Professor of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School

Staff

Anne-Marie Mazza, Director, Committee on Science, Technology, and

Law, National Academy of Sciences
Jo Husbands, Scholar/Senior Project Director, Board on Life Sciences,
National Academy of Sciences
Proctor Reid, Director, Program Office, National Academy of Engineering
Steven Kendall, Associate Program Officer, Committee on Science,
Technology, and Law, National Academy of Sciences

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

CHINA SYMPOSIUM PLANNING GROUP

Guo-Ping Zhao, Shanghai Institutes of Biological Sciences,

Chinese Academy of Sciences
Jian-Dong Jiang, Institute of Materia Medica, Chinese Academy
of Medical Sciences
Xuan Li, Shanghai Institutes of Biological Sciences, Chinese Academy
of Sciences
Zhongjun Qin, Shanghai Institutes of Biological Sciences, Chinese
Academy of Sciences
Haihan Xu, Chinese Academy of Engineering
Chen Yang, Shanghai Institutes of Biological Sciences, Chinese
Academy of Sciences
Zhihua Zhou, Shanghai Institutes of Biological Sciences, Chinese
Academy of Sciences

Staff

Guo-Rong Fa, Shanghai Institutes of Biological Sciences,

Chinese Academy of Sciences

vi

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

UNITED KINGDOM SYMPOSIUM PLANNING GROUP

Richard I. Kitney, Imperial College London

Peter Leadlay, University of Cambridge

Staff

Shafiq Ahmed, The Royal Academy of Engineering

Jessica Bland, The Royal Society
Nick Green, The Royal Society
Shane Mchugh, The Royal Academy of Engineering
Hayaatun Sillem, The Royal Academy of Engineering
Rapela Zaman, The Royal Society

vii

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, AND LAW

David Korn (IOM), (Co-chair), Massachusetts General Hospital and

Harvard Medical School
Richard A. Meserve (NAE), (Co-chair), Carnegie Institution for Science
and Senior Of Counsel, Covington & Burling LLP
Barbara E. Bierer, Harvard Medical School and Brigham and
Womens Hospital
Elizabeth H. Blackburn (NAS/IOM), University of California, San Francisco
John Burris, Burroughs Wellcome Fund
Claude Canizares (NAS), Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Arturo Casadevall, Albert Einstein College of Medicine
Joe S. Cecil, Federal Judicial Center
Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss, New York University School of Law
Harry T. Edwards, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Drew Endy, Stanford University and The BioBricks Foundation
Marcus Feldman (NAS), Stanford University
Jeremy Fogel, The Federal Judicial Center
Alice P. Gast (NAE), Lehigh University
Benjamin W. Heineman, Jr., Harvard Law School and Harvard Kennedy
School of Government
D. Brock Hornby, U.S. District Court, District of Maine
Wallace Loh, University of Maryland, College Park
Margaret Marshall, Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (retired)
Alan B. Morrison, George Washington University Law School
Cherry Murray (NAS/NAE), Harvard University
Roberta Ness (IOM), University of Texas School of Public Health
Harriet Rabb, Rockefeller University
David Relman (IOM), Stanford University and VA Palo Alto Health
Care System
Richard Revesz, New York University School of Law
David S. Tatel, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

Staff

Anne-Marie Mazza, Director

Steven Kendall, Associate Program Officer

viii

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

BOARD ON LIFE SCIENCES

Jo Handelsman (NAS/IOM), (Chair), Yale University

Vicki L. Chandler (NAS), Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation
Sean Eddy, Janelia Farm Research Campus
Sarah C.R. Elgin, Washington University
David R. Franz, Midwest Research Institute
Louis J. Gross, University of Tennessee
Richard A. Johnson, GlobalHelix LLC and Arnold & Porter, LLP
Judith Kimble (NAS), University of Wisconsin, Madison
Cato T. Laurencin (NAE/IOM), University of Connecticut Health Center
Alan I. Leshner (IOM), American Association for the Advancement of Science
Bernard Lo (IOM), University of California, San Francisco
Karen E. Nelson, J. Craig Venter Institute
Robert M. Nerem (NAE/IOM), Georgia Institute of Technology,
Atlanta, Georgia
Camille Parmesan, University of Texas, Austin
Alison G. Power, Cornell University
Margaret Riley, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Bruce W. Stillman (IOM), Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Janice C. Weeks, University of Oregon
Cynthia Wolberger, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Mary Woolley (IOM), Research!America

Staff

Frances E. Sharples, Director

Jo L. Husbands, Scholar/Senior Project Director
Jay B. Labov, Senior Scientist/Program Director for Biology Education
Katherine W. Bowman, Senior Program Officer
Marilee K. Shelton-Davenport, Senior Program Officer
India Hook-Barnard, Program Officer
Keegan Sawyer, Program Officer
Bethelhem M. Banjaw, Financial Associate
Carl-Gustav Anderson, Program Associate
Orin Luke, Senior Program Assistant
Sayyeda Ayesha Ahmed, Senior Program Assistant

ix

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING

Officers

Charles O. Holliday, Jr. (NAE), (Chair), Bank of America

Charles M. Vest (NAE), (President), President, National Academy
of Engineering
Maxine L. Savitz (NAE), (Vice President), Honeywell Inc. (retired)
Thomas F. Budinger (NAE/IOM), (Home Secretary), University of California,
Berkeley and E. O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Venkatesh (Venky) Narayanamurti (NAE), (Foreign Secretary), Harvard
School of Engineering and Applied Science and Harvard Kennedy School
C.D. (Dan) Mote, Jr. (NAE), (Treasurer), University of Maryland

Councillors

Linda M. Abriola (NAE), Tufts University School of Engineering

Alice M. Agogino (NAE), University of California, Berkeley
Corale L. Brierley (NAE), Brierley Consultancy LLC
Paul Citron (NAE), Medtronic, Inc. (retired)
Ruth A. David (NAE), ANSER (Analytic Services Inc.)
Charles Elachi (NAE), Jet Propulsion Laboratory and California Institute
of Technology
Paul R. Gray (NAE), University of California, Berkeley
Richard A. Meserve (NAE), Carnegie Institution for Science
Julia M. Phillips (NAE), Sandia National Laboratories
Arnold F. Stancell (NAE), Mobil Oil (retired) and Georgia Institute
of Technology (emeritus)
Richard H. Truly (NAE), United States Navy (retired) and National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (retired)

Ex Officio

Ralph J. Cicerone (NAS), President, National Academy of Sciences

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the contributions of the following individ-

uals who made presentations at the symposia: Anita L. Allen, University of
Pennsylvania Law School; Luke Alphey, Oxitec Ltd. and University of Oxford;
Rifat Atun, Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria; Roel Bo-
venberg, DSM, Netherlands; Patrick Boyle, Harvard University; Yizhi Patrick
Cai, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine; Peter Carr, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology; Lionel Clarke, Shell Global Solutions; Rochelle Cooper
Dreyfuss, New York University School of Law; Alexandra Daisy-Ginsberg, De-
signer, Artist, and Writer; Ben Davis, University of Oxford; Maitreya Dunham,
University of Washington; Ioannis Economidis, EU-US Task Force on Biotech-
nology Research; Robert Edwards, Food and Environment Research Agency;
Kirstin Eley, TMO Renewables Ltd.; Michael Elowitz, California Institute of
Technology; Drew Endy, Stanford University and The Biobricks Foundation;
Da-ming Fan, Chinese Academy of Engineering; Nita Farahany, Vanderbilt
University Law School; James Field, Imperial College London; Ian Fothering-
ham, Ingenza; Paul Freemont, Imperial College London; Paul Gemmill, Bio-
technology and Biological Sciences Research Council, U.K.; Saul Griffith, En-
gineer and Entrepreneur; Jaydee Hanson, International Center for Technology
Assessment; Karmella Haynes, Arizona State University; Wei Huang, University
of Sheffield; Farren Isaacs, Yale University School of Medicine; Mitsuhiro Itaya,
Keio University; Sheila Jasanoff, Harvard University; Michael Jewett, North-
western University; Gerardo Jimnez-Sanchez, Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development; Nigel Jones, Linklaters LLP; Richard Jones, Uni-
versity of Sheffield; Linda Kahl, Synthetic Biology Engineering Research Center
(SynBERC) and Stanford University; Nikki Kapp, Pennsylvania State Universi-
ty; Jason Kelly, Ginkgo BioWorks; Franois Kps, Centre Nacionale de Re-
cherche Scientifique; Daniel Kevles, Yale University; Richard I. Kitney, Imperi-
al College London; Thrane Kreiner, Santa Clara University; Peter Leadlay,
University of Cambridge; Thomas Lee, Defense Advance Projects Research
Agency; Mark Lemley, Stanford University; Jing-hai Li, Chinese Academy of
Sciences; Chen Liao, University of Science and Technology of China; Hai-Yan
Liu, University of Science and Technology of China; Duo Liu, Tianjin Universi-

xi

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

xii Acknowledgments

ty; Chenli Liu, Gangzhou Institute of Advanced Technology; Meagan Lizarazo,

iGEM Foundation; Heather Lowrie, University of Edinburgh; John McCarthy,
University of Warwick; Jason Micklefield, University of Manchester; Gautam
Mukunda, Harvard University; Carlos Olguin, Autodesk; Qi Ou-yang, Peking
University; John Perkins, Department of Business, Innovation, & Skills (U.K.
Government); Todd Peterson, Life Technologies Corporation; George Poste,
Complex Adaptive Systems Initiative and Arizona State University; Zhong-jun
Qin, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences; Renzong Qiu, Chinese Acade-
my of Social Sciences Institute of Philosophy; Arti Rai, Duke University; Sohi
Rastegar, National Science Foundation; Cesar Rodriguez, Genome Compiler
Corporation; Nikolas Rose, Kings College London; Franois Roure, French
High Council for Industry, Energy, and Technologies; Marc Salit, National In-
stitute of Standards and Technology; Christopher Schoene, Imperial College
London; Daniel P. Schrag, Harvard University; Reshma Shetty, Gingko Bio-
Works; Darlene Solomon, Agilent Technologies; Gregory Stephanopoulos, Mas-
sachusetts Institute of Technology; David Uffindell, Department of Business,
Innovation, & Skills (U.K. Government); Charles Vest, National Academy of
Engineering; William Wakeham, Royal Academy of Engineering; Barry L.
Wanner, Purdue University; Robert Wells, Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development; David Willetts, U.K. Government; Jeffrey Tze Fei
Wong, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology; Jetta Wong, U.S.
House of Representatives; Liang Wu, DSM, Netherlands; Youli Xiao, Shanghai
Institutes for Biological Sciences; Huanming Yang, Beijing Genomics Institute;
Sheng-li Yang, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences; Edward You, Fed-
eral Bureau of Investigation; Joy Zhang, London School of Economics; Wei-
wen Zhang, Tianjin University; Hao-qian Zhang, Peking University; Xian-en
Zhang, Ministry of Science and Technology of China; Weiwen Zhang, Tianjin
University; Guo-ping Zhao, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences; Hui-
min Zhao, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Lishan Zhao, Amyris,
Inc.; Jindong Zhao, Institute for Hydrobiology (Chinese Academy of Sciences);
Zhihua Zhou, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences; Laurie Zoloth,
Northwestern University; and Gordon Zong, Shanghai Institutes for Biological
Sciences.
We would also like to thank session moderators Roel Bovenberg, DSM,
Netherlands; Rob Carlson Biodesic; Zi-xin Deng, Shanghai Jiao Tong Universi-
ty; Drew Endy, Stanford University and The Biobricks Foundation; Richard
Johnson, GlobalHelix LLC; Richard I. Kitney, Imperial College London; Peter
Leadlay, University of Cambridge; Jonathan Margolis U.S. Department of State;
Jonathan Moreno, University of Pennsylvania; Megan Palmer, Synthetic Biology
Engineering Research Center (SynBERC) and Stanford University; Aristides
Patrinos, Synthetic Genomics; David Rejeski, Woodrow Wilson International
Center for Scholars; Pamela Silver, Harvard Medical School; Huanming Yang,
Beijing Genomics Institute; Ying-jin Yuan, Tianjin University; and Guo-ping
Zhao, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Acknowledgments xiii

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their
diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures ap-
proved by the National Academies Report Review Committee. The purpose of
this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will
assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to
ensure that the report meets institutional standards for quality and objectivity.
The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the
integrity of the process.
We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Arti Rai, Duke University; Markus Schmidt, Biofaction; and Terrence Taylor,
International Council for the Life Sciences.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive
comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the content of the
report, nor did they see the final draft before its release. Responsibility for the
final content of this report rests entirely with the rapporteurs and the institution.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Contents

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1

2 SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY: SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM ......................................................................... 7
Building on a Heritage of Biological Discovery, 8
Synthetic Biology and Converging Scientific Disciplines, 9
What Makes Synthetic Biology Special?, 10

3 STRATEGIES FOR ADVANCING SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY ....................... 17

China, 17
United Kingdom, 19
United States, 21
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 23

4 OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES EMERGING VIA

A NETWORKED WORLD ................................................................................ 25
Challenges for Synthetic Biology, 28
Technical Challenges, 28
Regulatory Challenges, 33
Intellectual Property Issues, 34
Inclusiveness, 36
Preparing for a Networked World, 38

APPENDIXES

A LONDON SYMPOSIUM AGENDA .................................................................. 43

B SHANGHAI SYMPOSIUM AGENDA .............................................................. 49

C WASHINGTON, DC SYMPOSIUM AGENDA ............................................... 55

BOXES

2-1 DNA and Biological Parts, 9

2-2 Synthetic Biology Tools and Technology Timeline, 11
2-3 The International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) Competition, 15
3-1 Strategic Targets for Synthetic Biology in China, 19
3-2 Publicly Funded Synthetic Biology Research in the United States, 22
4-1 The Commercialization of Synthetic Biology: Amyris, Inc., 26
4-2 Cooperative Arrangements for Discussions about Benefits and Risks, 29
4-3 What Can We Expect from Synthetic Biology?, 30

xv

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Introduction

Laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the pro-

gress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed,
more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths
discovered and manners and opinions change, with the
change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to
keep pace with the times.
Thomas Jefferson

The turn of the millennium brought into view a new research landscape in
which the biological sciences loom large and where technical possibilities barely
dreamt of decades ago seem legitimately attainable. The biological sciences of
this century are the product of decades of advances in, for example, genetics and
genomics, molecular and systems biology, and bioengineering technologies.
Modern biology also draws upon and incorporates discoveries from beyond the
life sciences. Disciplines as diverse as engineering, chemistry, computing, and
social science have all played important roles in shaping the biology of the 21st
century.
Interconnectedness defines todays biology and offers, in places, an un-
precedented and exponentially increasing linkage of many streams of discover-
ies and innovations.1 Biology also has become a global endeavor, with network-
ing technologies enabling new modes of collaboration amongst multidisciplinary
teams from around the world. In this networked world, researchers have the abil-
ity to develop partnerships that foster novel approaches to scientific inquiry, ask
new questions about the mechanisms of life, and address global needs in innova-
tive ways.
But the new century brings new challenges. An ever-increasing world
population means a host of new problemsclimate change, increasing food and

1
Thomas Lee, Director, Microsystems Technology Office, Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

2 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

energy needs, the dispersion of existing and emerging diseasesand a host of

unanswered questions about how human and natural systems might offer solu-
tions. Many scientists and engineers believe that some of the challenges of the
new century might be met through a young and potentially transformative
fieldsynthetic biologythat seeks to accelerate improvements in how we
partner with nature to meet our needs.
In the simplest terms, synthetic biology is an emerging discipline that
combines both scientific and engineering approaches to the study and manipula-
tion of biology. For example, one branch of synthetic biology seeks to apply
engineering principles to realize standardized biological parts that can be relia-
bly reused off the shelf to perform specific functions. Rather than asking
How does an existing natural biological system work?, such synthetic biolo-
gists ask, What components are necessary to encode a specific behavior within
an engineered living system? By asking different questions, synthetic biologists
hope to improve our collective capacity to engineer customized biological sys-
tems designed to meet specific human needs. Scientists using synthetic biology-
based approaches also hope that constructive approaches to studying biology
will yield a deeper understanding of natural living systems.
Various approaches are being pursued so as to best practically realize
learning by building and scaleable engineering in synthetic biology. For
example, full genome synthesis, when combined with evolutionary screening or
selection, can yield improved cellular strains for biomanufacturing while direct-
ly supporting reverse genetics approaches to scientific discovery.
It is important to note that some aspects of synthetic biology research have
been technically controversial. Some ask, for example, whether genetic parts can
ever be reliably standardized for reuse across changing genetic and environmen-
tal contexts.
Within the research community, synthetic biology fosters relationships
across a unique and global assemblage of practitioners that extends beyond es-
tablished academics and students working in traditional institutions and includes
members of the do-it-yourself (DIY) community of amateur researchers. Fur-
ther, the connectivity offered by the World Wide Web gives researchers an un-
precedented opportunity to network, collaborate, and share research results
across communities and nations.
Although synthetic biology is still in its infancycore research has largely
been confined to efforts to identify and refine biological units that perform spe-
cific genetic or biochemical functions and to improve DNA synthesis and con-
struction methodsthe collective vision for the field is ambitious. Progress in
synthetic biology, proponents believe, will enhance human potential through an
interlocked cycle in which incremental advances expand our understanding of
life. Deepening our understanding of natural biological processes will, in turn,
improve the biological toolbox that gives scientists and engineers the means to
engineer organisms that offer new forms of pollution control, novel medications,
and sources of energy. Ultimately, synthetic biologists hope to design and build
engineered biological systems with capabilities that do not exist in natural sys-

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Introduction 3

temscapabilities that may ultimately be used for applications in manufactur-

ing, food production, and global health. Even though research has largely been
limited to work at the molecular or cellular level, governments and industries
worldwide are investing significant resources in synthetic biology research and
product development.
Synthetic biologyunlike any research discipline that preceeds ithas
the potential to bypass the less predictable process of evolution to usher in a new
and dynamic way of working with living systems. Thus, while synthetic biology
is still a nascent area of research, it has attracted significant attention. Many
questions, however, remain:

What solutions can synthetic biology realistically offer for todays global
challenges?
How may we best prepare researchers for work in synthetic biology?
What are the commercial, industrial, and medical possibilities for syn-
thetic biology?
What ethical and social concerns does synthetic biology raise, and how
can they be addressed locally or collectively?
How should we best engage the public to enable understanding of the
promise and risks of this emerging field?
What intellectual property, patent, sharing and ownership arrangements
will best allow synthetic biology to advance?
How should synthetic biology be regulated, and what form should any
oversight or governance frameworks take?
Does synthetic biology pose new biosafety and biosecurity concerns,
and if so, how may they be addressed effectively?

Stakeholders around the world are grappling with such questions. In the
United States, for instance, the Presidents Commission for the Study of Bioethical
Issues has identified essential principles and recommendations for the purpose of
guiding ongoing research in synthetic biology.2 And, in response to advances in
synthetic biology, the National Institutes of Health has revised its guidelines on
recombinant DNA3 based upon the National Science Advisory Board for Bio-
securitys consideration of synthetic biology in the context of dual use research.4
2
Anita L. Allen, Henry R. Silverman Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy,
University of Pennsylvania Law School and a member of the Presidents Commission,
discussed the commissions recommendations at the Shanghai symposium. See page 22
of this report.
3
Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health March,
2013. NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant or Synthetic Nucleic Acid
Molecules (NIH Guidelines). Online at http://oba.od.nih.gov/rdna/nih_guidelines_oba.html
(accessed March 27, 2013).
4
National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB), April 2010. Addressing
Biosecurity Concerns Related to Synthetic Biology: Report of the National Science Advisory

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

4 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

Nevertheless, as serious discussions about synthetic biology are only beginning,

many questions remain about how to best manage, stimulate, and govern the
continued development of the field. The resolution of these questions requires
input from the public and private communities of stakeholders.
Importantly, synthetic biology is an area of science and engineering that
raises technical, ethical, regulatory, security, biosafety, intellectual property, and
other issues that will be resolved differently in different parts of the world. Inev-
itably, this will affect how the field develops within nations and internationally.
As science and engineering research becomes more global, international
engagement on emerging technologies is critical. It has becoming increasingly
difficult to place limitations on scientific advances or to expect that norms and
protocols developed in one country will be followed in another. Only with an
international exchange of ideas on scientific and technical challengesas well
as policy, regulatory, and legal challenges that arise around emerging scientific
fieldswill it be possible for the global network of scientists, engineers, and
policymakers to develop mechanisms that encourage continued advances in
emerging fields while increasing awareness ofand proactively addressing
challenges that may arise.
As a better understanding of the global synthetic biology landscape could
lead to tremendous benefits, six academiesthe United Kingdoms Royal Society
(RS) and Royal Academy of Engineering (RAE), the United States National
Academy of Sciences (NAS) and National Academy of Engineering (NAE), and
the Chinese Academy of Science (CAS) and Chinese Academy of Engineering
(CAE) organized a series of international symposia on the scientific, technical, and
policy issues associated with synthetic biology. The symposia, which were primar-
ily funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation,5 built upon previous collaboration
between the RS and U.S. agencies and included China because of the country's
growing investment in engineering, scientific research, and biotechnology. The
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) also contrib-
uted participants and perspectives.

Board for Biosecurity (NSABB). Online at http://oba.od.nih.gov/biosecurity/pdf/NSABB%

20SynBio%20DRAFT%20Report-FINAL%20(2)_6-7-10.pdf (accessed March 27, 2013).
5
The Sloan Foundation, which supports research on science, technology, and econom-
ic institutions, has supported research in synthetic biology since 2005. The foundation's
grants support responsible development of synthetic biology and focus on ethical, regula-
tory, and public policy implications and on risks inherent in the field. Sloan grants have
included projects to articulate ethical issues, inform the policy and journalism communi-
ties, assess the regulatory aspect of synthetic biology, and educate policy makers and the
public. The foundation-sponsored Synthetic Biology Project provides a web-based infor-
mation clearing-house that includes important events in the field; provides information
and analysis on regulatory, ethical, and business developments related to synthetic biolo-
gy; and a regularly updated global map of ongoing projects. The Synthetic Biology Pro-
ject is hosted by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars (see http://www.
synbioproject.org, accessed May 15, 2013).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Introduction 5

The three symposia, attended by approximately 500 participants in total,

brought together researchers from numerous disciplinesexperts in law, proper-
ty rights, and ethics; representatives from industry; policymakers; and members
of the publicin the first collaboration among the United States, the U.K., and
China on synthetic biology. Participants were asked to discuss synthetic biology
in terms of its present and future value and to examine the scientific, engineer-
ing, societal, and policy implications of this emerging field.
The individual symposia, which were held in London, Shanghai, and
Washington, DC, were each organized around a specific aspect of synthetic bi-
ology.6 The first symposium, in London in April 2011, provided an overview of
synthetic biology and developments in the past five years. Participants discussed
estimates of what might be achieved in the next 5, 10, and 25 year periods, re-
quirements and resources necessary for realizing value creation from synthetic
biology, and conditions needed for an enabling environment. The focus of the
second symposium, in Shanghai in October 2011, was the scientific and tech-
nical challenges that must be met to enable further development of the field. The
final symposium, in Washington, DC in June 2012, focused on next-generation
tools, platforms, and infrastructure necessary for continued progress in synthetic
biology and the associated policy implications. Over the course of the three
symposia, the collaborating institutions and participants gained a deeper per-
spective on each country's national and insitutional aspirations and accomplish-
ments in synthetic biology. Further, presenters and attendees had the opportunity
to witness and share in a progression of knowledge and perspective amongst the
participating countries from the initial to the final symposia.
This report summarizes the major topics addressed during the symposia by
symposium participants. These included the development and potential of syn-
thetic biology, national and regional plans for the advancement of synthetic bi-
ology, and potential benefits and concerns associated with the field. The sum-
mary has been prepared by the symposia rapporteurs as a factual summary of
what occurred at the symposia. The statements made are those of the rapporteurs
or individual symposia participants and do not necessarily represent the views of
all symposia participants, the planners of the symposia, or the U.S. National
Academies.

6
For details on the specific agendas, see Appendixes A-C.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Synthetic Biology:
Science and Technology
for the New Millennium

The definition of synthetic biology remains fluid because its full potential
is not yet clear and because researchers are exploring many problem solving
approaches. In general, however, the discipline is seen as involving the applica-
tion of engineering principles to design and constructnew biological parts,
devices and systems and re-design existing natural biological systems for use-
ful purposes.1 Work is often motivated by the underlying goal of making biolo-
gy easy to engineer. Synthetic biology research is conducted and facilitated by
individuals trained in a variety of disciplines including biology, engineering,
chemistry, genetics, and computational sciences. Synthetic biology also includes
work to manufacture biological elements (for example, molecules, genetic se-
quences, systems, and simple organisms) different from those existing in nature
for the purpose of achieving predictable and reliable performance of specific
functions. Over time, proponents hope to develop a large portfolio of simplified
biological modulesparts, devices, and systems2that can be used to perform
predictable, pre-determined functions with various applications.
Biological parts in scientists current inventory are capable of performing
basic functions at the cellular level. Examples include engineered biological cir-
cuits3 and oscillators.4 However, researchers hope to achieve goals ranging from
1
Definition from syntheticbiology.org, a community of individuals, groups, and labs
committed to engineering biology in an open and ethical manner. The site provides
community news, discussions, and various resources (see http://syntheticbiology.org,
accessed March 27, 2013).
2
Part modules contain the instructions for basic biological functions. Devices
contain multiple parts arranged to carry out more complicated designer-determined
functions. Systems carry out advanced tasks.
3
Engineered biological circuits are cellular subsystems wherein cellular DNA has
been altered in order to produce specific new functionssuch as signaling the presence
of a given chemical or producing a certain protein. A major goal of synthetic biology is to

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

8 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

tissue engineering and bio-computer interfaces to the creation of organisms that

are capable of efficient, large-scale biofuel production.
At the symposium in Shanghai, Drew Endy, Assistant Professor of Bioen-
gineering, Stanford University, noted that while the current definition will likely
always be incomplete, the ultimate definitions of synthetic biology will take into
account the dynamism and potential of synthetic biology which, if it achieves its
potential, may change many aspects of how we live our lives.
At a fundamental level, synthetic biology seeks to take the creative force
of nature and harness it technologically in order to solve problems of varying
scale. In London, Huanming Yang, Director, Beijing Genomics Institute, opti-
mistically described synthetic biology as a science changing the world and the
future of man, and proposed a motto for the field: Life is what we make it.

Building on a Heritage of Biological Discovery

Though the practice of synthetic biology is new, the concept was coined a
century ago in two publications by the biologist Stphane Leduc.5
Modern synthetic biology has its roots in the 1953 discovery of the double
helix structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) by scientists James Watson and
Francis Crick (See Box 2-1).
The discovery of DNA was the key to understanding development and
specialization in cells and organisms and ushered in a new era of genetic manip-
ulation. Copying, editing, sequencing,6 engineering, and synthesizing DNA and
RNA (ribonucleic acid) all emerged from that discovery.
In Shanghai, Farren Isaacs, Assistant Professor of Molecular, Cellular, and
Developmental Biology, Yale University School of Medicine, reflected on the
developments that followed the early research on DNA. Not so long ago, he
observed, we had questions on how to decode DNA. That [is what] led to un-
derstanding of gene functions and interactions at the molecular level. Now we
get to change DNA at new scales, to both learn and make new systems.
By the 1970s, scientists had successfully created recombinant DNA
(rDNA)genetic material formed by combining DNA from more than one or-
ganism. This facilitated the development of genetic engineering and manipula-
tion.
In the early 1980s, technical innovation led to the ability to rapidly sequence
DNA.

develop a large portfolio of engineered biological circuits for use in various applications
or systems.
4
Oscillators are genetically controlled, rhythmically repeated cycles of response and
chemical production that govern the development, growth, and death of cells and
organisms.
5
Thorie physic-chimique de la vie et generations spontanes (1910) and La biologie
synthtique, etude de biophysique, ed. A. Poinat (1912).
6
Determining the nucleotide sequence of a particular fragment of DNA.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Synthetic Biology: Science and Technology for the New Millennium 9

BOX 2-1
DNA and Biological Parts

Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is a molecule that contains the hereditary material

of a living organism. It is found in every cell of known living organisms. The DNA
molecule has a double-stranded, ladder-like structure. Genetic information is encod-
ed as a sequence of nucleotides (adenine, cytosine, guanine, and thymine) that are
arranged in pairs which form the rungs of the ladder. DNA is replicated during cell
division.
A strand of DNA may contain thousands of genes, a unit of heredity which in-
fluences a particular characteristic in an organism. Genes contain anywhere from
1,000 to 1 million nucleotide base pairs. Genes are stored on chromosomesa
single, very long DNA double helix. The complete set of genes in a given organism is
called the genome.
Genes contain chemical instructions for manufacturing proteins and other
chemicals. Proteins are large molecules composed of amino acids. They are an
essential component of a living organism. Body structures, functions, and the regula-
tion of the body's cells, tissues and organs cannot exist without proteins. The manu-
facture of proteins entails transcribing genetic information into ribonucleic acid
(RNA). RNA molecules then direct the assembly of proteins on ribosomes.
Synthetic biology seeks to design new types of cellular machinery that perform
a desired function or produce a desired substance. Synthetic biologists achieve this
by creating simple cellular parts which, when assembled, simplify gene expression
and the cellular synthesis of proteins and other chemicals. Synthetic biologists also
seek to elicit predictable cellular functions in, for example, regulatory and metabolic
systems.

In 1974, geneticist Waclaw Szybalski heralded the next stage of biological

innovation: Up to now we are working on the descriptive phase of molecular
biology. But the real challenge will start when we enter the synthetic biology
phase of research in our field. We will then devise new control elements and add
these new modules to the existing genomes or build up wholly new genomes.
This would be a field with unlimited expansion potential. I am not concerned
that we will run out of exciting and novel ideas.7

Synthetic Biology and Converging Scientific Disciplines

While synthetic biology arises from a centurys worth of work in biology

and related fields, its practice would not be possible without breakthroughs in such
diverse fields as engineering, computer science, and information technology.
Stated differently, interconnectedness has been central to the development of
synthetic biology. Advances in microscopy and electronics multiplied the capacity
for data-gathering and analysis in biology. Simultaneously, progress in computer

7
Waclaw Szybalski, 1974. In Vivo and in Vitro Initiation of Transcription, in A.
Kohn and A. Shatkay (Eds.), Control of Gene Expression, pp. 23-24, and Discussion pp.
404-405. New York: Plenum Press.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

10 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

and internet technology revolutionized the ability to process and transfer data and
provided ideas and methods for how to manage complexity when engineering
multi-component integrated systems. Calculations that only a decade ago would
have taken weeks on a mainframe computer now take minutes: a gene sequence
may be processed on a laptop. Increasingly sophisticated software allows for con-
tinuing improvements in three-dimensional imaging and modeling. Advanced
technology has enabled real-time imaging of processes ranging from bacterial
reproduction to the behavior of nanoparticles. The development of optical fibers
has increased the capacity of data transferand global networkingby orders of
magnitude.8
By the turn of the 21st century, progress in synthetic biology had acceler-
ated as researchers began to exploit the concept of forward engineering, which
amalgamates custom-made or commercially available biological parts in order
to test functionality.9,10 Commercial gene synthesis became a global enterprise.11
Next generation gene sequencing machines now provide faster and less
expensive methods for indexing genetic code.
Currently, synthetic biologists have the ability to design genetic code to elic-
it a specific function, pre-test the code for functionality using computer modeling,
order the relevant genetic material from a commercial or open-source gene synthe-
sis facility, and insert the material into a cell body in order to test real world func-
tionality. Some DNA designs are now working the first time they are tested, re-
placing what has historically been a tedious trial-and-error based approach to
engineering novel phenotypes.

What Makes Synthetic Biology Special?

Synthetic biology builds on discoveries in, and is the result of collabora-

tions across, many fields (See Box 2-2). The field has several important charac-
teristics. It:

Represents a novel approach to studying biology

Applies engineering methods to living systems

8
National Research Council, 2009. A New Biology for the 21st Century. Washington,
DC: The National Academies Press.
9
Akst, Jef, 2011a. Tinkering with Life: A Decades Worth of Engineering-infused Bi-
ology, The Scientist, October 11. Online at http://www.thescientist.com/?articles.view/arti
cleNo/31193/title/Tinkering%20With%20Life (accessed March 27, 2013).
10
Pennisi, Elizabeth. 2013. Synthetic Genome Brings New Life to Bacterium, Science
328, p. 958. Online at http://www.sciencemag.org/content/328/5981/958.full.pdf (accessed
March 27, 2013).
11
As of 2009 there were approximately 50 gene synthesis companies around the
world. See Maurer, Stephen, et al., 2009. Making Commercial Biology Safer: What
the Gene Synthesis Industry Has Learned About Screening Customers and Orders,
Working Paper. Online at http://gspp.berkeley.edu/assets/uploads/page/Maurer_IASB
_Screening.pdf (accessed May 15, 2013).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Synthetic Biology: Science and Technology for the New Millennium 11

BOX 2-2
Synthetic Biology Tools and Technology Timeline
Synthetic biology is a tool and technology-based science. Institutional, indus-
trial, scientific, and technical developments have all contributed to the disciplines
evolution as a global, networked discipline.
1941: First functional program-controlled computer (Konrad Zuse)
1953: Crick and Watson describe the double helix structure of DNA
1960: First computer-aided drafting (CAD) program (Sketchpad)
1961: Discovery of mathematical principles in gene regulation
1971: First genetically modified organism (Escherichia coli)
1972: First synthetic gene (yeast)
1973: Cohen, Boyer, and Berg create first genetically engineered
organism (Escherichia coli)
1974: First U.S. patent on rDNA (Stanley Cohen and Herbert Boyer)
1975: Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA
Early genome sequencing techniques established
1976: First biotechnology firm founded (Genentech)
NIH guidelines for Recombinant DNA
1978: Term bioinformatics coined
Synthetic insulin gene inserted into E. coli
1980: In Diamond v. Chakrabarty, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that
a live, human-made micro-organism is patentable subject matter.
1982: U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves use of
synthetic insulin
1983: Development of the polymerase chain reaction (PRC) DNA
amplification technology
1984: First commercialized genetically modified food (Flavr Savr tomato)
1990: Human Genome Project (HGP) launched
1991: First public availability of the World Wide Web
1996: First cloned mammal (Dolly the sheep)
2000: International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium announces
working draft of human genome
2000: Genetic oscillators and toggle switches published
2002: Rice genome decoded
2002: Chemical synthesis of polio virus genome
2003: First BioBrick DNA assembly standard published
2003: Human Genome Project completed
2003: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) synthetic
biology studya
2004: Synthetic Biology 1.0 (first international meeting on synthetic biology)
2005: First International Genetically Engineered Machines (iGEM) competition
2008: Virus attenuation achieved via synthetic genome-scale changes in
codon usage
2010: First fully synthesized self-replicating genome (Mycoplasma mycoides)
2013: Successful engineering of digital amplifying genetic logic gates and
memory systems.

a
See Endy, Drew, 2007. 2003 Synthetic Biology Study. Online at http://dspace.mit.edu/
handle/1721.1/38455, accessed June 18, 2013.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

12 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

Relies on non-hierarchical research and commercialization networks

Views addressing social concerns as integral to the fields progress

A Novel Approach to Studying Biology. Synthetic biology, with its focus

on engineering customized living units and systems, represents a novel approach
to the study of life.
Synthetic biology reverses traditional approaches to understanding the
mechanisms of life. In his keynote address at the Washington, DC symposium,
Michael Elowitz, Professor of Biology, Bioengineering, and Applied Physics;
Bren Scholar; and Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, California
Institute of Technology, described the new thinking this way: Under routine
biological approaches, one perturbs an existing system [and asks:] How does the
system respond to perturbation? What components are necessary for it to work?
When conducting research in synthetic biology, one can ask different questions,
such as: What genetic circuits are sufficient to generate a particular behavior?
and, How can existing systems be re-wired to provide new functionality?
An expressed impulse in synthetic biology is to abstract or simplify
seeking, within the complexities of cells and bacteria, the minimum number of
components required to achieve a desired function. This conceptual model may
be a defining characteristic of the field,12 but an ultimate goal of synthetic biolo-
gy also includes the building of customized cells, organisms, and living systems.
Engineering Living Systems. Synthetic biology often uses engineering prin-
ciples to design simplified biological components that perform specified functions.
These approaches include:

Abstraction (or abstraction hierarchy): a system for managing biological

complexity by eliminating unnecessary details; abstraction allows re-
searchers at various levels (and in various fields) to work with and share
details about biological data without specialized knowledge
Modularization: developing interconnecting parts that can be combined
in various ways
Standardization: devising a broad consensus on the composition of parts,
devices, and systems so that they may be used reliably in any setting
Decoupling: de-linking the requirements for design from requirements for
manufacture to allow non-biologists to use biological components in vari-
ous applications
Modeling: testing the projected design and its function

The principles of abstraction, modularization, standardization, decoupling,

and modeling are not new per se: they transformed the textile industry in the 18th

12
Sheila Jasanoff, Pforzheimer Professor of Science and Technology Studies, John F.
Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Synthetic Biology: Science and Technology for the New Millennium 13

century with the development of the Jacquard loom,13 shaped the Industrial
Revolution,14 and led to the transformation of the integrated circuit industry in
the 20th century.
The application of engineering principles to biology offers, however, a dif-
ferent perspective on how to work with and use biological resources. When we
turn to biology, it tends to be [to address] a very pressing problem, Endy said.
I think that over-selects for applications and under-selects for improvements in
the engineering process. By building simplified biological circuits, systems, or
protocells (known as the bottom-up approach) while developing organisms
with enhanced or novel functions (the top-down approach),15 researchers are
seeking to improve our capacity to both understand and engineer living systems.
Incremental improvements in our capacity to navigate the design, build, test
cycle at the core of engineering biology, over time, can lead to geometric im-
provements in our capacity to engineer living systems. We have to invest in the
engineering fundamentals too, not just the immediate applications, added Endy.
One hope of synthetic biologists, said Rob Carlson, Principal, Biodesic, is
that by providing renewable materials through engineered cells, synthetic biolo-
gy may radically change the way we produce many materials in the future.
Non-hierarchical Networks. In Washington, DC, Robert Wells, former
Head, Biotechnology Unit, Directorate for Science, Technology, Organisation for
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), differentiated synthetic biolo-
gy from other fields, citing its tendency to develop in a horizontal, global way that
takes advantage of social networking and draws an international cadre of young
scientists. As Sheila Jasanoff, Pforzheimer Professor of Science and Technology
Studies at Harvards John F. Kennedy School of Government, observed in Shang-
hai, because of its inherent heterogeneity, synthetic biology gains coherence not
from a single set goal, but rather from a conceptual focus on simplification.
Synthetic biology has also created a unique opportunity for input from
outside traditional academic venuesfrom amateur scientists at community labs
to undergraduate institutions to high schools. At the Washington, DC symposi-
um, Meagan Lizarazo, Vice President of Operations at iGEM, and fellow panel-
ists discussed a prominent example where such collaboration is the norm: the
International Genetically Engineered Machine competition (iGEM). iGEM is a
competition in which undergraduates develop biological machines to address
real-world problems (See Box 2-3). The iGEM competition represents a new
type of educational pipeline for students interested in hands-on science and en-

13
Lee.
14
Richard Kitney, Professor of Biomedical Systems Engineering, Department of
Bioengineering, Senior Dean and Director of the Graduate School of Engineering and
Physical Science, Imperial College London.
15
Bedau, Mark A., Emily C. Parke, Uwe Tangen, and Brigitte Hantsche-Tangen,
2009. Social and Ethical checkpoints for bottom-up synthetic biology, or protocells,
Syst Synth Biol 3(1-4): 65-75, December. Online at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti
cles/PMC2759431 (accessed May 16, 2013).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

14 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

gineering, Lizarazo said. Launched in 2005 by the Massachusetts Institute of

Technology, iGEM became, in early 2012, an independent nonprofit endeavor.
In 2012, Lizarazo reported, the iGEM competition attracted participants from
190 colleges, 40 high schools, and 210 labs in five regionsAsia, Europe and
Africa, Latin America, Americas East, and Americas West.
The organizational structure of the iGEM competitionthe competition
and collaboration, the interactions among team members of widely differing
disciplines with various levels of experiencegives students non-threatening
entry into the complexities of science and engineering, said Karmella Haynes,
Assistant Professor, School of Biological and Health Systems Engineering, Ari-
zona State University. Participants in the iGEM competition applaud the mind-
expanding potential of the iGEM experience for developing scientists and engi-
neers. We learned the importance of collaboration and integrating human prac-
tices into our researchthose can be useful in our future careers, said Nikki
Kapp, a graduate student at Penn State University who represented Imperial
College London at iGEM as an undergraduate. As undergraduates, we dont
know clearly what isnt possible. Thats conducive to innovation.
Inclusion of Social Concerns. Early on, synthetic biology researchers rec-
ognized the need to engage with government and the public about social con-
cerns arising in conjunction with the practice of synthetic biology. This engage-
ment is, in part, a reflection of a desire to ensure that the public understands this
new technology. Researchers believe that a failure to engage with the publicas
exemplified by opposition to genetically modified food in Europemay ad-
versely affect ongoing and future innovation.
In Shanghai, Professor Jasanoff located U.S. scientific advancements of
the 20th century in the context of scale. In the United States, she observed, major
technical achievements such as the moon landing or the launch of the Hubble
Space Telescope were the result of large-scale national investments designed to
achieve specific goals and end points. By contrast, most synthetic biologists
work independently to achieve transformation at a microscopic level.
The decentralized nature of synthetic biology, in union with the revolu-
tionary nature of the field, may demand the development of a new approach to
the broad societal issues and aspects raised by advances in the field, she ob-
served. These include the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of the
technology (referred to as ELSA, or ethical, legal, and social aspects, in Europe)
as well as biosecurity, biosafety, regulatory, and intellectual property concerns.16
16
The synthetic biology community is beginning to address these concerns. For example,
in 2009, in collaboration with a panel of stakeholders, the International Association Synthet-
ic Biology developed a Code of Conduct for Best Practices in Gene Synthesis, focused on
DNA sequence screening, customer screening, and safety in gene synthesis (see http://
www.ia-sb.eu/go/synthetic-biology/synthetic-biology/code-of-conduct-for-best-practices-in-
gene-synthesis, accessed May 15, 2013). That same year, the International Gene Synthesis
Consortium developed a Harmonized Screening Protocol for gene sequencing and cus-
tomer screening to protect biosecurity (see http://www.ia-sb.eu/tasks/sites/synthetic-
biology/assets/File/pdf/iasb_code_of_conduct_final.pdf, accessed May 15, 2013).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Synthetic Biology: Science and Technology for the New Millennium 15

Jasanoff noted that a multi-country comparison of ELSI concerns revealed wide

variations and suggest an urgent need to include the public in discussions of
ELSI issues. She suggested that, given the publics increasing interest in science
and technology and its willingness (and, through the Internet, its ability) to en-
gage in or collaborate in research and interface with technology, synthetic biolo-
gy might, in fact, be considered a post-ELSI science.
Realizing the potential of synthetic biology depends on overcoming signif-
icant challenges. These include not only technological challenges but also miti-
gating potential biosafety and biosecurity dangers, attending to social, legal, and
political imperatives, and addressing intellectual property issues. These chal-
lenges are discussed in detail in Chapter 4.

BOX 2-3
The International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) Competition

iGEM has captivated a generation of young scientists and engineers from

around the world. Many of those involved believe that synthetic biology offers a
unique opportunity to address world needs related to food, disease, energy, and
material.
Each year, iGEM participants undertake a summer-long project wherein a mul-
tidisciplinary team designs biological solutions to real-world problems. By using parts
from the Registry of Standard Biological Parts (or by creating new parts), teams
engineer living systems designed to carry out specific functions. Participants assem-
ble their own teams, raise funds for their projects, and solicit advice from experts
across disciplines. In 2012, projects included:

Generating a bacterial detect and alert system to help defend crop planta-
tions against pathogens (Universidad de los Andes, Bogot, ColombiaLatin
America Grand Prize Winner)
Engineering a bacillus bacterium to produce blue or yellow pigments in meat
that has spoiled (University of Groningen, HollandEurope Grand Prize and
World Championship Winner)
Developing a low-cost biosensor to indicate the presence of pathogenic bac-
teria in water (Arizona State UniversityBest Human Practices Advance,
Americas West)
Building a protein-based light sensor (Chinese University of Hong Kong
Championship Competition)

Teams post the stories of their research on individual wikis on the iGEM website.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Strategies for Advancing

Synthetic Biology

Despite the challenges that lie ahead, both governments and non-
governmental organizations take the promise of synthetic biology seriously.
During the two-year period when the three symposia were taking place, the gov-
ernments of the United Kingdom and China made investments in synthetic biol-
ogy a priority. Both nations advanced formal strategies and benchmarks for this
purpose. Additionally, in Europe, the European Commission (EC)1 and the
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) have taken
an active interest in the field. During the course of the symposia series, repre-
sentatives from China, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the OECD
discussed national plans, as well as planned and ongoing international collabora-
tions, for stimulating progress in synthetic biology.

China

In Washington, DC, Xian-en Zhang, Director General, Basic Research

Department, China Ministry of Science and Technology, stated that the Peoples
Republic of China is seeking to position itself as a global leader in synthetic
biology. This effort, he said, is motivated by the country's urgent need to address
public health, nutrition, and resource needs, as well as a national strategy to
promote progress in science and technology. Beginning in 1978, with reforms
launched by Deng Xiaoping, China has pursued an aggressive strategy of indus-
trialization and technological development. Investments in bioscience and bio-
1
As of early 2012, the EC's Sixth Framework Programme for Research, Technologic
Development and Demonstration had funded 18 synthetic biology projects totaling over 24
million (Pei, Lei, Sibylle Gaisser, and Markus Schmidt, 2012. Synthetic biology in the
view of European public funding organisations, Public Understa Sci. February; 21(2): 149-
162. Online at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3311122, accessed May 15,
2013).

17

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

18 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

technology are part of this strategy. Zhang noted that since the 1990s, Chinese
leaders have prioritized economic development through science and education.
Chinas aggressive S&T policies have led to significant advances on many
scientific fronts, including synthetic biology. China now contributes about 10
percent (some 400 papers) of the annual papers published on synthetic biology.2
These publications are ranked seventh globally in terms of citations. China has
several databanks related to synthetic biology. These include a database of genes
that have been identified as essential for an organisms survival and a separate
database on prokaryotic and eukaryotic genes.
In China, several organizations support research in synthetic biology,
Zhang said. These include the Chinese Academy of Science (CAS) (the major
science policy advisor to the central government), the Chinese Academy of En-
gineering, the national and local offices of the China Academy of Machinery
Science and Technology (CAM), and medical universities. Funding for synthetic
biology research comes from many sources, including the National Natural Sci-
ence Foundation of China, state-level labs, and the CAS Knowledge Innovation
Program.3 Expenditure on research now totals 800 billion Yuan per year (about
$U.S. 100 billion), with 260 million Yuan allocated for synthetic biology.4 This
total research budget accounts for 1.8 percent of Chinas gross domestic product
or GDP (though this is still less than research funding in the OECD, which ac-
counts for 2 percent of GDP, and in the United States, which accounts for 2.7
percent of GDP).5
Despite the many technical challenges facing the field, China sees synthetic
biology as ushering in a new era of economic growth powered by technology.
According to Dr. Zhang, China has drafted a strategic roadmap that specifies de-
sired achievements in technology, industrial applications, medicine, and agricul-
ture in five, 10, and 20 year periods (See Box 3-1). In the case of synthetic biolo-
gy, the roadmap includes goals related to the availability of comprehensive
databases for synthetic parts, a timeframe for the commercial application of engi-
neered parts, and a timeframe for clinical application of devices and systems.
Guo-ping Zhao, Director, Laboratory of Synthetic Biology, Institute of
Plant Physiology and Ecology, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences, not-
ed that, besides seeking technological advances, future tasks for China include
addressing legal, ethical and security questions such as ensuring that the benefits
of synthetic biology will be distributed equitably. Dr. Zhao noted that intellectu-
al property, ownership, and sharing arrangements are another concern. Dr. Qiu,

2
Xian-en Zhang, Director General, Basic Research Department, China Ministry of
Science and Technology.
3
China is also conducting multi-country research, such as a bilateral project on risk as-
sessment and biosafety needs for synthetic biology in Austria and China (see http://www.
markusschmidt.eu/fwf/Home.html, accessed May 15, 2013).
4
Zhang.
5
Zhang.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Strategies for Advancing Synthetic Biology 19

BOX 3-1
Strategic Targets for Synthetic Biology in China

5 years:
Database of standardized parts and computational competency
for designing parts and devices
Module design and production of chemicals and biomaterials
Validated design of devices to increase plant tolerance of drought
and salinity

10 years:
Expanded database of standardized parts and devices and computational
competency for design of bio-systems
Commercial production of selected chemicals and biomaterials
Validated design of synthetic devices for nitrogen fixation

20 years:
Integrated platforms for design, modeling, and validation of
bio-systems
Commercial production of a range of natural compounds, drugs,
chemicals, and biofuels
Clinical application of devices and bio-systems for detecting, controlling,
or treating major diseases
Creation of artificial microbial life

Emeritus Professor of the Institute of Philosophy and Honorary Director, Center

for Applied Ethics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, added that protecting
the health and safety of those who work in the discipline is also a priority, and
Dr. Zhao stated that China seeks to work with international collaborators to de-
velop approaches to all these issues.

United Kingdom

In Washington, DC, John Perkins, Chief Scientific Adviser, Business &

Skills Group, Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, U.K. Government,
stated that the U.K. government is keen to assume a leadership role in synthetic
biology. According to Perkins, the U.K. government views synthetic biology as
a potentially revolutionary platform with very promising commercial possibili-
ties. The U.K. government is actively seeking to build a thriving synthetic biol-
ogy community with strong links to industry. Further, Perkins stated that the
government has made a commitment to establish a Synthetic Biology Leader-
ship Council6 co-chaired by a Minister and a senior industry figure. This council

6
The Synthetic Biology Leadership Council (SBLC) was established in December
2012 under the joint chairmanship of the Right Honorable David Willets, MP and Lionel

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

20 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

will serve as the major vehicle of vertical policies designed to stimulate dis-
cussion and partnership among various sectors.
The Cabinet of the United Kingdom sets strategic direction. The Research
Councils and the Technological Strategy Board (TSB) provide independent
evaluations of scientific issues. The U.K.s TSB, a public entity focused on in-
creasing innovation in technological fields with commercial potential, has in-
cluded synthetic biology on its short list of the top four emerging technologies
and has estimated that the field will generate a market worth up to $20 billion by
2020. This projection, Perkins said, caused an independent, industry-led group
to develop a roadmap for making the U.K. a leader in synthetic biology. The
roadmap, which presents five recommendations, emphasizes as a necessary first
step building a strong and multifaceted community of stakeholders.7
The United Kingdom intends to make investments in synthetic biology in
the following areas:

Public funding of 50 million, including up to 6.5 million to encour-

age investment by industry
Funding of 6 million from the Engineering and Physical Science Re-
search Council to encourage universities to investigate the commercial-
ization of new products
Integration of funding for studies in both research and development and
related ethical, legal, and social implications (ESLI)8
Support from the Biotechnology and Biological Science Research
Council for 16 agencies for five transnational research projects
Earmarking 100 million to sequence 100,000 whole genomes of pa-
tients of the National Health Service over the next three to five years.

According to Perkins, the U.K. governments next step will be to form a minis-
ter-led leadership council that will manage the direction of ongoing research.
Perkins noted that, from the U.K. perspective, major challenges are the
management of the complexity and expectations of synthetic biology, the trans-
lation of innovations in synthetic biology from lab to life, and the need for
continued public engagement. A failure to engage the public in discussion of
synthetic biology, he said will hamper the fields future development.
In Shanghai, Paul Gemmill, Director of Communications and Information
Management, U.K. Biology and Biotechnology Research Council, emphasized

Clarke. The Council's purpose is to coordinate interventions taken to implement the

U.K.'s synthetic biology roadmap (see https://connect.innovateuk.org/web/synthetic-
biology-special-interest-group/synbio-leadership-council, accessed May 14, 2013).
7
UK Synthetic Biology Strategy Group, 2012. A Synthetic Biology Roadmap for the
UK. Swindon, UK: Technology Strategy Board (TSB). Online at http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/
documents/publications/SyntheticBiologyRoadmap.pdf, accessed March 27, 2013.
8
Pei, Lei, Sybille Gaisser, and Markus Schmidt, 2012. Synthetic biology in the view
of European public funding organisations, Public Underst Sci 21(2): 149-162, February.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Strategies for Advancing Synthetic Biology 21

the seriousness of the U.K.s effort to engage the public by stating that doing so
is an integral part of the countrys plan for synthetic biology. We have had
problems in the past explaining novel technologies, he said. The public
thought that their questions were not properly answered.
In 2009, the U.K. government initiated a series of public dialogues on syn-
thetic biology. During these dialogues, a diverse group of citizens met with sci-
entists to explore questions regarding synthetic biology and to discuss mecha-
nisms for oversight and governance of the field. Gemmill said that these public
dialogues revealed that there is a high level of support for synthetic biology by
the British public. Communities see opportunities to use synthetic biology to
address numerous global problems, he said, but they also express concerns about
where the technology will lead, how quickly it will proceed, and what the long-
term consequences might be.

The report on the dialogues addresses three broad areas:

Questions for scientists on the purpose and benefits of synthetic biology

Recommendations for regulationincluding a recommendation against
self-regulation, a requirement that laws stay current with changes in
science, and an emphasis on alignment with international regulations
Recommended applications including medicine (approved by 80 per-
cent of those polled), energy (78 percent), environment and bioreme-
diation (58 percent), and food (55 percent).

The last recommendation clearly indicates the publics priorities, Gemmill

said. These align, he observed, with the priorities of scientists. Gemmill stated that
the next step will be to integrate the findings from the public dialogues into dis-
cussions on future topics. Gemmill concluded his remarks by observing that,
These are the people who one day might, or might not, be buying your product.

United States

The United States has been an early leader in synthetic biology. The
American synthetic biology community plays a vital role in research and in the
development of multi-country partnerships. The U.S. government has invested
about $140 million annually in synthetic biology research (See Box 3-2). At the
federal level, however, the U.S. government has not developed an overarching
funding or governance plan for the field. Though synthetic biology is mentioned
in the current administrations National BioEconomy Blueprint, specific initia-
tives for the field are not defined.9

9
The White House, 2012. National Bioeconomy Blueprint. April. Online at http://
www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/national_bioeconomy_blueprint_
april_2012.pdf.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

22 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

BOX 3-2
Publicly Funded Synthetic Biology Research in the United States

The U.S. government supports research in synthetic biology through a variety

of national organizations and institutions. For example, the National Science Foun-
dation (NSF) has invested about $72 million in research associated with synthetic
biology. A 2008 event, the Ideas Factory Sandpit, brought researchers and mentors
together to investigate major questions in the field and develop solutions. NSF also
supports the Synthetic Biology Engineering Research Center (SynBERC), a multi-
institution effort to develop foundational principles and technologies to help synthetic
biology advance.
Support from the Department of Defense is aimed at speeding production ca-
pacity in synthetic biology. The Departments Defense Advanced Research Project
Agencys (DARPA) Microsystems Technology Offices Living Foundries program,
launched in 2011, seeks to advance synthetic biology as a manufacturing platform.
The Department of Energy has launched several initiatives around synthetic
biology, including several focused on the mechanisms underlying biofuel produc-
a
tion.

a
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Synthetic Biology Project, 2012. Rec-
ommendation 2: Support for Promising Research. Online at http://www.synbioproject.org/score
card/recommendations/research/support-for-promising-research, accessed March 27, 2013.

In 2010, after the J. Craig Venter Institute publicized the creation of the first
cell containing a complete, self-replicating synthetic genome, President Obama
directed the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues to review
the field of synthetic biology and develop ethical guidelines aimed at providing
maximum public benefits while minimizing risks. In Shanghai, Anita L. Allen,
Henry R. Silverman Professor of Law and Professor of Philosophy, University of
Pennsylvania Law School and a member of the Presidents Commission, reviewed
the Commissions findings and noted that the report did not find a need for new
regulation or regulatory mechanisms at this time. The Commission did, however,
offer 18 recommendations based on five ethical principles: 1) public beneficence,
2) responsible stewardship, 3) intellectual freedom and responsibility, 4) demo-
cratic deliberation, and 5) justice and fairness.10
At the Washington, DC symposium, Jetta Wong, a staff member of the
United States House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology, noted that Congress has established a bipartisan caucus on synthet-
ic biology but has not developed a strategic plan for the field. Right now, Con-
gress is focused on jobs, the economy, and the budget deficit. Synthetic biology
is not getting much attention, she said.

10
A follow-up report that was to provide recommendations for agency-specific actions
has not been released as of June 2013.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Strategies for Advancing Synthetic Biology 23

Wong observed that limitations in the publics understanding of or reac-

tion to scientific developments are an obstacle that may affect the advance of
technology-based projects in developing areas such as biofuel production and
genetically modified food. She observed that government infrastructure, includ-
ing the organization of Congressional committees and the mandates and focus
areas of government institutions, can also create a stovepipe effect. Advancing
synthetic biology will require mechanisms that enable collaboration among
these different entities, Wong said. An additional challenge is that, in the Amer-
ican political system, action is focused on immediate concerns and expressed
public interests. Without strong input from the public or interested groups, is-
sues tend not to advance. Wong noted, however, that timely input by citizens
and interest groups can influence legislation. This was the case with the National
Research Council publication, A New Biology for the 21st Century. According to
Wong, as a result of the report, the House of Representatives included provi-
sions on synthetic biology in the recently passed Manufacturing Competitive-
ness Act.
According to Wong, funding for scienceconsidered a vital element of
economic development by the present administration and the Congressis rela-
tively strong in the United States. In the case of synthetic biology, the U.S. Na-
tional Science Foundation contributed $16 million to the Synthetic Biology Engi-
neering Research Center (SynBERC) based at University of California, Berkeley.
A joint effort by the U.S. Department of Energy and British Petroleum (BP) creat-
ed the $500 million Energy Biosciences Institute, where synthetic biology will
play a significant role. Private philanthropy is also contributing to synthetic biolo-
gy: the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation have invested $43 million into medical
applications of synthetic biology, for example.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

In Washington, DC, Gerardo Jimnez-Sanchez, Chairman, Working Party

on Biotechnology, OECD and Chair, HUGO Committee on Genomics and the
Bioeconomy, National Academy of Medicine, Mexico, reported that the OECD
views genomics, biotechnology, and sustainable production of biomass as priori-
ty development areas for the next 30 years.11,12 Jimnez-Sanchez noted that in-
terest in the potential of emerging technologies (and in their potential effect on
social and economic well-being) has risen among member countries. He stated
that half of the OECDs 34 countries are conducting initiatives on synthetic bi-
ology. Responding to this interest, the OECD has participated or collaborated in

11
OECD, 2009. The Bioeconomy to 2030: Designing a Policy Agenda. CITY? OECD
International Futures Project. Online at http://www.oecd.org/futures/long-termtechnolo
gicalsocietalchallenges/42837897.pdf, accessed March 27, 2013.
12
European Scientific Advisory Council (EASAC), 2010. Realising European Poten-
tial in Synthetic Biology: Scientific Opportunities and Good Governance, EASAC Poli-
cy Report 13. Halle, Germany: German Academy of Sciences Leopoldina.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

24 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

a series of events designed to explore synthetic biologys potential as a driver of

economic growth.
Jimnez-Sanchez stated that the OECD has strategic alliances with other
international agencies conducting activities related to synthetic biology. Events
and publications resulting from these collaborations include:

Opportunities and Challenges in the Emerging Field of Synthetic Biol-

ogy: A Symposium (in collaboration with the U.S. National Academies
and The Royal Society), 2009 and the summary report, Symposium on
Opportunities and Challenges in the Emerging Field of Synthetic Biol-
ogy: Synthesis Report, 2010 (Royal Society and OECD).
Workshop on genomics and the bioeconomy, May 2010, Montpelier,
France. Participants reached consensus on the need for guidelines on in-
ternational cooperation, innovative intellectual property management,
and ways of measuring the impact of genomics.
Delivering Economic Value from Synthetic Biology, a summit in Sydney,
Australia, in March 2012.

Jimnez-Sanchez also reported that the OECD has also engaged in discus-
sions with the international collaborative project SynBio13 and the U.S.-based
BioBricks Foundation.14 As a result of these discussions, the OECD has identi-
fied three areas where it might focus future attention: 1) needed infrastructure;
2) approaches for IP access and sharing; and 3) standards and interoperability.15

13
SynBio is a collaborative project to create new biologically based pharmaceutical
products. It was launched in 2011 with participation from companies in Russia, the U.K.,
and Germany.
14
The BioBricks Foundation is a nonprofit organization that seeks to provide open-
source biological partsDNA sequences with specific structures and functions that can
be introduced into living cells to create new functions.
15
OECD and Royal Society, 2010. Opportunities and Challenges in the Emerging
Field of Synthetic Biology: Synthesis Report. Paris: OECD and Royal Society.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Opportunities and Challenges

Emerging via a Networked World

Research in synthetic biology has the capacity to revolutionize our under-

standing of biological processes and genetics, suggesting a human potential that
builds on and beyond evolutionary processes. The environment in which synthetic
biologists hope to operatea decentralized, networked ecosystem unconstrained
by the boundaries of traditional research institutionsmay be the leading edge of
this transformation. Synthetic biology, in the words of Richard Johnson, CEO of
GlobalHelix LLC, represents the new normal of global researchnetworked,
decentralized, collaborative, and multidisciplinary. The novelty and promise of
this environment are cause for both excitement and caution.
Next industry wave. Industry has made significant investments in synthetic
biology, with the view that the field, coupled with continuing advances in genetics
and systems biology, has the potential to revolutionize the development of products
and substances through the application of biologically-based manufacturing.
Synthetic biologys emergence parallels trends in advanced manufacturing in which
operations are becoming increasingly global and networked-based.1 With this
movement, companies are beginning to commercialize products developed through
synthetic biology (See Box 4-1).
By the mid-2000s there were already some 3,000 biotechnology companies
globally2 and gene synthesis companies operating in five continents3 and produc-

1
Shipp, Stephanie S. et al., 2012. Emerging Global Trends in Advanced Manufactur-
ing. Report by the Institute for Defense Analyses, Alexandria VA. March.
2
Finnegan, Stephanie and Karl Pinto, 2006. Globalisation of biotech offshoring,
Pharmabiz.com. May 16. Online at http://www.goodwinbio.com/web/PharmabizDec06.pdf,
accessed December 5, 2012
3
Garfinkel, Michele S., Drew Endy, Gerald L. Epstein, and Robert M. Friedman,
2007. Synthetic Genomics: Options for Governance. Rockville, MD: J. Craig Venter
Institute, Center for Strategic and International Studies, and Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.

25

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

26 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

ing some 50,000 genes annually.4 Biological products have become economically
important. In 2010, it is estimated that the bio- economy in the United States (ge-
netically modified crops, biological products, and industrial biotechnology) gener-
ated more than $300 billion in revenue (the equivalent of over 2 percent of

BOX 4-1
The Commercialization of Synthetic Biology: Amryis, Inc.

The commercialization of synthetic biology products is in its very early stages,

but both investors and entrepreneurs are exploring opportunities. Amyris, Inc. is
using synthetic biology to produce products on a commercial scale. In Shanghai,
Lishan Zhao, Head of Enzymology and Protein Engineering, Amyris, Inc., described
his companys work with yeast cells engineered for novel functions. One application
is to produce a semi-synthetic version of artemisinin, a chemical traditionally derived
from the Chinese wormwood plant. Artemisinin is used in anti-malarial drugs, but the
chemical is difficult and expensive to extract. By engineering yeast to produce arte-
misinina process developed by Amyris co-founder, Jay KeaslingAmyris worked
to provide a steady, non-seasonal, and affordable supply of artemisinin for use in
developing countries. In partnership with the nonprofit organization OneWorldHealth
and with a $42.6 million grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Amyris
developed the ability to produce artemisinin at a scale suitable for global distribution.
Production was managed by the French pharmaceutical Sanofi. Sanofi announced
in April 2013 that it has begun large-scale commercialization of artemisinin using a
process that is based on the process developed at Amyris. The drug will be sold at
a
cost.
Amyris has also explored yeast-based production of farnesene, an aromatic
oil used in fuels, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and fragrances. Production, howev-
b
er, has been inadequate to justify a planned venture into biofuels. Nevertheless,
Amyris views synthetic biology as viable technology that offers solutions to global
challenges. Recently, for example, the company announced a multi-year agree-
ment with the global company International Flavors & Frangrances, Inc. to develop
c
renewable fragrance ingredients using a synthetic biology platform. I strongly
believe that if we all work together, we can pave the road for synthetic biology to
play an important role in replacing petroleum one day, Zhao said.

a
UC Berkeley News Center, 2013. Launch of Antimalarial Drug a Triumph for UC Berkeley,
Synthetic Biology, April 11. Online at http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2013/04/11/launch-of-
antimalarial-drug-a-triumph-for-uc-berkeley-synthetic-biology, accessed May 17, 2013.
b
Bullis, Kevin, 2012. Amyris Gives Up Making Biofuels: Update, MIT Technology Review.
February 10. Online at http://www.technologyreview.com/view/426866/amyris-gives-up-making-
biofuels-update, accessed March 27, 2013.
c
CNBC, 2013. BRIEF-IFF, Amyris to jointly develop ingredients for flavors, fragrances mar-
ket, Business news, April 29. Online at http://www.cnbc.com/id/1006861 85, accessed May 17,
2012.

4
Maurer, Stephen M. et al., 2009, Making Commercial Biology Safer: What the Gene
Synthesis Industry Has Learned About Screening Customers and Orders, Working Pa-
per, online at http://gspp.berkeley.edu/iths/Maurer_IASB_Screening.pdf.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Opportunities and Challenges Emerging via a Networked World 27

gross domestic product).5 Recently, BBC Research LLC, a market research

company, estimated that the global value of the synthetic biology marketplace
(including supporting technologies, biological parts, and the products developed
using these parts) was $1.6 billion in 2011 and projected that the value would
rise to $10.8 billion in 2016.6
Successes with engineered biological systems promise a wide range of
applications. For example, a trial of engineered male mosquitoesdescribed at
the London symposium by Luke Alphey, Chief Scientist, Oxitecresulted in a
90 percent reduction in the population of dengue-carrying mosquitoes in the 16-
hectare test area.7 Alpheys team has suggested using this approachknown as
the sterile insect techniquefor control of agricultural pests such as moths.8
Industry is continuing to make investments in promising engineered bio-
products. Monsanto, for example, recently announced the acquisition of certain
microbes developed by Agradisa synthetic biology company launched by
Synthetic Genomics Inc. (SGI) and the Mexican company Plenus, SA. Monsanto
also is collaborating with SGI in research on plant-microbe relationships. Other
industrial ventures include investments in plant-based production of rubber, bio-
based acrylics, green chemicals made from biological waste, vitamin pro-
duction, and biologically based diesel production using renewable carbohydrates.9
In Washington, DC, Darlene Solomon, Senior Vice President and Chief
Technology Officer, Agilent Technologies, a global firm specializing in measure-
ment, described Agilents analysis of market trends since 1940including the
growth of measurement technology, electronics, chemical analysis, communi-
cation and the Internet, and personalized medicine. Solomon projected that the
growth of the market for the products of synthetic biology will outstrip growth in
all of the other categories. She described synthetic biology as the next wave, and
noted that biologically-based manufacturing will likely transform the production
of all types of products by replacing products made with traditional materials with
products made of sustainable materials. This will lead, she concluded, to a more
sustainable global economy.

5
Carlson, Rob, 2011. Biodesic Bioeconomy Update. Document 20110811_01. Biodesic.
Online at http://www.biodesic.com/library/Biodesic_2011_Bioeconomy_Update.pdf, accessed
December 5, 2012.
6
BCC Research, 2011. Synthetic Biology: Emerging Global Markets. Market report
number BIO066B. Online at http://www.bccresearch.com/pressroom/report/code/BIO0
66B, accessed May 15, 2013.
7
Harris, Angela F. et al., 2011. Field Performance of Engineered Male Mosquitoes,
Nature Biotechnology 29: 1034-1037.
8
Jin, Li et al., 2013. Engineered Female-Specific Lethality for Control of Pest Lepi-
doptera, ACS Synth. Biol, January 8. Online at http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/sb30
0123m, accessed March 27, 2013.
9
Biotechnology Industry Organization (no date), Current Uses of Synthetic Biology
for Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals. Online at http://www.bio.org/articles/current-uses-
synthetic-biology, accessed March 27, 2013.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

28 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

Engagement by Law Enforcement. The Federal Bureau of Investigation

(FBI) has been proactive in its engagement with the synthetic biology policy and
research communities. Edward You, Supervisory Special Agent in the FBIs
Weapons of Mass Destruction, Biological Countermeasures Unit, described the
Bureaus involvement with synthetic biology in the context of the FBIs overall
effort to prevent terrorism and ensure the safety of those working in the field.
The FBI, he said, maintains a dialogue with scientists, students, and members of
the DIY community for the purposes of keeping abreast of current developments
and educating the synthetic biologists on the broader security picture. Many
people in the life sciences, he observed, have never heard of the Biological
Weapons Convention. As sponsors of iGEM, You said, weve had discussions
about thiswe need to educate people on these issues (See Box 4-2).

Challenges for Synthetic Biology

Unlocking the potential of synthetic biology depends on the development

of new interfaces for worldwide collaboration and, most likely, new types of
creative commons that allow for flexibility in the regulation and ownership of
scientific and technological innovations.

Technical Challenges

At present, only the leading edge of synthetic biology is visible, and the
technical challenges are enormous. Synthetic biologists have yet to develop a
broad understanding of the scientific foundations and engineering processes
needed to sustain rapid increases in the capacity to engineer biology.10 A chief
challenge is that, compared to other engineered systems, e.g., automobiles and
computers, biological systems are infinitely more complex and do not behave in
a linearly predictable way.11 Working at the molecular and cellular level is very
difficult. Moving from the cellular to the systems levelproducing engineered
tissues, for exampleincreases complexity by orders of magnitude.
The problem, Dr. Elowitz observed, is that even if reliable biological parts
were available, scientists lack the knowledge to use them effectively. Biological
functions, he noted, are implemented by genetic circuits of interacting genes and
proteins. But the circuits in question are often embedded in other complex circuits.
We can't see the core design. We only understand a portion of what mammal cells
are designed to do.

10
Drew Endy, Assistant Professor, Bioengineering, Stanford University and President,
The BioBricks Foundation.
11
Marc Salit, Research Chemist, National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Opportunities and Challenges Emerging via a Networked World 29

BOX 4-2
Cooperative Arrangements for Discussions about Benefits and Risks

A continuous discussion about biosafety, biosecurity, and risk mitigation is criti-

cal to the development of synthetic biology. In the United States, the FBI recently
began discussions with amateur synthetic biologists on topics ranging from mitiga-
tion of biological risks to the broader topic of ensuring responsible scientific innova-
tion. The Bureau holds workshops with the DIY community and has routinely been a
sponsor of iGEM. The FBI presence at iGEM has a dual purpose; to discuss security
issues with iGEM participants and to allow security agencies to keep pace with rapid
advances in the field.

Elowitz hopes that by asking new

It starts with a fundamental biologi-
questions and using the cell-building pro- cal questionhow many genes do
cess as a means of understanding cell pro- you need to have a functioning liv-
cesses, the engineering approach to biolo- ing cell? Its a simple question
gy will provide new insights into the about an important biological prob-
fundamentals of genetic design. lem, and people will continue to
Dr. Solomon reminded symposia work on it without worrying about
whether you can use it to make bio-
participants that many apparently ubiqui- fuels.
tous technologies took years to reach ma-
turity. In the particular case of synthetic Peter Leadlay,
biology, she said, both the development of Cambridge University
large-scale applications and the market
penetration of these applications will take decades (See Box 4-3). She noted, how-
ever, that advances in synthetic biology will likely be accelerated by the parallel
growth of related technologies, such as DNA sequencing and computing. In the
interim, she said, synthetic biology (as is the case with other emerging technolo-
gies) must necessarily move forward incrementally.
Parts and Applications. An immediate challenge for synthetic biology is the
development of a large portfolio of standardized, modular biological parts and
tools that behave predictably and may be used in a wide range of applications.
Though thousands of biological parts have been catalogedover 10,000 in the
Registry of Standard Biological Parts,12 for examplereproducible, reliable parts
are still not widely available.

12
This searchable registry is the best-known of a growing registry of biological parts.
It contains some 2,000 BioBrick, parts, devices, and systems. The availability of these
biological parts eliminates the need to develop each biological part separately, resulting
in significant time savings. In standard biology, for example, it might take a month to
assemble a given biological part. Using parts from a registry, a synthetic biologist can
assemble 20 parts over the same period. See http://partsregistry.org. The parts in partsreg-
istry.org were moved to parts.igem.org in May 2013.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

30 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

BOX 4-3
What Can We Expect from Synthetic Biology?

Participants in the symposiawhile acknowledging the difficulty of prediction

in synthetic biologysuggested possible short- and long-term developments in the
field.

In 5 years?
Multiple global intercommunicating synthetic biology research platforms,
including public-benefit facilitities

In 10 years?
$20 billion in synthetic biology products
Cells routinely engineered to produce desired bulk and fine chemicals

In 20 or 30 years?
Rationally engineered multi-cellular tissues or organs
Widely deployed cellular computing systems
Novel biological manufacturing processes for non-biological products

The first tools and applications of synthetic biology are being developed at
the molecular and cellular level. The wish list for synthetic biology is long,
including not just interchangeable biological parts and systems, but also custom-
ized cellular functions and designed bacteria and other organisms that can be
used to speed chemical productionin, for example, for industrial processes.
Multi-cellular development, tissue engineering, and industrial applications
lie in the future, but will inevitably depend upon investments made now.13 While
the ultimate products of synthetic biology are still unknowable, the immediate
utility of synthetic biologydesigning and constructing biological parts to in-
crease our understanding of fundamental biological processesis already be-
coming manifest. At this moment, Dr. Endy observed, the immediate benefits of
synthetic biology research include a greater understanding of how living organ-
isms work.
Inter-operability. Richard Kitney, Professor of Biomedical Systems Engi-
neering and Senior Dean and Director of the Graduate School of Engineering
and Physical Science, Imperial College London, stated that a key to the success
of synthetic biology will be the development of standardized biological parts
that can be reliably combined as modules and adapted as necessary. To become
universally accepted and used, every element of designed parts and systems,
databases, measurement units, and scalable systems must be compatible, and
compatibility must extend across scales and levelsfrom molecular- to tissue-
level, from lab to lab, from one operating system to another, and across regions

13
Darlene Solomon, Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer, Agilent
Technologies.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Opportunities and Challenges Emerging via a Networked World 31

and countries. At present, Kitney noted, the modularity of biological parts is

considerably limited, in part because of the complex interactions that occur
among biological parts.
Kitney stressed the need to increase understanding of how biosynthetic
pathways function and to find new ways to test and control the interactions of
synthesized biological material. Karmella Haynes suggested that a first step to
achieving this goal could be a requirement that a rigorous, standardized charac-
terization accompany any biological part entered in a registry. In addition to a
common language, Haynes continued, the success of the field will depend on
standardized descriptive protocols. She suggested, for example, that each de-
scription for a biological part listed in a registry or database should include a
common set of information.
Solomon commented that historically, timing the development of stand-
ards has been a balancing act for developing technologieswhether to stay open
in terms of standards, because the knowledge base is still developing, or to de-
velop convergent standards that improve efficiency. Marc Salit, Research Chem-
ist, National Institute of Standards and Technology, reminded participants that
existing standards institutes can serve as a resource and provide methodologies
for the development of interoperable modular parts. A possible place to begin,
he added, would be in areas with the potential for commercialization.
Measurement. The accurate measure of systems performance is an im-
mediate and pressing challenge in synthetic biology. In Washington, DC, Peter
Carr, Senior Researcher, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Lincoln La-
boratory, noted that reliable measurement standards are a critical factor in a
biologists ability to replicate biological parts. The biology community, he
said, is still learning to think like engineers, for whom measurement of sys-
tems performance is standard. Measurements of the performance of the syn-
thetic part or system and of the individual parts that contribute to the systems
performance are required. It would be useful, Carr noted, to create cells and
sensors that perform logical operations as well as those that can report back on
the performance of the operation. The ability to receive feedback from a sys-
tem is crucial, Carr observed, especially in the context of living cells, given
their range of complexity.
Carrs co-panelists agreed that it is essential to have an infrastructure ca-
pable of supporting multiple types of metrics including:

The number of parts, their designs, their construction, and the extent of
their utilization
The actions and results of tools used for computing, scanning, and com-
munication
The interconnective capacity of biological parts across scales and across
national borders

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

32 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

Reshma Shetty, Co-founder, Ginkgo BioWorks, encouraged participants to

take advantage of measurement improvements currently in use in gene sequencing
and mass spectrometry. She also suggested several measurement priorities: acquir-
ing measurements of all engineered cell strains; focusing on 100 important cell
proteins; designing a stress test chassis explicitly for measurement; and rede-
signing cells for measurement.
In the future, global acceptance of the units of measure will be as vital as
the measurements themselves. Franois Kps, Research Director, Centre
Nacionale de Recherche Scientifique (National Center for Scientific Research),
noted the importance of developing standardization, akin to the universality of
the chemical formula for water, to ensure that global collaboration flourishes.
Cost Control for Scale-up. Since the early days of genome sequencing,
DNA sequencing costs have fallen dramatically. The sequencing of a genome
can now be completed within two weeks at a cost of less than $10,000. The pro-
ject to sequence the human genome, by contrast, took 13 years and cost $27
billion.14 These decreases in time and cost coupled with early successes in the
production of commercially important chemicals (such as biofuels, agricultural
products, and medicines) fueled industry investment in synthetic biology.
However, cost-effective production of industrial chemicals requires engi-
neering of highly efficient microbial strains.15 The development of a viable
product containing synthetic parts, however, remains a herculean effort, said
Endy, who observed that it cost $25 million to genetically engineer E. coli and
yeast to produce the chemical precursor to the antimalarial drug artemisinin.
At this early stage of its development, synthetic biology generally has a
modestly scaled production capability and a decentralized structure with devel-
opments taking place in multiple locations, Solomon said. For fields such as
specialty chemicals, pharmaceuticals, and agriculture, or for fuel production in
developing economies, the current scale is adequate, she said. In the case of re-
newable energy in more mature economies, however, large-scale production
may require government subsidies. Professor Kitney suggested that the cost
problem may be solved as biological parts proliferate and become more refined.
Tools and Software. Improved data-gathering tools, software, and hardware
are as important to the development of synthetic biology as improvement in the
modularity of biological partsespecially if the ultimate object is industrializa-
tion.16 A number of labs and researchers have developed online tools for use in
developing and working with synthetic biology products. These include DNA

14
The Human Genome Project, completed in 2003, was a 13-year collaborative project
coordinated by the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health, with
contributions from the U.K.s Wellcome Trust as well as China, France, Germany, Japan,
and others. The project's goals included identifying and storing information on all the
genes in human DNA. Analysis of the data is continuing. See http://www.ornl.gov/sci/
techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml, accessed March 13, 2013.
15
Lishan Zhao, Head of Enzymology and Protein Engineering, Amyris, Inc.
16
Kitney.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Opportunities and Challenges Emerging via a Networked World 33

assembly programs, applications for modeling protein structures, and biological

parts registries.17 However, the growth of synthetic biology is inhibited by a lack
of field specific computational tools, e.g., computer-assisted design and modeling
tools18 as well as automated processes that can reduce the cost of synthesizing
biological parts.19 There is also a need for software that allows communication
among multiple complex datasets,20 and for linked software/hardware systems that
can feed information back into biological models.21 Other enabling technologies
include faster, cheaper DNA sequencing technologies, improved software for de-
signing and simulating biological systems and circuits, and improved measure-
ment technologies.22

Regulatory Challenges

Because the boundaries of synthetic

It isnt just that the future of synthet-
biology are so fluid, the field may not fit ic biology is uncertaintheres no
neatly within existing regulatory frame- way we can know the future. So
works. In the United States, under the cur- regulatory regimes must be open,
rent regulatory framework for biotechnol- adaptive, and dynamic.
ogy, the Department of Agriculture, Food
and Drug Administration, and Environ- Nikolas Rose, Professor of
Sociology and Head of the
mental Protection Agency are responsible Department of Social Science,
for oversight of genetically modified ani- Health and Medicine, Kings
mals, plants, and microbes. Recently, poli- College, London
cymakers have begun to focus on the regu-
lation of synthetic biology and are considering whether and how current regula-
tions apply to the products of synthetic biology. In the U.K. and China, legislators
have developed strategic plans designed to advance synthetic biology.
Recognizing that science tends to move forward much faster than policy
formation, early attention to issues associated with the governance and regulation
of synthetic biology seem to be particularly appropriate. Patrick Boyle, Postdoc-
toral Fellow, Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, suggested that
it would be best for synthetic biologists to continue their efforts to engage with
regulatory bodies now, before the number of products becomes overwhelming.23

17
OpenWetWare, a project to promote information-sharing among researchers in biology
and biological engineering. Online at http://openwetware.org/wiki/Synthetic_Biology:Tools,
accessed Marcy 27, 2013.
18
Cesar Rodriguez, Senior Research Scientist, Autodesk.
19
Todd Peterson, Vice President, Synthetic Biology R&D, Life Technologies Corpora-
tion.
20
Peterson.
21
Reshma Shetty, Co-founder, Ginkgo Bioworks.
22
Syntheticbiology.org. Online at http://syntheticbiology.org/FAQ.html, accessed March
27, 2013.
23
There are numerous examples of engagement between those representing the inter-
ests of the synthetic biology community and regulatory bodies. The U.S. Department of

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

34 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

Boyle suggested that one approach might be to build legislation around prototypes,
such as synthesized molecules shown to be safe.

Intellectual Property Issues

Questions about Property. The concept of constructing new biological

parts raises questions about whether rights to parts should be privately owned,
how the parts should be registered, whether they should be patented, and how
different intellectual property and sharing arrangements will affect advances and
innovation in synthetic biology.
Patent law is not uniform globally. At the Shanghai symposium, Gordon
Zong, Managing Director of The Office of Technology Transfer at Shanghai
Institutes for Biological Sciences and Adjunct Professor at Shanghai Intellectual
Property Research Center, noted that in China, intellectual property law is not
well developed and that patent considerations have not played a large role in the
early stages of developments in synthetic biology. Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss,
Pauline Newman Professor of Law, New York University School of Law, noted
that, in the case of biological materials, U.S. intellectual property laws present a
kind of double-edged sword. On one hand, she said, knowledge about the struc-
ture and function of biological elements such as proteins and genes is valuable.
Conferring patent or copyright protection can encourage both investment and
innovation. On the other hand, she observed, securing a patent may be a lengthy
and costly process wherein the benefits of securing a patent do not justify the
associated investment of time and capital.
In the United States, the pace of biological discoveries has tested intellec-
tual property statutes. A watershed event was the 1980 Supreme Court case Di-
amond v. Chakrabarty. In this case, the Court ruled that a live, human-made
micro-organism is patentable subject matter. This opened the door to the pa-
tenting of modified plants and animals (although, under the 13th Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution, human beings cannot be patented). Individual genes are
eligible for certain patent protections. Today, about 20 percent of human genes
(some 4,000 genes) are mentioned in patent claims.24 Speaking in Washington,
DC, Arti Rai, Elvin R. Latty Professor of Law, Duke University School of Law,

Health and Human Services, for instance, developed its 2010 Screening Framework
Guidance for Synthetic Double-Stranded DNA Providers with input from, among others,
the International Gene Synthesis Consortium, the International Association for Synthetic
Biology, and the International Council for the Life Sciences.
24
The patent claim describes the scope of protection granted in a patent. The holder of
a gene patent does not own the gene, as is widely believedthat is prohibitedbut can
claim man-made or isolated DNA molecules as well as novel ways to use them. Patent
infringement is not a risk in whole gene sequencing in general, but may be a risk where a
sequence being used corresponds to a portion of a human gene. See Holman, Christopher,
2012. Debunking the myth that whole-genome sequencing infringes thousands of gene
patents, Nature Biotechnology 30(3): 240-244. March.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Opportunities and Challenges Emerging via a Networked World 35

stated that around 60,000 patents have been issued for DNA-related innovations.
Co-panelist Daniel Kevles, Stanley Woodward Professor of History, Yale Uni-
versity, observed that the problem for synthetic biology is that the patent system,
in granting broad rights to a patent holder, may, as a result, limit and prohibit
researchers and the publics full access to the potential benefits of the field.
Linda Kahl, Legal Scholar, Department of Bioengineering, Stanford Uni-
versity, observed that the U.S. patent system was not designed to handle the
complex intellectual property issues that arise in the practice of synthetic biolo-
gy. The practice of synthetic biology, she continued, entails three major process-
es: abstraction (developing low-complexity biological parts, devices, and sys-
tems); decoupling (obtaining specific DNA sequences that are distinct from the
natural DNA design); and standardization (uniform composition and function of
biological parts). She noted that these processes can enable non-biologists to
generate organisms, such as a bacterium that destroys tumors, without needing
special knowledge about DNA and genetics. She observed, however, that within
the patent system, each process can be hindered by high costs and the threat of
patent infringement:

Abstraction: The availability of simple biological components allows

non-biologists to generate organisms, such as tumor-destroying bacte-
ria, without needing special knowledge about DNA or its functions.
Registries provide information or materials, but conducting freedom-to-
operate searches (searches to determine whether a product infringes
claims on patents already issued) can run into thousands or tens of
thousands of dollars. Royalty stacking (when a single product may po-
tentially infringe on multiple patents) may add costs that make it cost-
prohibitive to market a product.
Decoupling: Specialists can now develop software to design specific
genetic sequences that can then be ordered from DNA synthesis com-
paniesexponentially increasing the speed of DNA production and
testing. However, in producing the genetic material, synthesis compa-
nies may inadvertently infringe on patented sequences.
Standardization geometrically increases the quantity of parts being
produced, distributed, and re-used. Synthetic biologists are developing
standards for the physical composition of parts, but there are many
types of standardsfunctional standards, for instancethat may be
subject to patent hold-ups if an uncooperative third-party patent holder
were to refuse to issue a non-exclusive license to use, for example, a
standard bacterial promoter that measures and reports on the relative
activity of a sample promoter.

Thus, a major question for researchers is whether synthetic biology can thrive
within existing intellectual property systems or whether a new national or inter-
national intellectual property framework is needed. In synthetic biology, the

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

36 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

resolution of intellectual property issues is especially important given the num-

ber of synthetic parts already developed (over 10,000 in the iGEM Registry
alone) and the strong interest in eventually commercializing these products.
Over the course of the three symposia, Professor Dreyfuss, Nita Farahany,
Associate Professor of Law and Associate Professor of Philosophy, Vanderbilt
University, and Mark Lemley, William H. Neukom Professor of Law, Stanford
University, suggested several ownership alternatives:

Registering new parts in a searchable clearinghouse that provides par-

tial or conditional exemptions for information providers, intermediar-
ies, users, and contributors
Depositing standard parts in an information commons available to
members who share costs and profits
Research and educational patent exemptions
Copyrights and utility model (shorter-term) patents
Petty patents, which are regulated but do not require patent examination
Obligations for funders and investors to make resources available
through non-exclusive licensing
Development of software tools for the patent environment.

Keep in mind a vision wed like to strive towards: imagine creating a collection of
genetic functions that were free to use and composefree of fear of liability, limi-
tation of uses, and transaction costs.

Linda Kahl, Legal Scholar, Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University

Inclusiveness

Synthetic biology is a hybrid field that grew out of and feeds back into a
range of disciplines. Continued inclusiveness is essential for the fields continued
growth.
Engagement with the Business, Regulatory, and Policy-Making Communi-
ties. Many symposia participants emphasized that continued investment and buy-
in by industry and policymakers is essential for the development of synthetic biol-
ogy. At the three symposia, presenters representing petroleum, microchip, and
genetic synthesis organizations, business collectives, and national and regional
trade organizations described potential alliances and strategies that might strength-
en synthetic biology.
In Washington, DC, Lionel Clarke, Biodomain Global Strategic Programme
Manager, Shell Global Solutions, observed that industry views synthetic biology
as a promising field with the potential to offer solutions to many problems. Unfor-
tunately, Clarke observed, at present large companies only have the infrastructure

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Opportunities and Challenges Emerging via a Networked World 37

for existing technologies. Readying synthetic biology for the market, he said,
would require simultaneous progress along many frontsdevelopment of bench-
marks, partnerships with industries, capital investment, and proof of effective-
nessto achieve a technological push met by a market pull.
Ian Fotheringham, President, Ingenza, observed that, while many large
companies are interested in using biological tools, they have shared concerns
about high costs, feasibility, and reliability. Fotheringham suggested addressing
these concerns by furnishing evidence of the reliability of a given product, de-
fining approaches that increase the speed of production while reducing costs and
risks, and ensuring a clear agreement about the allocation of intellectual proper-
ty. Furthermore, he suggested that managers need to build interdisciplinary
teams and network actively to find new users and remain current on developing
trends.
Engaging the Public. At the symposia, considerable attention was paid to
involving a larger community of stakeholders in discussions about synthetic
biology. One reason for paying attention, said Jaydee Hanson, Policy Director,
International Center for Policy Assessment, is that the public has a right to know
about publicly funded research. Hanson called for a moratorium on the use of
synthetic biology to change human genetic makeup and cited several possible
dangers inherent synthetic biology, e.g. the unintended effects of exposure to
synthetic organisms that have not been proven to be safe; potential misuse, in-
equitable distribution of beneficial products from the technology; and a lack of
clarity about how to maintain public health and worker safety.
An important part of any discussion
Something we dont always appre-
with the public includes addressing con- ciate is the power of convening
cerns about biosafety and biosecurity. working cooperatively and leaving
There is an excellent opportunity, Solo- institutional baggage at the door.
mon observed, for a global collaboration
to improve communication about synthet- Robert Wells, former Head,
Biotechnology Unit, Directorate for
ic biology. She noted that a bad outcome Science, Technology and Industry,
for an engineered biological product can Organisation for Economic Co-
quickly go viral but observed that the operation and Development
Internet is equally effective as a tool for
spreading news about the benefits of synthetic biology.
Laurie Zoloth, Professor of Medical Humanities & Bioethics and Religion
and Director, Center for Bioethics, Science and Society, Northwestern University,
suggested six points to consider on the ethics of science and synthetic biology:

What methodologies and paradigms should the field adopt?

Is there a moral problem with creating life?
What ideas of justice would work for the field?
When are the risks that will arise morally justifiable?

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

38 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

How can we interpret and address moral and religious concepts on what
constitutes life, safety, and social values?
How will the field be regulated?

Synthetic biologists recognized early the importance of public acceptance in

preparing to commercialize synthetic biology products. Experiences with the
European rejection of genetically modified food, for example, illustrate the per-
ils of not involving the public often and early in discussions about emerging
technologies. Since the public pays for a large proportion of research funding
and is, ultimately, the beneficiary of the research or the consumer of products
that result (and sometimes the bearer of the burdens of technologies gone
wrong) many symposia speakers agreed that the public must be included in dia-
logues about synthetic biology, its limitations, and its future.
Professor Qiu noted the urgency of having stakeholder input and true part-
nerships with the public, nongovernmental organizations, and the mediawith
mutual learning on all sides. Besides discussing the balance of risks and bene-
fits, Qiu said, partners should discuss ethical issuessuch as how to ensure that
synthetic biology benefits a whole society (rather than benefitting a select few).
Joy Zhang, BIOS Centre, London School of Economics and Franoise Roure,
Chair, Committee on Technologies and Society, French High Council for Indus-
try, Energy and Technologies, discussed to the effects of including sociologists
and ethicists in discussions on synthetic biology. These are fields, she observed,
that can help in discussions about the intersections between science and justice,
the morality of creating life, and the moral obligations of science and society in
the metamorphosis of technology.

Preparing for a Networked World

Advancement in synthetic biology requires more than collaboration: it re-

quires practitioners who are prepared to maximize the benefits of working
across disciplines. While this implies changes in education, it may not necessari-
ly suggest the need for a new degree curriculum in synthetic biology. Gautum
Mukunda, Assistant Professor in the Organizational Behavior Unit, Harvard
Business School, suggested that one model might be a kind of networked curric-
ulum in which students of various disciplines work together and learn to under-
stand both the fundamental principles of several fields and the strengths that
each discipline can bring to new research. A skill set would likely extend be-
yond the natural sciencesfor example to include the social and behavioral sci-
encesand students might have the opportunity to work with experienced men-
tors and researchers from various countries. Foundational skills for young
researchers might also include an understanding of the regulatory environment
and the ability to assemble an effective team.

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Opportunities and Challenges Emerging via a Networked World 39

The iGEM model, with its emphasis on projects that may yield real-
world applications, has worked well. The current generation of students may
have a more ready understanding of how science can affect the world around
them. However, symposia participants suggested that other modelsperhaps
along the lines of the competitions run by engineering schools25might enrich
the field. These included:

A program that features a course combining engineering design with

communication and is taught by faculty in both specialties, a model
used at Northwestern University, that might be appropriate for graduate
and postdoctoral students.26
The Engineering Research Center at the National Science Foundation
(NSF), which provides on-campus centers for cross-disciplinary exper-
imental research. The centers expose students to the nature and prob-
lems of cross-disciplinary research and provide opportunities to learn
from experts in industry and academia.27
The NSFs Ideas Factory Sandpit, which fosters high-risk, high-reward
research that would otherwise not receive support. This model facili-
tates interdisciplinary research on global problems and has led to col-
laborative multi-country projects.28

Several symposia participants endorsed the importance of agreeing on

milestones to help guide the development of synthetic biology. Dr. Clarke said
that as part of a move toward a market, roadmaps can support development of an
emerging field by simultaneously addressing goals and synergies. A roadmap
can identify short- and long-term goals and help create communities that are
focused on those goals. However, too close a focus could undermine innovation,
he added. The ideal roadmap is not a straitjacket but a marker showing targets to
address but also allows shifts to other areas as the knowledge base grows, or as
breakthroughs occur, said Guo-ping Zhao. Richard Johnson suggested that the
best way to advance synthetic biology would be to produce a consensus-based
global roadmap. While doing so will be complicated, there are numerous exam-
ples of roadmaps that address aspects of this complexitysuch as those of the
U.S. National Weather Service, the National Aeronautics and Space Administra-
tion, and the Cloud Computing industry.29 The urgency of engaging multiple

25
Karmella Haynes, Assistant Professor, School of Biological and Health Systems
Engineering, Arizona State University.
26
Michael Jewett, Assistant Professor of Chemical and Biological Engineering,
Northwestern University.
27
Sohi Rastegar, Acting Division Director, Office of Emerging Frontiers in Research
and Innovation, Directorate for Engineering, National Science Foundation.
28
Rastegar.
29
Johnson, Richard A., 2012. Enabling the Synthetic Biology Commons: The Role of
a Strategic Global Roadmap (draft).

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

40 Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century

stakeholders, noted Johnson, comprises in itself a way to enrich and enhance the
field and its potential as more and more partners share their expertise.

[Synthetic Biology] is a very exciting enabling technology. It [has] the potential to

drive a new industrial revolution for the 21st century [,but] we,both in Britain and
across the world, have a responsibility for the right regulatory environment which
enables rapid scientific progress whilst ensuring public safety and confidence
around ethical issues.

David Willetts, Minister for Universities and Science, U.K. Government

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Appendixes

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Appendix A

London Symposium Agenda

43

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Append
dix A 45

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

46 Positionin ology to Meet thhe Challenges of the 21st Centuury

ng Synthetic Bio

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Append
dix A 47

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

48 Positionin ology to Meet thhe Challenges of the 21st Centuury

ng Synthetic Bio

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Appendix B

Shanghai Symposium Agenda

49

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Append
dix B 51

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

52 Positionin ology to Meet thhe Challenges of the 21st Centuury

ng Synthetic Bio

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Append
dix B 53

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

54 Positionin ology to Meet thhe Challenges of the 21st Centuury

ng Synthetic Bio

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Appendix C

Washington, DC Symposium Agenda

55

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Append
dix C 57

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

58 Positionin ology to Meet thhe Challenges of the 21st Centuury

ng Synthetic Bio

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Append
dix C 59

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

60 Positionin ology to Meet thhe Challenges of the 21st Centuury

ng Synthetic Bio

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Append
dix C 61

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

62 Positionin ology to Meet thhe Challenges of the 21st Centuury

ng Synthetic Bio

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Append
dix C 63

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Positioning Synthetic Biology to Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century: Summary Report of a Six Academies Symposium Series

Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.