ISSN: 0972-7566 Vol. 25 | No.

3 | November 2023

BIOTECHNOLOGY
ASIAN

AND DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW
Special Issue on
Biotechnology for Bioeconomy

Editorial Introduction
Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits
Pramod Khandekar and Prasanta Kumar Ghosh

Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review

Radhika Hedaoo

Sustainable Biofuels and Carbon Footprints

Arpit Srivastava, Piyush Kant Rai and Kamlesh Choure

Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology to Produce Environmentally

Sustainable Biotechnology Products
Punit Kumar and Archana

Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations :

An Indian Perspective
Shiv Kant Shukla and Susmita Shukla
 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Editorial Board
Editor
Sachin Chaturvedi Director General, RIS

Managing Editor
K. Ravi Srinivas Consultant, RIS
Assistant Editor
Amit Kumar Assistant Professor, RIS

International Editorial Advisory Board

Aggrey Ambali Director, NEPAD-African Union Development Agency (AUDA)

Nares Damrogchai Chief Executive Officer, Genepeutic Bio, Bangkok, Thailand

Vibha Dhawan Director General, TERI, New Delhi, India
Reynaldo V. Ebora Executive Director, Philippine Council for Advanced Science and Technology Research
and Development (PCASTRD), The Philippines
Jikun Huang Professor and Director, Centre for Chinese Agricultural Policy (CCAP), China
Dongsoon Lim Dong-EUI University, College of Commerce and Economics, South Korea
William G. Padolina President, National Academy of Science and Technology, Philippines
Balakrishna Pisupati Head of Biodiversity, Land and Governance Programme, United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya
Bambang Purwantara Director, Southeast Asian Regional Centre for Tropical Biology, Indonesia
Sudip K. Rakshit Canada Research Chair - Bioenergy and Biorefining, Lakehead University, Canada
T. P. Rajendran Former Assistant Director General, ICAR and Adjunct Fellow, RIS, India
S. R. Rao Vice-President (Research, Innovation & Development), Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth, Puducherry
and Former Senior Adviser, DBT, India
M S Swaminathan Founder Chairman, M S Swaminathan Research Foundation, Chennai, India
Halla Thorsteinsdóttir Director, Small Globe Inc and Adjunct Professor at the University of Toronto, Canada

This journal is abstracted/indexed in CAB International, Scopus, Elsevier Database and EBSCO host™ database.
ABDR is also listed in the UGC-CARE List of Approved Journals.
The editorial correspondence should be addressed to the Managing Editor, Asian Biotechnology and
Development Review, Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS). Zone IV-B,
Fourth Floor, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003, India. Telephones: 24682177-80.
Fax: 91-11-24682173-74. E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.ris.org.in

Copyright RIS, 2023.

RNI Registration No. DELENG/2002/8824.
The views expressed in the Asian Biotechnology and Development Review are those of the authors and not necessarily
those of the RIS or the organisations they belong to.
Asian
Biotechnology
and
Development Review
Asian
Biotechnology
and
Development Review
Vol. 25 No. 3 November 2023 ISSN: 0972-7566

Special Issue on
Biotechnology for Bioeconomy
Editorial Introduction..........................................................................................1

Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits .......5

Pramod Khandekar and Prasanta Kumar Ghosh

Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review....39

Radhika Hedaoo

Sustainable Biofuels and Carbon Footprints ...................................................61

Arpit Srivastava, Piyush Kant Rai and Kamlesh Choure

Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology to Produce Environmentally Sustainable

Biotechnology Products ...................................................................................77
Punit Kumar and Archana

Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations : An Indian

Perspective......................................................................................................101
Shiv Kant Shukla and Susmita Shukla
 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review
Vol. 25, No. 3, pp 1-4
© 2023, RIS.

Editorial Introduction
Kashyap Kumar Dubey* and Krishna Ravi Srinivas**

Welcome to the third issue of Volume 25! The response to the last issue,
the Special Issue on ‘Bioeconomy for the Common Good’ was excellent!

Bioeconomy is an emerging cutting-edge economic sector that usages

of biological resources and processes to provide goods and services in a
sustainable manner. Industry 4.0 has been recognized as a key component
in the age of sustainable development for the bioeconomy. The adoption
and implementation of Industry 4.0 in the bioeconomy area in the context
of Asia is a major challenge.

As we are in Fourth Industrial Revolution, or Industry 4.0, a confluence

of technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), the Internet of Things
(IoT), and robotics are reshaping the landscape of biotechnology industries.
Yet, amidst this digital resurgence, another transformative force is also
gaining momentum i.e., the bioeconomy. This emerging paradigm, which
leverages biological resources to meet societal needs across various sectors,
is not merely a complementary element but a crucial pillar for sustainable
growth in the age of Industry 4.0.

The bioeconomy represents an economic system based on the

sustainable production and conversion of renewable biological resources
into a range of value-added products, including food, feed, bio-based
products, and bioenergy. It encompasses a diverse array of sectors, from
agriculture, forestry, and fisheries to biotechnology, bio-based industries,
and beyond. While the digital innovations of Industry 4.0 are revolutionizing
manufacturing, supply chains, and services, the bioeconomy offers a
complementary pathway to address pressing challenges related to resource
scarcity, environmental degradation, and climate change.

The Bioeconomy of India has risen from USD 70.2 billion to USD
100 billion in 2022 and India is set to achieve the target of USD 150
billionBioeconomy in 2025. The growing market of bio-based products
will reach USD 270-300 Billion by the year 2030 (India Bioeconomy
Report, 2022).

* Professor, School of Biotechnology, JNU. Email: [email protected]

** Managing Editor, ABDR and Consultant, RIS. Email: [email protected]
2 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

One of the most compelling synergies between Industry 4.0 and the
bioeconomy lies in the realm of sustainable production and consumption.
Upcoming technologies like AI, machine learning, and IoT can optimize
resource usage, zero waste, and enhance the efficiency of bio-based
processes. For instance, precision agriculture systems equipped with sensors,
drones, and data analytics can enable precise monitoring and management
of crops, which will enhance yields and lower environmental impact.
Similarly, biorefinery processes utilize advanced biotechnologies processes
and operations to convert agricultural residues, underutilized biomass, and
algae into biofuels, biochemicals, and biomaterials efficiently with a low
carbon footprint. Moreover, the integration of digital technologies and
biological sciences is unlocking unprecedented opportunities for innovation
and diversification across the bioeconomy value chain. Meanwhile,
bioinformatics tools and computational models facilitate the rapid screening,
optimization, and scale-up of bio-processes, accelerating the development
and commercialization of bio-based solutions. Bioeconomy is fostering
cross-sectoral collaboration and knowledge exchange between the digital
and biological innovation ecosystems is essential to co-create integrated
solutions, scale innovations, and unlock new market opportunities.
Ecosystem in India with respect to Bioeconomy
According to Indian Bioeconomy Report 2023, the Bt cotton production for
the year 2022 has showcased a consistent economic output of approximately
USD 28 million daily within the BioAgri sector. In 2022, the Bioeconomy
in the Diagnostic Sector has improved by 1.5-fold from 2018, contributing
to the yearly output of USD 10.8 billion. The Biopharma vaccine market
adds up to USD 1.16 billion monthly to the Bioeconomy with an annual
production of about 2 billion doses. Accompanying the Biopharma vaccine,
Biopharma Therapeutics also showcases its strong contribution with an
annual value of USD 6.8 billion in the bioeconomy. Since enzymes play a
crucial role in bioindustries, such as poultry, and aqua, they have contributed
around USD 17 billion. India’s ethanol production has doubled since 2020
and contributes up to USD 26 billion.

Indian bioeconomy has contributed more than USD 11 billion to the

national GDP. India’s bioeconomy has shown an impressive rise of 29
percent in the year 2022 with USD 137 billion. Biotech startups have also
shown a remarkable surge of 23 per cent making a cumulative count of
6,755 biotech startups. Startups are categorized into various activities such
as healthcare, manufacturing chemicals and products thereof, business
services, trading, agriculture, and research and development.
 Editorial Introduction 9

The incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI) into the pharmaceutical

business holds enormous promise for crafting a brighter future in healthcare
and beyond. People turned to online platforms for their healthcare needs
as a result of the COVID-19 epidemic, which has hastened the use of
e-pharma services. AI can reveal previously overlooked patterns and insights
in healthcare data from sources such as clinical trials, drug formulations,
and feedback from medical equipment or patient apps. The ability of AI
to analyze such huge amounts of data allows academics and healthcare
practitioners to make more educated judgments, discover new correlations,
and potentially locate novel treatments or approaches that would have gone
unreported otherwise.

Despite advances in AI in different fields, there is still potential for

advancement in the use of AI and machine learning in medical sales and
healthcare professionals in India. Still, a large number of companies are at
the beginners level of AI execution. The core agenda of the top AI companies
in India includes providing cost-cutting solutions for healthcare, cutting
down drug development costs, and making a hands-free interaction with
people. AI will undoubtedly assist medical professionals in comprehending
diseases better and faster.

In this Special Issue on ‘Biotechnology for Bioeconomy’, there are

five articles. These five articles have covered a wide canvass related to
Bioeconomy. The article by Pramod Khandekar and Prasanta Kumar
Ghosh, ‘Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple
Benefits’, gives an excellent account of the driving factors and components
of bioeconomy in different countries that may have a determining impact
on the development of the regions and on the kinds of technologies and
industries coming up in the short, medium and long terms. The authors
have also argued for the setting-up of the global forums on a precautionary
principle for an undisputed sound resolution, in light of the elements of
ethics and social acceptance issues, including rights to choose and legal
provisions. The second article, ‘Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable
Food Systems’, by Radhika Hedaoo, explores the utility of bio enzymes in
food production and processing and in improving food quality, nutritional
value, and safety and its role in the environmental impact. The author also
traces the latest technological developments and innovations in the food
industry and argues that bioenzymes would enable food industry to become
sustainable, accessible, and move towards becoming carbon neutral. In the
third article, ‘Sustainable Biofuels and Carbon Footprints’, the authors,
Arpit Srivastava, Piyush Kant Rai and Kamlesh Choure, have discussed
the significance of biofuel, the energy demand and supply statistics and
4 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

how biofuels are going to play a very important role in uplifting the global
bioeconomy. The authors have also pointed out the concern regarding the
carbon footprint of biofuels. In the fourth article, authors Punit Kumar
and Archana, have discussed the role of Industry 4.0 in biotechnology to
produce environmentally sustainable biotechnology products. The fifth and
final article, ‘Significance of Technology Transfer Offices in Strengthening
Technology Transfer Ecosystem and Translation of Life Sciences Innovation
into Commercialization for Rapid Industrial Growth: Indian Perspectives’,
by Shiv Kant Shukla and Susmita Shukla explores the role and importance
of Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs) by illustrating some of the successful
institutions and models. The authors have also highlighted the need for
having a larger network of professional TTOs, harmonised policy for
managing IP and technology and a robust tech-transfer system which will
help all the stakeholders leading to creation of a large number of start-ups,
job-creations and, overall, in building the robust innovation and tech-transfer
ecosystem for industrial growth.
Future Prospects
Industry 4.0 offers a unique opportunity to reimagine, reinvent, and
reshape our bio-based economies. However, it needs strategic investment,
and collaborative action across sectors, disciplines, and borders.
Together, we can harness the power of the bioeconomy and Industry
4.0 to build a more sustainable, inclusive, and prosperous future for all.
 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review
Vol. 25, No.3, pp 5-38
© 2023, RIS.

Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different

Strategies, Multiple Benefits
Pramod Khandekar* and Prasanta Kumar Ghosh**

Abstract: The steering and operative aspects and components of bioeconomy

in different countries that may have a determining impact on the development
of the regions and on the kinds of technologies and industries coming up in the
short, medium and long terms have been discussed. The flavour of bioeconomy
directions and their drivers as conceived in different regions have been touched
upon in monetary terms over the future years, based on available data and
information. The emphasis for future development in the biotech sectors
for pushing up bioeconomy is different in different regions. The stress on
mastering biotechnological capabilities is also dissimilar. The developments
in bioeconomy plans and programmes in the European Union, UK, USA,
China, India, Japan, Brazil, ASEAN countries, South Korea and Russia have
been profiled. Australian plans and programmes in synthetic biology have
been included. Harnessing bioeconomy is anticipated to enable more recycling
of wastes and promotion of environmental sustainability. Advancement of
bioeconomy is anticipated to elevate the health, longevity and living standards
of people. Contributions to global GDP are anticipated to be substantial from
bioeconomy activities; the horizons of more effective newer biotechnologies
are appearing fast in certain bioeconomy countries. Advancement in wealth
creation by developing products involving the manipulation of genes, cell
lines, and natural life forms has strong societal acceptance issues. The
elements of ethics and social acceptance issues, including rights to choose and
legal provisions, need to be worked upon through united global forums on a
precautionary principle for an undisputed sound resolution.
Keywords: Bioeconomy, Green economic activities, Paris Agreement,
Sustainable development goals, Synthetic biology

Introduction
Bioeconomy refers to economic activities emanating through plans,
actions, and activities involving extensive use of biotechnology for the
production of biomass, energy and a wide range of other goods and services,
especially in the areas of agriculture, healthcare, chemicals and energy
production and distribution sectors. The activities also include multiple
efficient recycling methods of materials generated through human activities.
Green economic activities are promoted to resist the damaging effects and
*
Society for Biotechnology Promoters of India, New Delhi. Email: [email protected]
**Managing Partner, Sompradip Publishers and Consultants, New Delhi (corresponding author)
6 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

consequences of climate change emanating from human activities. Green

economic activities imply and express occupation and income-driven by
investment into economic activities that promote reduced carbon emissions
and pollution, prevent loss of biodiversity, and increase resource usage
efficiency. Bioeconomy is not yet a fixed concept all over the world but is
accepted to be an economy, driven by knowledge-based production methods
that involve utilisation of biological resources and biological principles to
sustainably deliver goods and services over multiple economic sectors.
The concept of bioeconomy revolves around harnessing the potential of
renewable biological resources derived from both land and sea, including
crops, forests, marine life, animals, and microorganisms. These resources
are leveraged to create essential commodities such as food, materials, and
energy. Moreover, the bioeconomy taps into the largely untapped reservoir
of value within vast quantities of biological waste and residual materials.
Its primary objective is to foster sustainable development and promote
circular practices. Specifically, it embraces the core principles of the circular
economy, which encompass reusing, repairing, and recycling materials, thus
reducing overall waste generation and its environmental impact.1,2 Countries
are making use of bioeconomy in their territories emphasising strategies
that provide more cutting-edge advantages to them. Strategies taken by
countries are linked to their biotechnological development and progress.
Consequently, there are observable distinct differences in strategies and
action plans among countries as biotechnological progress and capabilities
are at different levels of advancement.
Certain identified pathways towards the monitoring of sustainable
bioeconomy include economic aspects linked to the GDP, investment,
increase in trade and services, employment generation and job creation etc.;
socioeconomic aspects linked to R&D spending and intellectual property
generation, income inequality rationalisation, food security, health security,
energy security, gender equity in employment, education and training of
citizens etc.; and environmental aspects hovering around sustainable use
of natural resources, biodiversity conservation, reduction in the emission
of greenhouse gasses, etc. Bioscience-related strategies include the use of
both conventional and modern biotechnological inventions and discoveries.

The ill effects of climate change from human activities have started
becoming vivid in many parts of the world. Climate change refers to a
change in the pattern of climate, which is traceable and ascribable directly
or indirectly to human activities. There has been much increase in the
greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere from human activities, resulting
in the trapping of heat and an increase in the overall temperature of the
global climate. If, therefore, mammoth actions are not initiated fast by the
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 7

people, the future of human existence would get from bad to worse. The
threat from climate change is real and therefore, to take actions to move
towards environment-friendly economy is not only a necessary but a core
responsibility. Sustainable bioeconomy activities and strategies include
actions towards the reversal of ill-effects of climate change.

It was being increasingly realised after the discovery of recombinant

DNA technology(r DNA) by Herbert Boyer and Stanley Cohen in 1973
and thereafter that the new science of manipulating the genes, and broadly
more understanding in the whole span of genomics in all life forms shall
enable the human kind to produce multiple substances of human use in
more greener ways. The first industrial use of r DNA based technology
usage was with the manufacture of human insulin. Recombinant DNA-
based human insulin was prepared for the first time in Genentech, USA by
David Goeddel and his team by expressing the A and B chains of insulin
in Escherichia coli, isolating the pure peptides and chemically combining
the two chains, followed by purification to get authentic human insulin.
The technology was procured by Elli Lily, USA from Genentech, and
the first commercial human insulin was authorised by the USFDA for
use (Quianzon and Cheikh 2012). This landmark invention ushered the
beginning of the use of r DNA-based technology worldwide. Multinational
companies(MNCs) got immensely interested to invest in genomics for it
was realised that understanding, identification and manipulation of genes
and profound greater knowledge in genomics were going to be the future for
multiple industries, including pharmaceuticals; agriculture, including food,
feed and fodder industry; industrial products such as enzymes, detergents,
biodegradable plastics, fibers etc.; and environment management issues.
Dominant MNCs, especially in the pharmaceutical sector; agribusiness
including horticulture and animal sciences; and chemical sector, started to
invest in molecular technologies and genomics thereafter (Enríquez 1998).

There were, however, apprehensions and skepticisms about the risks

emanating from the use of r DNA-based technologies, and therefore laws
and rules were established in every country to use the technologies under
precautionary principles. The use of recombinant DNA (rDNA) technology
for economic benefits began in 1973 when Herbert Boyer and Stanley Cohen
discovered that genetic material could be transferred directly to organisms
through non-sexual methods. Safety concerns arose, leading to the Asilomar
Conference in 1975. The conference emphasised the need for regulations,
transparency, and precautionary principles in research involving rDNA
technology and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In response to the
conference’s recommendations, India introduced Environment Protection
8 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Laws in 1986 and Rules in 1989 to address environmental safety and

human and animal health concerns related to rDNA-based technologies.
Additionally, the United Nations established an Ad Hoc Working Group on
Biological Diversity in 1988. This led to the Cartagena Protocol of Biosafety
in 2000, emphasizing the precautionary principle for the transboundary
movement and use of genetically modified substances, ensuring safety for
the environment and human health. India is a signatory to the Protocol, which
is followed by all signatory countries, while non-signatory countries assess
the safety of genetically modified substances within their own territories
using their own laws and protocols. For the transboundary movement
of living genetically modified organisms (LMOs), a global treaty was
established.3 Interestingly, most developed countries, including the USA,
Canada, countries in the European Union, Russia, Japan, Australia and South
Korea; developing countries such as China and India; and small countries
like Cuba had invested heavily in modern biotechnology, which resulted in
the emergence of multiple benefits in the invention and emergence of new
products and processes in medicines, agriculture including animal husbandry
and fisheries sector, and bio-industrial products. Europe had shown
apprehensions about the use of genetically modified seeds, and European
farmers remained behind in the use of LMOs from their own production.
Research in molecular biology resulted in the invention and advancement
of ‘omic’ technologies (Dai and Shen 2022) besides advancement in
nanotechnologies (Ghosh 2000). It started to become clear that multiple
techniques of recombinant DNA technology could also be used not only to
produce goods and services in a greener way but also to reverse several ill
effects of the deteriorating global climate.

In the meantime, intense human activities resulted in adverse global

climate change, making the environment from bad to worse over the years,
particularly due to the increase in emission of green gasses because of
excessive use of fossil fuels loss in biodiversity resulting from excessive
over- exploitation of living resources and deforestation endeavour;
overexploitation of ground water resources resulting in loss of land
productivity and the manifestation of food security issues; accumulation of
non-biodegradable wastes; and several other adversities. Such changes drew
the attention of the global community, and concerns were being voiced to
take remedial actions against such deteriorating climate changes.

Over a period of time, the need for remedial measures for preventing the
deterioration of global climate was being explored by a number of countries,
and a new economic paradigm was founded on the use and recycling of
biological resources by making use of the advances of modern biology
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 9

and biotechnology besides other congruent technological inputs. The new

paradigm evolved from the initial use of the term ‘biotechonomy’ in 1997
by Juan Enríquez and Rodrigo Martinez at the American Association for
the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Genomics Seminar.4 The term has
also been used later as ‘biobased economy’ and ‘bioeconomy’. Presently,
the term is widely used as ‘bioeconomy’ by most of the policy makers, all
over the world. Bioeconomy covers the whole activities, including biobased
non-food goods as well as food and feed.5
Methodology of the study
The information and data sources included in the paper are based on
retrieving data sets from scientific, technological and economic information
available on the internet at the web pages of different governments, scientific
and technological institutions, and other trustworthy sources. Google search
engine was used for collecting data. The authors have extensive hands-on
training and practical experience in multiple aspects of biological sciences
and technologies. They were involved in the planning, development,
execution and review of biotech projects in many areas in India.
Aims of Bioeconomy
The need for ensuring food, energy and health security for people all over
the world within a more sustainable natural environment in the midst of
a rising global population requires sustainable plans, policies, activities
and actions that can intercept, tackle and resolve these burning issues.
Activities within the ambit of bioeconomy are aimed at addressing these.
The environment is already over-exploited by multiple human activities and
has derogated considerably as a consequence, requiring reversal and repair.
The projects and tasks pursued under bioeconomy by countries as a new
vision of development are to essentially achieve sustainable development
goals (SDGs) and commitments under the global climate treaty, popularly
known as the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement (PA)6 is a treaty on
climate change, which was adopted by 196 countries at the UN Climate
Change Conference in Paris, France, on 12th December 2015. Through
this treaty, efforts would be made to limit global warming to 1.5°C by the
end of this century. Different countries have different strategies towards
working for SDGs.

While pursuing bioeconomy for societal benefits, another lately

developed term, namely circular economy, is often used. They both focus
on sustainability and the efficient use of resources, but they have different
primary areas of emphasis. Bioeconomy is like making the best use of
nature’s gifts, like plants and animals, to create valuable things while
10 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

taking care of the environment. It’s about using biological resources wisely.
While, circular economy, on the other hand, is like a big recycling and
waste-reduction program for everything we use, not just biological things.
It’s about using, reusing, and recycling as much as possible to cut down on
waste and pollution. While they are related in their focus on sustainability,
the key difference is that the bioeconomy specifically deals with biological
resources, whereas the circular economy is a broader approach that
encompasses all types of resources in a sustainable way.
Technological Advancements in Bioeconomy Efficiency
Technological advancements have significantly boosted the efficiency
of the bioeconomy. By adopting highly mechanised production systems,
selecting efficient cultivars and planting materials, and employing fertilizers
alongside effective water management, global agricultural yields for crops,
vegetables, fibers, and biomass have seen remarkable growth. The use
of biofertilizers and biopesticides has reduced the reliance on chemical
alternatives. Breeding technologies have increased meat, milk, and animal
fiber production, while mechanisation in poultry has led to higher egg and
poultry meat output. In the fisheries sector, conventional technological inputs
have improved productivity. Bio-catalysis technologies find applications
in various fields, offering innovative solutions. Extensive documentation
technologies enable tracking saleable bio products back to their source,
ensuring transparency and safety. With the advent of rDNA, genomics,
proteomics, and genome editing technologies, human capabilities to
modify and produce organisms with enhanced genetic traits have grown
exponentially. Bioinformatics, fast computation, and artificial intelligence
have accelerated research. Bioreactors, ultracentrifuges, chromatographic
systems, and analytical techniques contribute to efficient resource utilisation.

The integration of these technologies falls under the umbrella of

synthetic biology technologies (SBTs). SBTs empower the redesigning
of organisms at the genetic level, creating opportunities to produce drugs,
chemicals, fuels, and materials. They can also aid in bioremediation and the
development of efficient planting cultivars. However, these technologies
are capital and technology-intensive and require stringent environmental
biosafety considerations. To harness the potential of these technologies for
sustainable bioeconomy, countries must carefully assess risks and gains in
each project. Integration of modern technologies is essential to improve the
efficiency of using renewable biological resources. Public awareness and
trust are crucial, and ethical and legal frameworks should ensure the safe
and effective utilisation of these advancements in the bioeconomy.
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 11

Elements of Bioeconomy Framework in Different Countries

In a study report by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of the
United Nations of 2018, an analysis was made by measuring the contribution
of bioeconomy in selected countries, chosen from six continents, namely
Germany and the Netherlands from Europe; Malaysia from Asia; Argentina
from South America; USA from North America; South Africa from Africa;
and Australia.7 The study analysed how different countries were measuring
the contribution of bioeconomy to their overall country objectives of
economy. It was revealed that while these countries had adopted bioeconomy
as a new vision of development, the set of sectors and subsectors of
activities under bioeconomy were widely different, and the technological
expertise and inputs required for pursuing and promoting those activities
were also widely divergent. For example, in Europe, while Germany
had included into their bioeconomy, exhaustive activities comprising
agriculture, automobile and engineering, chemicals including bioplastics
(biodegradable plastics and materials based on polyhydroxybutyrate or
polyhydroxyalkanoates), biofuels and bioenergy, biorefining, construction
and building industry, consumer goods including cosmetics and cleaning
products, feed, fisheries, food and beverage industry, forestry, knowledge
and innovation, pharmaceutical industry, paper and pulp industry, and
textiles; the Netherlands had not included many of these activities. Argentina
and South Africa included a couple of activities under bioeconomy but did
not monitor or measure their progress periodically. The USA had included
only a few activities such as agriculture, chemicals including bioplastics,
biorefining, forestry, and textiles under their activities.

It was evident from the report that different countries had included
different sets of sectors and subsectors under bioeconomy, where widely
different kinds of technological expertise and inputs are required and
used. Consequently, there could be no one method of evaluation of each
country’s bioeconomy efforts. Further, every country had not created
periodic evaluation infrastructure for its bioeconomy activities, which exists
in some countries only. This would hinder taking corrective policy from
time to time in countries that do not have the reviewing and assessment
infrastructure. There is a need to create measurable environmental, economic
and social objectives in every country promoting a bioeconomy strategy
for development.

A serious bioeconomy framework requires periodic monitoring,

measurement and reporting of the gains in economic parameters such
as contributions to national gross domestic product (GDP), employment
generation and job creation, increase in trade and services and new
12 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

investments; socio-economic parameters such as conduct of R&D and

generation of intellectual property rights (IPRs), income increase of
people and reduction in poverty, food and health as well as energy security,
increased infrastructure development, increased education and training of
people in skills, gender inequality rationalisation and growing inequality
among people in different countries; and improvement in the environment
hovering around sustainable use of natural resources, reduction in the
emission of greenhouse gasses, conservation of biodiversity etc.

Technological advancements in biosciences are linked with industrial

applications as means of industrialisation in bioeconomy. Leader countries
in biosciences such as the USA, EU, Japan, Canada China, India, Australia,
Israel and Cuba, followed by several Asian countries like Malaysia, Thailand,
Vietnam, Indonesia and Singapore; South American countries like Brazil,
Mexico and Argentina among others, and South Africa, Kenya, Egypt
and Nigeria among the African countries are the regions that have made
considerable progress. Taking into consideration the factors such as the
current GDP at Nominal values (GDP measured as aggregate output using
current prices in a year) as well as GDP at PPP values (GDP converted to
international US dollars using purchasing power parity rates); the population
of the country; and the levels of modern biotechnological developments,
the authors had chosen to elaborate the bioeconomy plans and programs in
European Union, UK, USA, China, India, Japan, Brazil, ASEAN countries,
South Korea and Russia. Australian plans and programmes in synthetic
biology have been included.

The elements of micro and macro development goals for different

countries in the context of promoting bioeconomy cannot be the same.
In a Global Bioeconomy Summit (GBS) held in 2015 in Berlin (El-
Chichakli et al. 2016), the experts concluded that to rationalise the needs
of different countries, multiple policy initiatives need to be evolved and
pursued for improving the quality of air, water and soil, and to use the
biological resources on a sustainable basis at each region. The elements
of policy initiatives and their implementation strategies would, however,
be different, and have to be evolved, taking into consideration the regional
factors and expertise. Five unifying generic cornerstones were identified
in the GBS as sustainable development goals through bioeconomy which
were (1) intensifying international collaborations between governments
and public and private researchers for optimizing use and sharing of
resources; (2) ways to measure the development and contributions to
sustainable development goals in priority factors such as food security; (3)
bioeconomy initiatives to be linked more closely with SDGs 2030 agenda8
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 13

which is essentially an agenda and a plan of action for people, planet and
prosperity) with provisions of follow up with Paris Agreement (a legally
binding international treaty on climate change) and Aichi Biodiversity
Agreement9 (the agreement had identified 20 specific targets to address and
mitigate biodiversity loss across the globe); (4) in the context of possessing
the relevant knowledge, skills and competence required for developing
a bioeconomy for sustainable use of biological materials in different
regions and parts of the world, the experts and educators need to define
these elements and assist in preparing road maps requiring interdisciplinary
approach, based on which government could build international teaching,
learning and exchange programs for imparting and sharing skills; (5)
research and development support programmes are needed, based on which
global programmes in a few break-through projects could be developed.
The need for such programmes in specific areas such as new and novel
food systems, development of bio-principled cities, sustainable aquaculture,
biorefinaries, artificial photosynthesis, citizen and consumer participation
and global governance were identified.
Bioeconomy Requires Attention to Unique Social and
Technological Issues
Economic growth is commonly measured in terms of the increase in the
aggregated market value of additional goods and services produced, using
estimates such as contributions to GDP. In any country, the rewards of
economic growth should be rationally distributed for its sustainability.
Elevation of GDP through bioeconomy needs to be treated in the same
manner as are economic gains resulting from other economic contributors.

Of all the factors responsible for economic growth, the development

and deployment of highly improvised technology, and blossoming of the
full potential of talented and skilled human capital are the most contributing
factors.

Advancement in wealth creation by developing products involving

manipulation of genes, cell lines, and natural life forms have strong societal
acceptance issues. Invention and regulation seem to be inversely related.
If there is relaxation in the conduct of experiments using human subjects
or the development of products for human use, where safety and ethical
issues are compromised, and where risk capitals are easily available from
funding sources for research, and further where the laws are not strong,
their innovations and inventions may proceed at higher speed, but may also
bring about catastrophic results. Presently, genome editing work is going
on in several laboratories. The first work (Alonso and Savulescu 2021)
14 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

was started by He Jiankui, a Chinese scientist, in 2018, and He gene-edited

embryos in-vitro in 2018 and transplanted the edited embryos to the donor
mother, which resulted in the birth of twin baby girls, who are doing fine,
according to a news.10 He Jiankui used CRISPR technology for the editing
work to produce HIV resistant babies. He Jiankui was sent to prison for 3
years as the work was considered unethical, and He did not have approval
from any ethical committee or agency.

Heritable human genome editing followed by using such modified

embryos cannot be used for reproduction in any country. Such an act is
illegal and is punishable by law in some countries. In India, human genome
editing for reproductive cloning is banned by the National Guidelines for
Stem Cell Research.11 There are, however, no enforceable laws to deal with
the offenders.

Research in heritable human genome editing is, however, carried out

(Baylis et al. 2020) in many countries. Gene editing in plants and animals
is, however, authorised and carried out in many countries, which is done
to improve crops in agriculture, and in animals, including in the fisheries
sector, to obtain better animals and fish; the USA has been the most
advanced in carrying out Gene editing in multiple life forms, followed
by many other countries including China, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico,
India and some smaller countries like Bangladesh. Europe had not been
adopting these technologies in many countries for multiplying transgenic
life forms in open environment but had been using such substances produced
elsewhere. Recently, the UK passed their Genetic Technology (Precision
Breeding) Act,12 which indicated that changes are in the air for adopting
these technologies gradually in Europe.

However, Germ line editing work on humans is under debate and is

vexed. Gene editing techniques are being pursued in the research stage for
mono gene editing in somatic human cells as a curative therapy for a number
of diseases. US FDA has prepared recommendations13 for developing human
gene therapy products incorporating genome editing (GE) of human somatic
cells in different research setups. FDA considers the use of CRISPR/Cas9
gene editing in humans to be gene therapy.

Like gene editing technologies, which are presently in high risks

category of technologies and cannot be used without exhaustive research,
some other technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) products and
technologies, have great risks if blindly used. AI products and technologies
are based on the integration of sound science and sound data through
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 15

complex algorithms and need to be upgraded continuously. As such products

and technologies may not always be based on current knowledge, errors
can come. Therefore, while AI-based products and technologies can be
useful, their use in many situations, such as advice for human therapy and
other areas of bioeconomy should be made judiciously, and ethical rules
should be in place.

The elements of ethics, social acceptance issues, including rights to

choose and the necessary legal provisions need to be worked upon in several
areas of research contemplating genome editing, use of AI etc., through
united global forums on a precautionary principle for undisputed resolution.

Selected Region and Country-Specific Bioeconomy

Programmes and Activities
European Union (EU)
There are 44 countries in Europe of which presently 27 countries, namely
Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland,
Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden are the European Union
(EU) countries.14 The UK was a part of the EU, but left the EU on 31 January
2020. Switzerland is not an EU.

The EU GDP15 was US$16.6 trillion (nominal; 2022) and US$24.05

trillion (PPP; 2022) with a population of 447.7 million as of January 2020.
The GDP by sectors were agriculture: 1.5 per cent, industry: 24.5 per cent,
services: 70.7 per cent and others 3.3 per cent, as per2016 data. The EU
economy is the joint economy of the member states and is the third largest
economy in the world in nominal terms, after the United States and China.

The EU Bioeconomy strategy was adopted and launched16 on February

13, 2012. The EU history of evolving into strategies in bioeconomy is
fascinating. The European Commission (EC) had been actively involved in
framing and managing the Biotechnology and Life Sciences programmes
of the EU since 1982. Over the years, the activities increased. The
transformations were to create research groups, with the objective of
exploiting the research results through the industry to benefit the society.
The early Life Science programmes had gone through the conceptualization
and implementation of policy frameworks to create solid foundations in
European research in biotechnology. The concept of the “Cell Factory”
16 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

followed by key action plans elaborated in the 5th Framework Programme

(1998-2002), was an important milestone reached. Germany created for
the first time its “Bioökonomierat”, which was a Bioeconomy Council to
advise its Chancellor and the Government in 2009, and in 2010 published
its Bioeconomy Strategy. Later, more European countries started planning
in life sciences technologies. Eventually, in 2012, a strategy on Bioeconomy
was adopted for the whole of the EU, and the EU matured up to the present
time, planning more systematically for the future (Patermann and Aguilar
2018).

The EU activities are enshrouded among all sectors and systems that
rely on biological resources, which include animals, plants, microorganisms
plus organic wastes; land and marine ecosystems; agriculture, forestry,
fisheries and aquaculture; and all industrial sectors using biological resources
and processes for producing food, feed, fodder, bio-based products,
energy and services. The EU defined bioeconomy to include17 the use of
renewable biological resources from land and sea. The biological resources
emanate from crops, animals, fish, microorganisms, and forests to produce
food, materials and energy. The EU strategy addressed intensifying and
magnifying production of the needed materials and substances through
renewable biological resources and their conversion into vital industrial
products and bio-energy. The intent of the EU Bioeconomy strategy is to
accomplish five main objectives namely (1) to ensure food and nutrition
security; (2) to manage natural resources on a sustainable basis;(3) to reduce
dependence on non-renewable, un-sustainable resources secured locally or
obtained through imports;(4) to mitigate and adapt to climate change; and
(5) to strengthen competitiveness while creating jobs. Multiple kinds of
technological inputs, including conventional and modern biotechnological
methods, nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, bioinformatics etc.,
are included in the EU Bioeconomy strategy. The turnover value of EU
bioeconomy was estimated at Euro 2.3 trillion in 2015 and the activities
supported nearly 8.2 per cent of the EU workforce (Ronzon and M’Barek
2018) which provides a flavour of the economic importance of bioeconomy
in the EU.

The present EU bioeconomy strategies are based on four key priorities,18

which include (a) strengthening and scaling up of the bio-based sectors;
(b) increased investments and development of new markets are promoted
; (c) deployment of local bioeconomy projects rapidly across the whole of
Europe; and (d) understanding the ecological boundaries of the bioeconomy.

A study conducted on the contribution of bioeconomy services to GDP

and employment generation in the EU Member countries (Ronzon et al.
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 17

2022) over 2008-2017 indicated that during the more recent years in 2015-
2017, the EU economic growth was stronger in bioeconomy services than
the total EU economy, indicating the increased importance of this sector.
Bioeconomy services accounted for between 5 per cent to 8.6 per cent of
the EU GDP and 10.2 per cent to 16.9 per cent of the EU labour force.
UK
The United Kingdom (UK), with a population of 67 million as of June 2021
has a GDP of US $3.159 trillion (nominal; 2023) and USD$3.847 trillion
(PPP; 2023). The GDP economy is contributed by agriculture: 0.7 per cent,
industry: 20.2 per cent, and services: 79.2 per cent as per 2017 estimate. The
UK economy is a highly developed social market economy and is the 6th
largest national economy in the world, as measured by nominal GDP value.19
The UK has been benefiting from its highly developed bioscience base.
The future strategies20 are to ensure that the UK move towards paths of
pulling out from their reliance on finite fossil resources whilst increasing
productivity across their habitats. High-end bioeconomy harnesses the power
of bioscience and biotechnology, as the technologies address challenges
in food, human and animal health, chemicals, materials, energy and fuel
production, and environmental deteriorations. The potential benefits include
the use of processes and technologies that ensure low green gas emissions.
It has been reported that the UK bioeconomy in 2014 contributed to £220
billion of output across the UK economy, supporting 5.2 million jobs.

The Government, industry and the research community have been

working together to realize a visible transformation in their bioeconomy.
For future developments in bioeconomy, the country has set out 4 high-level
goals, which include (a) capitalizing the world-class R&D in biosciences, (b)
maximizing productivity, using existing renewable biological resources(c)
delivering measurable benefits with the aim of creating new jobs, increasing
productivity and increasing the size of the impact of the bioeconomy to
£440 billion by 2030, and (d) creating the right national and international
market conditions to enable innovative bio-based products and services to
thrive, raising public interest, increasing skills in the workplace and sales
to the market.

These goals are aimed at activities in bioeconomy that include designing

and producing new forms of clean energy and new routes to high-value
industrial chemicals; turning out and fabricating smarter, cheaper materials
such as bio-based plastics and composites for everyday items as part
of a more circular, low-carbon economy; decreasing and minimising
plastic waste and pollution by developing a new generation of advanced
and environmentally sustainable, biobased, biodegradable plastics and
18 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

packaging materials, and ensuring pollution from microplastics; coming

up with sustainable, healthy, affordable and nutritious foods; improving
the productivity, sustainability and resilience of agriculture and forestry in
UK; and inventing and producing newer medicines of the future while also
manufacturing the existing ones more efficiently.
USA
USA21 has a population of 334.6 million as of January 2022 with a GDP of
US$26.854 trillion (nominal; 2023) and US$26.854 trillion (PPP; 2023).
USA GDP is contributed by agriculture: 0.9 per cent; industry: 18.9 per
cent; and services: 80.2 per cent as per 2017 estimate. The USA is a highly
developed mixed economy. The USA economy by nominal GDP is the
largest economy by nominal GDP in the world, and the second-largest by
purchasing power parity (PPP), behind China.

In the USA, three regulatory authorities, namely the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are involved to steward the
country to make use of products and services derived from biotechnology
emanating from plants, animals and microorganisms. These authorities are
empowered by the US White House who approve the federal regulatory
policies for ensuring the safety of biotechnology products.22 In recent times,
the USA has been the most productive country, coming out with multiple
innovative technologies involving biosciences such as the m RNA vaccines,
CAR-T Cell technology, CRISPR Cas 9 technology and others in medicines;
GMOs and LMOs in agriculture; renewable biomass sources for energy;
and biochemicals/ chemicals etc.

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) of the USA has defined

bioeconomy as “the share of the economy based on products, services,
and processes derived from biological resources (e.g., plants and
microorganisms)”23 This definition is a bit narrower than what is understood
by the term in many other countries.

Bioeconomy is fructified and materialized through multiple applications

where manufacturing is the bio-engine. In the USA, the country had enacted
its CHPS and Science Act and the Executive Order (EO) 14081, Advancing
Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe and
Secure American Biotechnology to promote bioeconomy. The CHIPS Act,
signed into law on August 9, 2022, is designed to boost competitiveness,
innovation, and national security in the USA. It would catalyze investments
in multiple sectors through R&D and commercialization in biotechnology
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 19

and bio manufacturing, artificial intelligence, clean energy, quantum

computing, nanotechnology, semiconductor manufacturing capacity, and
create new regional high-tech hubs to create a highly skilled workforce
with an investment of USD 280 billion over a period of time.24 The intent
of the Executive Order is to promote the advancement of economic activity
derived through biotechnology and biomanufacturing in the country to
promote and encourage innovative solutions across health, energy, food
security, agriculture, the supply chain, and climate change to bring in robust
national and economic security.25

The USA has identified three major factors that must be cogently
addressed to enhance the country in maintaining its competitive edge
and maximize the benefits from biotechnology.26 These factors are to
enable (1) the manufacturing capacity and the skills of the US workforce
in biotechnology need to advance in a manner that both in manufacture
and in new product development, the country maintains its leadership
position, and therefore, the necessary policy should be place and funds
must be allocated;(2)the regulatory review and approval process for new
cross-cutting bio products must advance faster as delays can hinder or
even stop the initiatives and commercialization process;(3) an integrated
and overarching bioeconomy strategy must be in place, which needs to be
updated regularly to help guide the Federal Agencies to take actions for
developing and transferring such powerful biotechnologies towards social
and economic advancements. The emphasis and urges are to implement a
long-term vision document and action plans for advancing the country in
biomanufacturing to support the US bioeconomy.

The major recommendations of the government are (a) to create strong

biomanufacturing infrastructure hubs through coordination among several
relevant government agencies and universities in a time-bound manner; (b)
to establish a sound and strong but fast, Regulatory Approval Process; and
(c) to establish a new data-based strategy for bioeconomy by preparing a
long-term strategy document for bioeconomy through multiple identified
offices and establishments such as the National Science and Technology
Council(NSTC); Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP) of the White House; the Secretary of Commerce; and the Bureau
of Economic Analysis(BEA). NSTC coordinates science and technology
policy for the Federal research and development enterprises. OSTP works by
providing advice to the President and the Executive Office of the President
on matters related to science and technology. BEA is an independent,
principal federal statistical agency that is devoted to promoting a better
understanding of the U.S. economy.
20 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

The present US bioeconomy is estimated27 to be valued at over USD

950 billion, and account for more than five per cent of the US GDP. This
economy is predicted to grow globally to over USD 30 trillion over the
next two decades.
China
China28 has a population of 1411.7 million as of December 2022.The GDP
of China is US$19.373 trillion (nominal; 2023 est.) and US$33.014 trillion
(PPP; 2023 est.). The GDP by sector is Agriculture: 7.9 per cent;
Industry: 40.5 per cent; and Services: 51.6 per cent( 2017 estimate). The
Chinese economy is considered as an upper middle-income developing
mixed socialist market economy. China advances through its strategic
five-year plans incorporating firm industrial policies for growth. China is
presently the world’s second-largest economy by nominal GDP. But when
measured by the purchasing power parity (PPP), it is the largest global
economy.

China unveiled29,30 a new plan to promote their bioeconomy activities

during the country’s 14th Five-Year Plan period (2021-25) in May 2022.
The plan was to protect and intensify the use biological resources for the
development of novel and useful goods and services in the areas of medicine,
healthcare, agriculture, forestry, energy, environmental protection, materials
and other linked sectors to promote bioeconomy and the action plans would
show results by 2025. The document prepared for this purpose and the
actions proposed is thought to boost meeting rising domestic demand for
healthcare to improve the quality of lives, foster high-quality economic
development, prevent and control biosecurity risks and modernize China’s
system and capacity for governance in bioeconomy during the period. In the
bioeconomy sector, four areas and industrial activities shall be in sharp focus
for development, which would be health care, bio-agriculture, biofuel and
bio-informatics. While pursuing bioeconomy projects, China will promote
low-carbon growth technologies and would enhance their technological
capabilities to effectively face future epidemics. Through bioeconomy
action plan, the country will explore biomass to help boost sustainable
development and resource conservation. It will reinforce prevention, control
and treatment of animal and plant diseases, besides human disease. Projects
would also be pursued using novel techniques in bio-based breeding, the use
of biofertilisers and biopesticides in agriculture to produce healthier foods.

The action plan shall push the proportion of bioeconomy to the country’s
GDP sizably, witnessing a significant increase in the number of enterprises
engaged in the bioeconomy. Thereafter, bioeconomy in China shall steadily
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 21

grow, and by 2035, China aims to be at the forefront of bioeconomy activities

in the global context. The above ‘14th Five-Year Plan for Bioeconomy
Development’ (2021-2025) was critically evaluated (Zhang et al. 2022)
by an academic group, and it was concluded that China’s bioeconomy
development plan, encompassing three pathways to improve bioeconomy
through technological innovation, industrialization and policy supports were
relevant, timely and valuable. It was revealed that China had the meantime,
invested US$3.8 billion over the period of 2008–2020 in biotechnology
R&D, and its biotechnology industry had contributed RMB two trillion
to China’s bioeconomy by 2011, maintaining a growth of about 20 per
cent annually in value terms, from 2013 to 2015. The new 14th Five-Year
Plan period (2021-25) initiative is therefore anticipated to make a major
contribution to Chinese bioeconomy, and to their GDP.

India
India, with a population of 1417.2 million as of 2022, has a GDP ofUS$3.737
trillion (nominal; 2023 est.) and US$13.033 trillion (PPP; 2023 est.) and is
ranked as the 5th largest economy (nominal; 2023) and 3rd largest (PPP;
2023) in the world. Indian GDP contributions from bioeconomy were
through (a) agriculture: 18.8 per cent; (b) industry: 28.2 per cent; and (c)
services sector: 53 per cent( FY 2021-22 estimate). The Indian economy
has transitioned from a mixed-planned economy to a mixed middle-income
developing social market economy. The services sector is the fastest-growing
sector. Agriculture sector provides more than 40 per cent of the labour force,
while the service sector provides over 30 per cent, and the rest is provided
by the industry sector.31

Indian bioeconomy has been defined32 as “an economy where the basic
building blocks for matter, chemicals and energy are derived from renewable
biological resources.” In a Report33 released in 2022, the Indian bioeconomy
was valued at US$70.2 billion in 2020, which moved up to US$ 80.12
billion by the end of 2021, registering a monetary growth of 14.1 per cent.
The bioeconomy segments comprised of biopharma; COVID Economy
(consisting of COVID-19 Vaccines and COVID-19 testing and diagnostics);
bio-agriculture; bio-industrial segment; and bio-IT and Research services.
The sectors and subsectors of industrial activities included in bioeconomy in
India are those where modern biotechnology techniques are hovering around
the use of r DNA technologies, where studies are involved and undertaken in
the genetic materials of living substances, and useful products and services
are evolved. One guiding star in the fast progress of bioeconomy in India
was due to government involvement and government promotion of this
sector by creating in place laws, rules and procedures for handling r DNA
22 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

technologies by the Indian Ministry of Environment Forests & Climate

Change (MOEF&CC) and the Department of Biotechnology (DBT).
The proactive actions of the government enabled rapid development of r
DNA-based technologies in all the sectors and subsectors, and especially
in pharmaceuticals. In bio-agriculture, major contributions came from the
use of Bt-cotton technology. Much more contributions could have come
in bio agriculture from the use of LMOs. However, the myopic views of
non-science based opinion makers and their opposition to the introduction
and use of LMOs in food, feed and fodder sector prevented the use of other
such products in India. This resulted in loss of opportunities by the Indian
farmers, and loss in the accrual of the potentially acquirable benefits was
put at stake. Indian bioeconomy constituted about 2.6 per cent share of the
GDP of the country in 2021. It is predicted that the bioeconomy of India
may touch US$ 150 billion by 2025 and US$ 300 billion by 2030.
Japan
Japan34 is a country with a highly developed economy. The economy of the
country is ranked as the 3rd largest in the world by nominal GDP, and 4th
largest by purchasing power parity (PPP). Japan had a population of 124.49
million as of 1 March 2023 estimate. The GDP of the country is US$4.4
trillion (nominal; 2023 est.) and US$6.4 trillion (PPP; 2023 estimate). The
GDP is contributed by agriculture: 1.1 per cent; industry: 30.1 per cent
and services: 68.7 per cent( 2017 estimate). Labor force employment is
agriculture: 3 per cent; industry: 25 per cent; and services: 72 per cent (FY
2018 estimate).

The Japanese government from their Ministry of Economic, Trade and

Industry Division planned in 2017, formulating their new national policy
in the field of biotechnology to boost their bioeconomy blueprint. The
elements of planning included (a) practicing smart eco-friendly agriculture,
using techniques of modern biotechnology to increase food production,
(b) producing new functional materials for sustainable growth, using
living cells,(c)reducing dependency on fossil fuel and producing energy
through biofuels, (d) emphasising on factors leading to good health and
increased longevity by using biotech food-based healthcare and medical
care, and (e) developing new industrial sector and new markets, creating
bioeconomy via smart living cell- based innovation.35 The New Energy
and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEITDO), Japan
estimated in 2019 the size of bio-industry market size of Japan to be of 3.6
trillion yen(USD 32 billion), and included in the basket, biotech products
and services emanating from recombinant DNA products. The estimate
would swell if conventional biotech products and services are also included.
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 23

In 2019, the government of Japan funded nearly 6.2 billion yen (USD 56
million) to promote bio-manufacturing technologies. Japan government
had formulated their bioeconomy strategy to advance the biotechnology
sector to reach 92 trillion yen (USD 837 billion) by 2030, encompassing
development in(a)bio pharmacy, regenerative medicines, cell therapy, and
gene therapy to reach 3.3 trillion yen( USD 30 billion); (b) life-style related
health care improvement technologies to reach a value of 33 trillion yen )
USD 300 billion); c) high-performance biomaterials and bio plastics valued
at 53.3 trillion yen (USD 485 billion) ; (d) sustainable primary production
systems in bioeconomy valued at 1.7 trillion (USD 15.5 billion); and (e) large
scale wood-based construction valued at 1 trillion yen (USD 9 billion).36
Attaining a market size of 92 trillion yen by 2030 would require creating
highly skilled bio-communities and promoting policies that attract early
investments and hard work of nearly a decade. Japanese government started
taking steps as early as 2017 for this purpose. They had also partnered a
global biotechnology summit in 2020 to keep the speed of development
vibrant37 in their country.
Brazil
There are presently 33 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, and
another 15 dependencies or other territories,38 of which population wise as
well as area wise Brazil is the largest. While many of these countries have
moved to improve their GDP through activities linked with bioeconomy,
Brazil has the largest GDP among all countries in the region.39 The other
two large countries in this region, namely Argentina and Mexico, are also
poised for improving economy and using modern biological processes,
while many other Latin America and the Caribbean countries are also
doing so. Genetically modified cotton, maize, soybean, sugarcane, flex
etc., are being cultivated in several countries in this region. However,
the basic biotechnologies and the genetically modified planting materials
are often inducted from other developed nations, and the local seeds are
transformed by back-crossing. The biotechnological base is not yet at the
most advanced levels. In a research-based study (Mungaray-Moctezuma
2015) the characteristics of technology and human capital needed in order
to evolve towards a knowledge-based economy, where the importance of
institutions for their development and the necessary human capital from
the perspective of bioeconomy were studied for Argentina, Costa Rica and
Mexico. It was revealed that Argentina has greater potential to compete in an
economy that is sustained in the creation and dissemination of knowledge,
while in Mexico there are pressing needs for improving its institutional
structure and skills in human resources so as to enable them to adopt
knowledge-based bioeconomy pathways. Agriculture and biodiversity are
24 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

important components for development in every agro-based economies.

Appropriate plans and programmes in these areas can boost bioeconomy
in these regions.
South America40 is home to 434 million people (as of July 2022),
which is about 6 per cent of the world population. The GDP is US$4.04
trillion (nominal; 2023 estimate) and US$8.2 trillion (PPP; 2023 estimate).
South American economy, measured by nominal GDP (2023), is 4th in
the world and 5th by PPP GDP (2023). Agriculture, animal husbandry,
mining, industry, oil and natural gas, and tourism are the main components
of their economy. The continent could not keep pace with current global
developments. The education system and the institutional structure as well
as the developmental infrastructure, have remained behind; the colonial past
has had a negative influence towards faster modernisation.

In this review, the bioeconomy of Brazil has only been discussed in more
detail. Among the Latin American and the connected Southern Hemisphere
countries, the economy of Brazil is the largest. Brazilian economy41 is a
middle-income developing mixed economy. Brazil has a population of 215
million (2022), with a GDP of US$2.081 trillion (nominal; 2023 estimate)
and US$4.020 trillion (PPP; 2023 estimate). The GDP economy of the
country is country when compared with the global GDP is 10th on a
nominal basis (2023) and 8th on a PPP basis( 2023).The service sector
GDP represents over 60 per cent, followed by industry, over 15 per cent ,
and the agriculture sector at about 6 per cent( 2020 estimate).

Brazil is globally an established economic giant42 in mining, agriculture,

and manufacturing, and has a rapidly growing service sector. Presently, Brazil
is getting more interested in bioeconomy, and aims to promote (Maximo
et al. 2022) sustainable development in areas of expertise of the country,
using biotechnological processes and innovations utilising renewable raw
materials, which are forest and agriculture-based, to substitute the use of
fossil-based materials. In Brazil, their bioeconomy periphery is majorly
bound by the application of biotechnological knowledge to renewable
biological resources emanating from agriculture and the forest sector. Forests
and the forest sector form an important part of Brazilian economy. Brazil
has the second-largest forest area in the world. The pulp and paper industry
of Brazil is significant, and for this sector forests play an important role.
Latex rubber and timber are other significant forest-based products. Forests
also enable the production of many other value added products in Brazil
such as nano-crystalline nano-size cellulose, wood-based textile fibers,
lignin-based products, and chemical derivatives from tall oil.
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 25

Brazilian policies and programmes in bioeconomy dates back to the

6th German-Brazilian dialogue in science, research and innovations,43
held on November 8, 2017 at Sao Paulo, where Brazilian strategies,
policies and programmes were cogently conceived and framed out of
discussions with multiple stakeholders. It was realized that success in
bioeconomy was primarily based on and linked with innovations, especially
in biotechnology. The aims were to add value to primary production, use
of bio-wastes gainfully, reduce dependence on fossil fuel by replacing
fossil fuel based energy with bioenergy production systems. Brazilian
government evolved their bioeconomy strategy involving agribusiness,
tropical agriculture research, natural biodiversity usage, including forests
and biofuel production, while empowering the academic sector and evolving
structured new bio business sector. The Brazilian government strategy
and their industry were to focus research and innovation in (a) bio control
and biotechnological processes in in a sustainable manner for managing
agricultural pests, (b) biomass processing, (c) developing proficiency in
renewable green chemistry, (d) environmental biotechnologies applied to the
recovery of degraded and contaminated lands and processing of bio-wastes
for value addition, and (e) development and scale-up of biotechnological
processes. Brazilian efforts in bioeconomy also included intent to collaborate
with multiple biotechnology-rich countries so as to induct knowledge and
expertise therefrom for the country.

A researched based study (Machado et al. 2021) on the macroeconomic

aspects of Brazilian economy derived from biomass (bioeconomy) through a
Computable General Equilibrium model revealed that by 2030, the amount
of chemicals and energy production through fossils versus biomass for the
country, based on sugarcane, soy and forest crops may result in almost
irrelevant negative impacts on GDP and in small increases in unemployment
rate, when compared to business as usual, as the reference scenario. It was
further revealed that if there was an increase in efficiency regarding land use
in the livestock and agriculture sectors, then such effects might be reversed.
However, if there was not enough rise in the efficiency and productivity
from the learnt innovative technologies, then the biobased costs of products
could be higher, and it might be necessary to provide subsidies to encourage
the use of these technologies. These results clearly point towards intense
attention and activities in R &D to develop technologies that contribute
to improve efficiencies. However, the country has already turned towards
efforts to magnify their GDP through bioeconomy activities, and a study
report has claimed44 that by 2050, the bioeconomy of Brazil can generate
US$ 284 billion in revenue per annum, and that it has been flagged that
a list of solutions that would increase yield in agriculture and would also
reduce the emission of greenhouse gasses.
26 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Brazil has another significant responsibility in the global context,

which emanates from the issues linked with their Amazon rainforests. It is
estimated that the rainforest contributes45 about $8.2 billion a year to the
economy of the country from products including rubber and timber. But
the Amazon forest is often hit by fires that irreversibly clear thousands of
miles of rainforests, thereby worsening the carbon capture capacities of
Mother Earth, and causing potential environmental damage. Added to this,
if the rainforest is over exploited by human activities, there could be much
increase in the worsening of the environment. Corrective actions (Brouwer
et al. 2022) in this context on a global platform need to be intensified to
maintain the good health of the Amazon rainforests.
The ASEAN Countries
The ASEAN Member States are Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos,
Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.The
ASEAN States account for about 7 per cent of global GDP and is home to
nearly 0.7 billion people. It accounts for 9 per cent of global GDP growth
during the past 10 years (2012-2022).46 They visualise as a single market
and production base, which is characterised by the free flow of goods and
services, capital, investments and labour. Agriculture provides a maximum
number of employments to the member countries, which employs more than
8.2 per cent of the region’s labour force and generates over USD 2.3 trillion
in sales annually (Wang et al. 2022). Critical studies on the transition of
bioeconomy through agriculture, forestry, agribusiness and other certain
sectors that produce and use bio-based raw materials make good economic
sense. There is a strong need to develop improved and efficient technologies
that ensure improved efficiencies. Long-term national and regional strategy
and action plan for such activities need to be framed and systematically
pushed. There is yet no unified strategic document for the ASEAN countries
to identify the technological gaps and barriers as also the best practices to be
adopted for the region to address the challenges faced by the governments
and the policymakers, the researchers and practitioners, including the
industry for a successful bioeconomy for the region. In the renewable energy
area, the ASEAN countries have plans47 to achieve 23 per cent share in the
total primary energy supply from renewables by 2025. Each country has
different plans and programme.48 As of 2019, the capacities for generating
energy from renewable sources was the highest in Vietnam and lowest in
Singapore. The Government of Vietnam in 2015 announced.49 their first-
ever national development strategy for energy, from renewable sources and
has plans to reach 32 per cent of their primary supply of electricity from
such sources by 2030.
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 27

The impact of resources emanating from the agricultural and forestry

sectors for sustainable development aiming at achieving improved bio-
economy in ASEAN countries has caught attention of many intellectual
groups. In one recent study (Phuoc Huu Vo and Thanh Quang Ngo 2021)
from Vietnam, it was shown that the agricultural resources such as
agricultural land both irrigated as well as rain fed, agricultural practices,
forest resources, forest area and forest rent((round wood harvest times the
product of regional prices and a regional rental rate), and fishing economic
activities including fishing industry (activities concerned with catching,
culturing, processing, preserving, storing, transporting, marketing or selling
fish or fish products from sea and land waters)have a positive association
with the transition towards bio-economy in ASEAN countries. The primary
renewable production systems like conventional agriculture, the use of
forests and forest products for human benefits, fisheries and aquaculture
shall be affected by global climate change, and therefore, there would be
a need to develop new technologies and strategies to keep the production
from these primary production systems efficient and more productive.
This would be possible by inducting modern biotechnological systems
into conventional practices. There is presently a lack of development in
modern biological technologies in the ASEAN region. Future researchers
may develop road maps for the development of modern biotechnologies
to assist the policymakers to come up with strategies and action plans that
benefit the region.
South Korea
South Korea with a population of about 51.3 million in 2021, had a GDP
of US$2.76 billion in 2022. The per capita GDP was US$33591(nominal)
in 2022 and US$ 53574(PPP) during the same period. South Korea is the
4th largest economy in Asia and 12th in the world. South Korea is a highly
developed mixed economy. Their agricultural sector is only 2.2 per cent of
the GDP; the latter is dominated by industry (39.3 per cent of GDP) and the
services sector (58.3 per cent). Only 4.4 per cent of the labor is employed
by the agriculture sector.50 The term ‘bioeconomy’ is understood in South
Korea to mean the economic sectors related to the biosciences, medical
biotechnology and the health sector. Bioenergy, green chemistry and bio-
electronics have also been attributed to bioeconomy.51

South Korea has a great interest in bioeconomy. The term ‘bioeconomy’

is understood in South Korea to mean the economic sectors related to the
biosciences, medical biotechnology and the health sector. Bioenergy, green
chemistry and bio-electronics have also been attributed to bioeconomy.
28 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

As early as in 2006, South Korea prepared a document entitled “ Bio-

Vision 2016” and adopted it as the “2nd Framework plan for Promotion of
Biotechnology” with clear targets for the biotech industry with a view to
develop their bioeconomy. The document aims to develop a prosperous
bioeconomy in the country and to provide healthy life to its citizens. In 2008,
the South Korean government published a document with “Low Carbon,
Green Growth strategy. For promoting bio-industries, their Ministry of
Trade, Industry and Industry in 2012 came out with a document on “Strategy
for promotion of industrial biotechnology”52 South Korean Government
continues to support and promote bioeconomy activities. On July 14, 2020,
the government announced to invest KRW of 114 trillion (USD 94.5 billion)
over a period of time on Green Technologies, comprising green renewable
energy, housing (energy saving buildings), mobility through electric cars,
and industry, and the initiatives are anticipated to create 1.9 million new
jobs by 2025.53

The bioeconomy of South Korea is presently leaning towards the

medical care industry (Wei et al. 2022). The Government has made sizable
investments to promote the sector. The sector has made commendable
progress and in manufacturing recombinant DNA-based therapeutic proteins
of high value, biosimilar molecules and stem cell therapy as well as high-
class medical devices, such as molecular diagnostics and equipment with
global competitiveness. It is anticipated that the country shall also take up
massive projects utilising modern biotechnologies in the field of agriculture,
the environment, oceans, energy, and the bioelectronics industries, where
the present emphasis would need to be strengthened.
Russia
Russia54 with a population of 147 .1 million as of late 2021 census has a
GDP of US$2.063 trillion (nominal; 2023 estimate) and US$4.989 trillion
(PPP; 2023 estimate). Russian GDP economy is driven by agriculture: 5.6
per cent;industry: 26.6 per cent; and services: 67.8 per cent(2022 estimate).
Labour employments is 9.4 per cent in agriculture; 27.6 per cent in industry,
and 63 per cent in the services sector (2016 estimate).

Russian government launched their programme called BIO-2020

strategy 55 in 2012 with an investment of US$18 million. Efficient
development of biotechnology to bring the country to a globally leading
position in areas including biomedicine, bio-pharmaceuticals, agro
biotechnology, food, environmental biotechnology, marine biotechnology,
forests, industrial sector and bio energies, with the aim of creating a globally
competitive bioeconomy sector in Russia was the plan. The span of the
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 29

programme was 2012-2020. Several government departments, including

ministries, government agencies and academic institutions, were involved
in the plan. Bioeconomy was to contribute to 1 per cent of the Russian GDP
by 2020, and 3 per cent by 2030.56 The President of Russia, in his address to
the Federal Assembly on January 15, 2020 had emphasized the need for a
circular economy as a part of the Russian bioeconomy as their development
priorities.57 Wastes generated by the industry would have to be mitigated by
them. This calls for the development of new and sustainable technologies.

The BIO 2020 programmes seemed to have been conceived essentially

as the programmes with a beginning; the money allocated appears to be
too small for such massive plans and projects. In an academic analysis in
2021, it was revealed that the forecast made in 2012 through BIO 2020 did
not materialize (Boyarov et al. 2021). While business interest is gradually
emerging in pursuing the bioeconomy sector, newer strategies need to be
adopted with more investment allocations; a new BIO 2030 document seems
to be under preparation.
Australia
Australia58 has a population of 25.89 million (2021 Census) with a GDP
of $1.708 trillion (nominal; 2023) and $1.718 trillion (PPP; 2023). It ranks
13th on GDP (nominal 2023) and 19th (PPP GDP 2023). Agriculture
constituted 2.8 per cent (2017) of GDP, while the dominant sectors were
Services: 62.7 per cent; Construction: 7.4 per cent; Mining: 5.8 per cent
and Manufacturing: 5.8 per cent. Australia is a highly developed country
and its economy is mixed.

Presently in Australia, there is no official national bioeconomy strategy.

The government is however interested to develop it’s agricultural, forest and
marine resources, using sophisticated modern technologies and therefore
has provided political guidance and support,59 identifying priority areas in
several thematic areas of the bioeconomy in these sectors. Australia has
defined plans and strategies for generating bioenergy. Their Bioenergy
Roadmap.60 is anticipated to contribute to around $10 billion in extra GDP
per annum.

Australia has a strong emphasis on developing products and services

using techniques of synthetic biology. They have defined synthetic
biology as ‘the rational design and construction of nucleic acid sequences
or proteins and novel combinations thereof, using standardized genetic
parts’. Australia is moving into synthetic biology application domains61
by developing appropriate expertise systematically through (a) Foundation
30 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Technologies, (b) Environment and Bio control projects, (c) Industrial

Biotechnology projects, (d) projects in Health and Medicine, and (e)
programmes in Agriculture and Food. They are also working on rationalising
and maximizing the impact of each project on their economy. The domain
of application of Foundation Technologies includes an advanced robotic
high-throughput DNA componentry assembly, cell line engineering, and
analysis facility, which they have termed as Bio Foundry; development
of synthetic biology parts and tools(( termed as bio bricks) that can be
applied to a wide range of application areas for exploiting their biological
and genetic heritage; and developing organelle control devices which
would serve as engineering tools targeting mitochondria and chloroplasts.
The aim of projects in Environment and Biocontrol is to contribute to a
world class capability in delivering solutions based on synthetic biology.
Industrial Biotechnology projects would be towards producing fibers and
chemicals. Projects in Health and Medicine would aim to design new
synthetic biology tools and platforms that would improve health and further
global health research. The novel design of next generation yeast and crop
production platforms is aimed at, in Agriculture and Food areas. Efforts
would concurrently be made to enable the public to understand the benefits
of the developments. The necessary social, ethical and legal frameworks
required to deliver safe and efficacious solutions by using synthetic biology
techniques and technologies would also be prepared.

Thus far Australia has invested at least Australian dollars (A$) 80

million in developing research capabilities in synthetic biology. It is
anticipated that by 2040, synthetic biology may turn out up to A$ 27 billion
in revenue annually and would create 44,000 new jobs for the country.62 The
contributions from synthetic biology are thus thought to be quite significant.
The techniques and technologies used in synthetic biology are almost the
same that are used in uplifting bioeconomy in other developed countries.
Although Australia does not officially have bioeconomy programmes, they
are focused on developing technologies that are most relevant to promoting
bio economies elsewhere, and therefore the efforts of the country were
included in the paper.
Impact of Bioeconomy towards Global GDP
The present GDP of the world63 was estimated at US$101.56 trillion in
2022(International Monetary Fund); US$96.51 trillion in 2021(World
Bank); and US$85.33 trillion in 2020(United Nations). Estimate made by
different agencies vary. For example, the 2022 World GDP was reported64
at US$95 trillion as of 2022. The figures provide a broad flavour about
the world economy. The global biotechnology market65 was estimated at
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 31

US$1224.31 billion in 2022. The present contributions of bioeconomy to

the world GDP are therefore assessed to be about 1.2 per cent to1.3 per
cent. The contributions shall substantially rise in future as cutting-edge
novel biotechnologies are invented during future years.
Discussion and Concluding Remarks
The worldwide bioeconomy is centered on fostering economic prosperity by
harnessing biological resources, including plants, animals, microorganisms,
derived biomass, and organic waste. Through advanced technological
applications, it facilitates the production of diverse goods, ranging from
food, animal feed, pharmaceuticals, bio-based polymers, plastics, chemicals,
and value-added products to biofuels and energy. The overarching objective
is to achieve these outcomes while concurrently reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. Harnessing bioeconomy is anticipated to enable recycling of
wastes and more promotion of environmental sustainability. Bioeconomy
is a social necessity to address major human needs such as food, medicines,
safe drinking water, healthy dwelling places with science-based washrooms
and bathrooms. Advancement of bioeconomy in counties is anticipated to
elevate the health, longevity and living standards of people besides societal
reforming to promote equal opportunities for skill development.

The demand for certain inputs for people for improving the living
standards promotes competition between and among certain crucial needs
such as food, feed, fuel, pharmaceuticals and healthcare infrastructure.
Countries and societies would resort to trade-offs strategy, depending on
their priorities, and one universal solution would not emerge. Therefore
different kinds of innovations shall be promoted in different countries.
However, safe and nutritious foods grown through various innovative
technologies, using different life forms other than plants, shall be a major
priority all over to produce protein-rich biomass in closed systems, thereby
minimizing the use of land. Adverse impacts emanating from packaged
foods dispensed in plastics-based containers would draw more attention,
and innovations in bioplastics are anticipated to be a major direction in
novel technology development. In order to reduce respiratory illness
while preparing foods using solid fuels (plant biomass and animal dung
based), more use of liquefied as well as biogas is foreseen. Advent in the
generation of more efficacious new medicines and increased production
of patent expired effective biomedicines (produced by r DNA technology
and other connected and linked technological advancements) for increasing
longevity and maintaining better health are other areas of innovation are
bound to intensify.
32 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Economic advancement causes generation of more wealth. Bio economic

advancement causing creation of more wealth needs to be rationally
distributed so that there is more equity among people in the possession of
wealth. As a social objective, bioeconomy needs to address the inequality
dynamics among people, and come up with policies to minimise and
rationalise severe existing inequality. Growing inequality among people in
different countries is a great global concern. The world needs more talented
people to contribute to new inventions in science and technologies. The
world cannot progress without major new inventions. Inventions emanate
from people. There is increasing evidence that innovative people are born
in every community. But to nurture talents, there is a need to enable people
to have access to good health, high-quality education and to ensure safety.
Access to these services by all would reduce inequality, and more talented
people would develop from both sexes. Talented young people would not
reach their full potential if they are inhibited by social circumstances. In
bioeconomy objectives, while creating new job opportunities is flagged,
there is a need to take action to reduce inequalities, especially in developing
and poor countries, at least in maintaining good health, access to high-quality
education and ensuring safety at all ages.

In countries practicing globalisation, competition and open market

economy, while countries have been able to increase their wealth
phenomenally, the income inequality has also grown along with
increased lack of opportunities for poor individuals, resulting in diminished
access to basic needs such as nutritious food, pure drinking water, sound
health, adequate education for skill development, access to cheaper
energy sources, and many others. Therefore, unless governments have
simultaneously taken up programmes to mitigate such needs rationally,
the gap is seen to swell. Multiple components emanating from practicing
bioeconomy and improving the efficiency across productive factors can
assist in bridging the gap between ‘haves and have-nots’, especially in access
to food, good health and renewable energy in a sustainable manner. The
technological developments in relevant areas should, therefore, be identified
for each country by the governments, and appropriate programmes and
action plans need to be pursued. There is no better alternative to acquiring
own skills and developmental initiatives.

Acceptance of biobased products and technologies involving

manipulation of genes, cell lines, and natural life forms applied to benefit
various relevant sectors such as food, feed and fodder; health of people,
industry and improvement of polluted environment has strong societal
acceptance issues. Safety and efficacy are the two main points on which
societal acceptance or rejection depends. To develop a strictly science-based
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 33

society is almost impossible. The element of ethics, social acceptance

issues, including rights to choose and legal provisions, are anticipated to
flare up. Countries would have to resolve multiple issues and, therefore,
there is a need to spend time on such issues through united global forums
on a precautionary principle concurrently, as global advancements in
bioeconomy take place.

Advancement in wealth creation by developing products involving

the manipulation of genes, cell lines, and natural life forms has strong
societal acceptance issues. The element of ethics, social acceptance issues,
including rights to choose and legal provisions need to be worked upon
through united global forums on a precautionary principle for bringing out
undisputed resolution.

Acknowledgement: The authors wish to thank Mrs. Deepali Ghosh, Partner, Sompradip
Publishers and Consultants, New Delhi, Block: C2B, Flat: 5A, Janakpuri, New Delhi
110058 for her encouragement and support.

Financial Support and Sponsorship: Nil

Conflict of Interest: There is no conflict of interest

Endnotes
1
Bioeconomy – European Commission
2
What is Bioeconomy - BW
3
The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety- https://bch.cbd.int › protocol
4
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, March 14). Bioeconomy. In Wikipedia, The Free
Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 5, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.
php?title=Bioeconomy&oldid=1144666464
5
Biology: Biobased economy. (2023, March 11). HandWiki, . Retrieved April
7, 2023 from https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Biology:Biobased_
economy&oldid=2812665.
6
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change-https://unfccc.int › process-
and-meetings › the-paris-a..., retrieved on April 15, 2023
7
Assessing the contribution of bioeconomy to countries’ economy-https://www.fao.org/
publications/card/en/c/I9580EN/ and https://www.fao.org/3/I9580EN/i9580en.pdf,
retrieved on April 15, 2023
8
un.org-https://sdgs.un.org › 2030agenda, retrieved on April 15, 2023\
9
Org Earth.Org-https://earth.org › what-are-the-aichi-biodiversity-targets, retrieved on
April 15, 2023
10
CRISPR Babies: Where Are the First Gene-Edited Children ...-Popular Mechanics-
https://www.popularmechanics.com › Science › Health
34 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

11
National Guidelines for Stem Cell Research-search-Department of Biotechnology-
https://dbtindia.gov.in › sites › default › filesPDF
12
Game-changing Genetic Technology Bill passes into law in ...-John Innes Centre-https://
www.jic.ac.uk › News
13
Human Gene Therapy Products Incorporating ...-Food and Drug Administration (.gov)-
https://www.fda.gov › search-fda-guidance-documents
14
GOV.UK-https://www.gov.uk › Visas and immigration ,retrieved on April 21, 2023
15
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 21). Economy of the European Union. In
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 21, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.
org/w/index.php?title=Economy_of_the_European_Union&oldid=1151015133
16
SWITCH to Green Facility-https://www.switchtogreen.eu › ..., retrieved on April 21,
2023
17
europa.eu-https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu › bioecono..., retrieved on April
22, 2023
18
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 19). Economy of the United Kingdom. In
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 21, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.
org/w/index.php?title=Economy_of_the_United_Kingdom&oldid=1150651692
19
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and Department for Business,
Energy & Industrial Strategy - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-
innovation-strategy-leading-the-future-by-creating-it/uk-innovation-strategy-leading-
the-future-by-creating-it-accessible-webpage ( This Policy paper was published on
July 22, 2021); https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/
uploads/attachment_data/file/1009577/uk-innovation-strategy.pdf ( This Policy paper
was published in July 2021) ; ; and https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/
bioeconomy-strategy-2018-to-2030/growing-the-bioeconomy-a-national-bioeconomy-
strategy-to-2030 (This policy paper was withdrawn on Nov 30, 2021)- all accessed
on April12, 2023
20
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 21). Economy of the United States. In Wikipedia,
The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 21, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/
index.php?title=Economy_of_the_United_States&oldid=1150956886
21
United States Department of Agriculture (.gov)-https://usbiotechnologyregulation.mrp.
usda.gov › about, accessed on April 21, 2023
22
The Bioeconomy: A Primer - CRS Reports-https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/
pdf/R/R46881, accessed on April 21, 2023
23
The White House (.gov)-https://www.whitehouse.gov › 2022/08/09 › fact-sheet...,
accessed on April 21, 2023\
24
The White House (.gov)-https://www.whitehouse.gov › Presidential Actions, accessed
on April 21, 2023
25
Congress.gov-https://crsreports.congress.gov › product › pdf, accessed on April 21,
2023
26
Forbes-https://www.forbes.com › johncumbers › 2022/09/12 and https://renewable-
carbon.eu/news/white-house-unveils-strategy-to-grow-trillion-dollar-u-s-bioeconomy/,
accessed on April 21, 2023
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 35

27
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 21). Economy of China. In Wikipedia, The
Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 22, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.
php?title=Economy_of_China&oldid=1151021833
28
China’s five-year bioeconomy plan to focus on low-carbon www.gov.cn-https://english.
www.gov.cn › statecouncil › ministries, accessed on April 21, 2023
29
China Daily-https://global.chinadaily.com.cn › 202205 › 11, accessed on April 21, 2023
30
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 21). Economy of India. In Wikipedia, The Free
Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 22, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.
php?title=Economy_of_India&oldid=1150988656
31
Youth Destination IAS-https://youthdestination.in › Science & Technology , accessed
on April 22, 2023
32
Birac-https://birac.nic.in › webcontent › 1658318307...PDF, accessed on April 22, 2023
33
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 17). Economy of Japan. In Wikipedia, The
Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 22, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.
php?title=Economy_of_Japan&oldid=1150360165
34
New Biotech Policy by Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI):- https://
www.nedo.go.jp/content/100890873.pdf , accessed on April 17, 2023
35
Market Intelligence - Japan-International Trade Administration (.gov)-https://www.
trade.gov › market-intelligence-search, followed by https://www.trade.gov/market-
intelligence/japan-bioeconomy-strategy , accessed on April 17, 2023
36
Partners - Global Bioeconomy Summit 2020-Global Bioeconomy Summit 2020- https://
gbs2020.net ›official partnerships and METI, Japan - https://gbs2020.net/official-
partnerships/japan/, accessed on April 17, 2023
37
How many countries in Latin America and the Caribbean?-Worldometer-https://www.
worldometers.info › geography › how-man..., accessed on April 17, 2023
38
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, February 17). List of Latin American and Caribbean
countries by GDP (nominal). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April
17, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Latin_American_
and_Caribbean_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)&oldid=1139949198
39
https://www.managementdynamics.ro/index.php/journal/article/view/134
40
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, February 22). Economy of South America. In Wikipedia,
The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved, April 22, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/
index.php?title=Economy_of_South_America&oldid=1141018301
41
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 19). Economy of Brazil. In Wikipedia, The
Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 22, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.
php?title=Economy_of_Brazil&oldid=1150631315
42
Encyclopedia Britannica-https://www.britannica.com › ... › Brazil, accessed on April
22, 2023
43
Brazilian Policies and Programmes in BIOECONOMY-fapesp.br-https://fapesp.br ›
eventos PDF , accessed on April 22, 2023
44
Bioeconomy in Brazil can generate US$ 284 billion ...-embrapa.br-https://www.
embrapa.br › busca-de-noticias › noticia , accessed on April 10, 2023
36 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

45
NBC News-https://www.nbcnews.com › mach › science › why-amaz.., , accessed on
April 10, 2023
46
World Economics-https://www.worldeconomics.com › Regions › ASEAN, , accessed
on April 10, 2023
47
IRENA-https://www.irena.org › News › pressreleases › Sep › AS..., accessed on April
12, 2023
48
ASEAN Goes Green: Renewable Energy Strategies in ...-ASEAN Business Partners-
https://bizasean.com › News
49
National Bureau of Asian Research-https://www.nbr.org › publication › vietnams-
renewable-..., accessed on April 12, 2023
50
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 12). Economy of South Korea. In Wikipedia, The
Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 19, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.
php?title=Economy_of_South_Korea&oldid=1149535886
51
Bioökonomie.de-https://biooekonomie.de › files › files › sudkorea PDF, accessed on
April 19, 2023
52
South Korea-https://biooekonomie.de/sites/default/files/files/2016-12/sudkorea.pdf ,
accessed on April 19, 2023
53
nternational Institute for Sustainable Development-https://www.iisd.org › sustainable-
recovery › news › s... , accessed on April 19, 2023
54
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 21). Economy of Russia. In Wikipedia, The Free
Encyclopedia. Retrieved on April 23, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.
php?title=Economy_of_Russia&oldid=1150988170
55
National Defense University-https://ndupress.ndu.edu › JFQ › Joint Force Quarterly
108, accessed on April 23, 2023
56
STATE COORDINATION PROGRAM for the Development of Biotechnology in
the Russian Federation until 2020 “BIO 2020”- http://biotech2030.ru/wp-content/
uploads/2017/05/BIO2020_Summary.pdf, accessed on April 23, 2023
57
Presidential address to the federal assembly. 2020- http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/
news/62582-,accessed on April 23, 2023
58
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 13). Economy of Australia. In Wikipedia, The
Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 20, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.
php?title=Economy_of_Australia&oldid=1149620603
59
AUSTRALIA-https://biooekonomie.de/sites/default/files/files/2017-01/country_
profile_australia_pdf.pdf, April 20, 2023
60
Australia’s Bioenergy Roadmap Report- Australian Renewable Energy Agency-https://
arena.gov.au › Knowledge & Innovation, accessed on April 20, 2023
61
CSIRO Futures (2021) A National Synthetic Biology Roadmap: Identifying commercial
and economic opportunities for Australia. CSIRO, Canberra.-https://www.csiro.au/-/
media/Services/Futures/Synthetic-Biology-Roadmap-2.txt, , accessed on April 20,
2023
62 `
Global Australia-https://www.globalaustralia.gov.au › industries › syntheti..., , accessed
on April 20, 2023
 Bioeconomy: Different Countries, Different Strategies, Multiple Benefits 37

63
Wikipedia contributors. (2023, April 7). List of countries by GDP (nominal). In
Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved April 11, 2023, from https://en.wikipedia.
org/w/index.php?title=List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)&oldid=1148617602
64
CrowdStrike® Threat Report - 2023 Global Threat Report-Crowd Strike-https://
go.crowdstrike.com › global_threat › report-https://go.crowdstrike.com/rs/281-
OBQ-266/images/CrowdStrike2023GlobalThreatReport.pdf accessed on April 11, 2023
65
Precedence Research-https://www.precedenceresearch.com › biotechnology-m...,
accessed on April25, 2023.

References
Alonso, M. and Savulescu, J. 2021. “He Jiankui´s gene-editing experiment and the non-
identity problem”. Bioethics, Vol. 35(6), pp. 563-573.
Baylis, F. Darnovsky, M. Hasson, K. and Krahn, T.M. 2020. “Human Germline and Heritable
Genome Editing: The Global Policy Landscape”. The CRISPR Journal, pp. 365-377.
Boyarov, A. Osmakova, A. Popov, V. 2021. “Bioeconomy in Russia: Today and tomorrow”.
N Biotechnol, Vol. 25, No. 60, pp. 36-43.
Brouwer, R. Pinto, R. Dugstad, A. Navrud, S. 2022. “The economic value of the Brazilian
Amazon rainforest ecosystem services: A meta-analysis of the Brazilian literature”.
PLoS One. Vol. 19, No. 17, pp. 0268425.
Dai, X. Shen, L. 2022. “Advances and Trends in Omics Technology Development”. Front
Med (Lausanne). Vol. 1, No. 9.
El-Chichakli, B. von Braun, J. and Lang, C. Barben, D. Philp, J. 2016. “Policy: Five
cornerstones of a global bioeconomy”. Nature, Vol. 14 No. 535(7611), pp. 221-3.
Enríquez, J. 1998. “Genomics and the world’s economy”. Science, Vol. 14, No. 281(5379),
pp. 925-6.
Ghosh, P.K. 2000. “Hydrophilic polymeric nanoparticles as drug carriers”. Indian J. of
Biochemistry and Biophysics, Vol. 37, pp. 273-282.
Machado, P.G. Cunha, M. Walter, A. Faaij, A. and Guilhoto, J.J.M. 2021. “Biobased
economy for Brazil: Impacts and strategies for maximizing socioeconomic benefits”.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Vol. 139.
Maximo, Y.I. Hassegawa, M. Verkerk, P.J. Missio, A.L. 2022. “Forest Bioeconomy in
Brazil: Potential Innovative Products from the Forest Sector”. Land Vol. 11, pp. 1297.
Mungaray-Moctezuma, A.B. Perez-Nuñez, S.M. and López-Leyva, S. 2015. “Knowledge-
Based Economy in Argentina, Costa Rica and Mexico: A Comparative Analysis from
the Bio-Economy Perspective”. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy,
Vol. 3, pp. 213.
Patermann, C. Aguilar, A. 2018. “The origins of the bioeconomy in the European Union”.
N Biotechnol, Vol. 25, No. 40, pp. 20-24.
Phuoc Huu Vo and Thanh Quang Ngo, 2021. “Cuadernos de Economía” Vol. 44, No. 126,
pp. 23-33
Quianzon, C.C. and I. Cheikh. 2012. “History of insulin”. J Community Hosp Intern Med
Perspect, Vol. 16, No. 2(2). doi: 10.3402/jchimp.v2i2.18701.
38 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Ronzon, T. and M’Barek, R. 2018. “Socioeconomic Indicators to Monitor the EU’s

Bioeconomy in Transition”. Sustainability, Vol. 10, No. 1745.
Ronzon, T. Iost, S. and Philippidis, G. 2022. “An output-based measurement of EU
bioeconomy services: Marrying statistics with policy insight”. Structural Change Econ
Dynam, Vol. 60, pp. 290-301.
Wang, T. Yu, Z. Ahmad, R. Riaz, S. Khan, K.U. Siyal, S. Chaudhry, M.A. and Zhang, T.
2022. “Transition of bioeconomy as a key concept for the agriculture and agribusiness
development: An extensive review on ASEAN countries”. Frontiers in Sustainable
Food Systems, Vol. 6, pp. 998594.
Wei, X. Luo, J. Pu, A. Liu, Q. Zhang, L. Wu, S. Long, Y. Leng, Y. Dong, Z.Wan, X. 2022.
“From Biotechnology to Bioeconomy: A Review of Development Dynamics and
Pathways”. Sustainability, Vol. 14, pp. 10413.
Zhang, X. Zhao, C. and Shao, M.W. Chen, Y.L. Liu, P. Chen, G.Q. 2022. “The roadmap of
bioeconomy in China”. Eng Biol, Vol. 30, No. 6(4), pp. 71-81.
 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review
Vol. 25, No.3, pp 39-59
© 2023, RIS.

Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food

Systems: A Narrative Review
Radhika Hedaoo*

Abstract: Due to its numerous benefits to sustainability, product quality,

and consumer health, the use of bio-enzymes in food systems has grown in
significance. The importance of these enzymes in the creation of sustainable
food is highlighted in this abstract. By increasing the bioavailability of vital
nutrients and lowering the amount of anti-nutrients, bio-enzymes serve a
critical role in boosting the nutritional value of food. By displacing artificial
additives and preservatives, they also assist in the production of products with
cleaner labels. Reduced food waste, increased shelf life, and consistency and
flavour of food items are all made possible by bio-enzymes. Additionally,
their eco-friendly sourcing and sustainable production methods meet the
rising demand for food production that is environmentally conscious. The
significance of bio-enzymes is growing in an era of increased sustainability
goals, consumer awareness and environmental implications. The review
presents studies on the utility of bio enzymes in food production and
processing and in improving food quality, nutritional value, and safety
and its role in the environmental impact and exploration of the latest
technological developments and innovations in the food industry along
with the identification of literature gaps and areas where research is scarce.
Keywords: Bio enzymes, Bio catalysis, Ecofriendly food production, Food
processing, Enzymes in food, Sustainable food systems.

Introduction
In recent years, there has been growing recognition of the need for
sustainable food systems that can meet the nutritional needs of a growing
global population while minimising negative environmental impacts.
Traditional agricultural and food production practices often rely on non-
renewable resources, contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, and generate
waste. As a result, there is a growing interest in utilising bio-enzymes and
biofuels to promote sustainability in food systems. Achieving sustainable
food systems now appears to be possible with the help of biofuels and bio-
enzymes (Herrero et al., 2020).

In living organisms, bio-enzymes serve as catalysts to speed up chemical

reactions. They are naturally occurring proteins. They have a wide range of
uses in numerous industries, including the food business. Biofuels, on the
*
Assistant Professor, Nutrition & Dietetics Program, Symbiosis Institute of Health Sciences, Symbiosis
International University, Pune, India Email: [email protected]
40 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

other hand, are renewable fuels that can replace fossil fuels since they are
made from organic matter, such as plant biomass or animal waste (Ayub
et al., 2023).

A solution named as “Garbage Enzyme” was developed in 2006 by

Thai researcher Dr. Rosukon Poompanvong, utilising organic solid waste
(Novianti & Muliarta, 2021). The simple fermentation of organic waste
materials, such as fruit and vegetable peels, flowers, or leaves, mixed with
molasses and water, is employed to produce bio enzymes. The concoction
is made up of three parts organic waste, one part molasses, and ten parts
water, or 3:1:10 ratio. In addition, the mixture’s primary ingredients include
hormones, amino acids, alcohol, acetic acid, vitamins, minerals, salts, and
enzymes (such as lipase, amylase, protease, and cellulase). This mixture
is fermented for three months to provide a dark brown liquid known as
garbage enzyme or eco enzyme, which has an odour similar to vinegar
(Samriti, 2019).

Biotechnology utilises bio-enzymes in bioprocessing, where biological

systems are employed to produce valuable products using genetic
engineering and fermentation. This includes the use of enzymes in the
production of bio-based materials, biofuels, and other bio-derived products.
Various industries such as detergents, textiles, pharmaceuticals and food and
beverages are using the bio-enzymes to obtain a sustainable cost-effective
and environment-friendly products. Enzymes have been found to be useful
in bioremediation processes to degrade pollutants, and they play a role in
wastewater treatment and soil improvement. By naturally fertilising the
land with enzyme residue, tainted water is purified and more leaching is
prevented (Keus, 2015).

By using such Eco-enzymes, wastewater sludge can be used as

a potential organic fertilizer and disinfectant, an antibiotic agent for
endodontic treatments, and also as a hand sanitiser. Its versatile properties
include its ability to act as a disinfectant, biofertiliser, and cleaner for
wastewater, all while lowering the need for landfills that generate methane
emissions, a major contributor to global warming (Barman et al., 2022).
Thus, the bio-enzymes are useful instruments in the wider discipline of
biotechnology because of their versatility; they have an impact on many
industries and help develop novel and sustainable solutions. The value of
bio enzymes and biofuels comes from their capacity to address a number
of significant sustainability issues in food systems. They provide chances
to increase resource efficiency, lower greenhouse gas emissions, encourage
waste reduction, and aid in the growth of circular economy practices.
Sustainable food systems can be developed, assuring food security,
 Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review 41

minimising negative environmental effects, and promoting economic growth

(Esfandabadi, 2022).

In the food sector, sustainability is essential to protect the environment,

save resources, maintain food security, promote public health, complete
social obligations, satisfy customer needs, and manage risks. A more
resilient, egalitarian, and sustainable food system that benefits people, the
environment, and future generations can be achieved through adopting
sustainability approaches by the industry. The usefulness and advantages
of bio enzymes in sustainable food systems is crucial in this regard. This
review examines the potential of bio enzymes in enhancing the processing
efficiency, and waste management by converting the biowaste to value added
products, improving the shelf life and the quality attributes of the product,
and improving the specific functional properties of the food product while
highlighting the beneficial contributions to the development of a more
resilient and sustainable food system. Hence, the present review focusses on
assessing the available literature to develop a comprehensive understanding
of the potential, challenges, and opportunities and guide future efforts
towards a more sustainable and efficient food production and processing.
Rationale for the narrative review:
The usage of bio enzymes for giving a thorough overview of the state of
research and commercial practices has grown significantly as people’s
awareness of the need for sustainable food systems has increased. The review
highlights the role of these eco enzymes in enhancing the bioeconomy.
Researchers, legislators, business people, and the general public would all
benefit from the review’s information on the function of bio enzymes in
advancing sustainable food production, processing, and waste management.
The evaluation can shed light on potential new developments and future
approaches for the use of bio-enzymes in food systems. Researchers,
industry participants, and policymakers may work together more to discover
fresh uses, get around obstacles, and boost the adoption and use of these
technologies. The review can identify literature gaps and areas where
research is limited or scarce.
Objectives of the Review:
1) Analyse the utility of bio enzymes in food production and processing
and in improving food quality, nutritional value, and safety.
2) Investigate the environmental impact of bio enzymes in the context of
sustainable food systems.
3) Explore the latest technological developments and innovations related
to bio enzymes in the food industry.
42 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Methodology: Different databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed

and Google Scholar were searched by utilising the Boolean operators “OR”
and “AND” to find the relevant articles. MeSH subheadings and appropriate
keywords were employed, such as Bio enzymes, Food production, food
processing, Enzymes in food, Sustainable food systems, Enzymes in food
and or Food industry, Food processing, Garbage-enzymes, Eco-enzymes
for the identification of the pertinent studies. Fifty-four full research papers
in English language, published between 2003-2023 were included in the
review and studies with only abstracts published and research articles found
in non-English language were excluded.
Overview of Bio-Enzymes and their Utility in Sustainable
Food Systems
Currently, the global food system is accountable for over 30 per cent of
greenhouse gas emissions, with food loss and waste alone responsible for
8–10 per cent. The need for animal-based protein will rise as a result of rising
earnings, urbanisation, and the projected increase in world population to
approximately 10 billion by 2050 (Fiora, 2019). This calls for a revolution
in food manufacturing, consumption, and production processes worldwide
during the next three decades. In order to feed an additional two billion
people while also combating climate change, we now have a striking
opportunity and responsibility to build a more equitable, resilient, and
sustainable food system. A developing strategy to replace chemical agents
in numerous industrial domains is the use of bio enzymes. Bio enzymes,
also referred to as biological catalysts are proteins which assist and quicken
chemical processes in living things. Microorganisms generate bio enzymes
that convert natural resources, such as food and agricultural waste, into
soluble nutrients, enhancing the bioavailability of such elements. Bio
enzymes have received a lot of interest recently due to their use in sustainable
food systems. They have many advantages, such as better product quality,
reduced waste, higher resource efficiency, and reduced environmental impact
(Kee et al., 2023). Although the use of bio enzymes is not a different idea, its
potential in the current chemical-dominated global market has been grossly
underestimated. These biological catalysts can contribute to a sustainable
food and drink industry.
Characteristics of Bio-enzymes
The crucial traits of bio enzymes include the unique composition and three-
dimensional structure of amino acids specialized in catalytic activity. The
substrate is recognised and bound by the enzyme, which then catalyses the
desired chemical reaction. This is made possible by the precise arrangement
of amino acids in the active site and other sections of the enzyme. The
 Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review 43

structure of an enzyme can be altered or changed, which can result in altered

catalytic activity or function loss (Lakra et al., 2022). Proteases have a
distinct protein structure that enables them to target and cleave particular
peptide bonds in proteins, leading to protein hydrolysis. For example,
proteases are essential for the development of flavour and texture in the
making of cheese. Peptides and amino acids are produced as a result of the
proteases’ action on the casein proteins found in milk. These breakdown
byproducts help give many types of cheese their distinctive flavour and
scent (Gurumallesh et al., 2019). Additionally, every bio enzyme exhibits
selective catalysis. By being specific, bio enzymes guarantee that they
carry out certain tasks inside biological systems. Different mechanisms,
such as post-translational modifications, feedback inhibition, and allosteric
regulation, can be used to regulate an organism. This enables precise control
over cellular functions and metabolic pathways. Extreme pH or temperature
conditions can be tolerated by certain bio enzymes. Bio-enzymes are
generally reusable catalysts. They are not consumed or permanently altered
during the catalytic reaction and can participate in multiple reaction cycles.
This reusability contributes to the cost-effectiveness and efficiency of bio
enzymes in various industrial processes, such as during the brewing process,
bio enzymes are used to break down proteins and starches, respectively, such
as amylases and proteases. These enzymes aid in breaking down proteins
to increase flavour and stability and turn starches into fermentable sugars.
The leftover grains or biomass from brewing can be used as animal feed
or anaerobically digested to produce biogas or during the baking, enzymes
such as amylases, xylanases, and lipases are used to increase volume,
improve texture, and prolong the shelf life of baked goods and any waste or
unfinished goods can be recycled or used again after baking, for example, by
composting them or using them to make animal feed (Handique et al., 2023).

Utility of Bio-Enzymes in the Food Production and Food

Processing Industry
It has been shown that bio enzymes can be used in a variety of settings,
including agriculture and food industry and community settings, to utilise
food waste. Likewise, the Bio enzyme use is extensive since it is entirely
natural and aids in waste lessening. As we are accentuating on sustainable
food production, the bio enzymes which accelerate food production and
ease food processing are particularly useful.
Proteoses
Proteoses are particularly important in cheese-making processes to impart
and develop the texture, flavour, and aroma of different types of cheese.
They are added during the coagulation stage to break down milk proteins,
44 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

primarily casein, into smaller peptides and amino acids. This enzymatic
action helps develop specific proteases, such as chymosin (rennet), to
coagulate milk proteins and form curds in cheese production. Advances in
enzyme engineering techniques have allowed for the development of more
efficient and specific proteases for cheese production (Sharma et al., 2020).
Researchers are exploring genetic modifications and protein engineering to
enhance the performance of proteases, resulting in improved coagulation
properties, cheese texture, and flavour development. By optimising
fermentation conditions, pH levels, temperature, and incubation times,
they aim to maximize the proteolytic activity of enzymes, leading to better
cheese quality and yield (Sharma et al., 2016). The use of microbial proteases
derived from genetically modified microorganisms or newly discovered
strains has gained attention. When dairy, fruit, vegetable, legume, fish, and
meat products are fermented, bioactive peptides are released. In addition to
their capacity to produce bioactive peptides, lactic acid bacteria, Bacillus
spp., yeasts, and mould have a proteolytic specificity that contributes
significantly to the production of particular bioactive peptides in traditional
fermented foods (Chaurasia et al., 2023). Protease supplies from new
and different sources are being investigated for meat fermentation. This
entails looking into proteases produced from plants, microorganisms, or
recombinant enzymes.
Finding proteases with particular functions and traits that can improve
fermentation and aid in the production of distinctive meat products is being
researched (Parlindungan et al., 2023). According to reports, soy-based
fermented foods (SFF) are highly effective at preventing thrombus, which
is one of the major risk factors for cardiovascular disease. This is largely
because these foods contain bioactive compounds, particularly fibrinolytic
enzymes (FE) produced by microorganisms during the fermentation process.
The microbial fibrinolytic enzymes (MFE) from SFF were consequently
been the main focus (Yao et al., 2021). Some plant proteases are used to
coagulate milk proteins and aid in the production of cheese curds, such as
those found in figs (ficin) and pineapples (bromelain) (Patel et al., 2013).
They provide an alternative to proteases originating from animals, such
as rennet. Plant proteases have a function in the brewing and beverage
industries, particularly in the manufacturing of beer. They are employed to
break down malted grain proteins, enhancing wort filtration and beer clarity.
Additionally, proteases are utilised to alter the functional characteristics of
food proteins, such as coagulation and emulsification, as well as their flavour,
nutritional value, solubility, and digestibility (Graca et al., 2023). In the
baking industry, proteases are frequently employed to make bread, baked
goods, crackers, and waffles. These enzymes are employed to speed up the
mixing process, lessen dough consistency and uniform (Aruna et al., 2014).
 Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review 45

Amylase
The field of amylase applications in food production is continuously
evolving, with ongoing research and development. Amylase is a common
ingredient in baking products and is used to enhance the texture, handling
characteristics, and overall quality of baked foods. It aids in the breakdown
of flour’s intricate starch molecules into simpler sugars that yeast can
ferment and release carbon dioxide from. This gas generation helps dough
leaven and gives bread, pastries and other baked goods their light and fluffy
texture. Immobilisation techniques have advanced the use of amylase in food
production. Immobilised enzymes have increased stability, reusability, and
ease of separation from the finished product, among other advantages (Bashir
et al.,2020). In order to increase the performance and cost-effectiveness
of amylase applications, many immobilisation techniques have been
investigated, including encapsulation, covalent binding, and adsorption onto
solid substrates. Amylases with improved characteristics have been created
using genetic engineering techniques for use in particular food applications.
Researchers have altered amylases to enhance their substrate specificity,
thermal stability, pH tolerance, or resistance to inhibitors through protein
engineering and directed evolution. These developments allow for the
creation of customised amylases with enhanced functionality for various
food processing requirements (Jujjavarapu, 2019). Likewise, new methods
for process optimisation have increased the efficiency with which amylase
is used in food production (Far et al., 2020).
Lipases
Animals, plants, and microorganisms all manufacture lipases, which are
widely distributed enzymes The adoption of recombinant manufacturing
technology is essential due to the rising economic interest in these proteins
in the food and nutraceutical industries. Utilising cell factories for the
heterologous manufacture of lipases has increased the productivity of
lipase production bioprocesses while decreasing the cost of enzymes.
One of the most frequently employed cell factories among them is
Komogataella phaffi (P. pastoris) (Vellero et al., 2012). To safeguard lipases
throughout processing, improve their stability, and regulate their activity
in certain food matrices, microencapsulation, and delivery systems based
on nanotechnology protein engineering, bioinformatics design, directed
evolution, saturation mutagenesis, site-directed mutagenesis, and DNA
shuffling have all been used to improve lipases activity (Reyesal et al.,
2022). These developments make it possible for lipases to be released in a
targeted and regulated manner, improving their performance in food-related
applications (Hamdan et al., 2021). However, the natural form is frequently
chosen in the food business as a valuable bio enzyme in food production,
46 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

offering opportunities to enhance flavours, improve texture, and modify fat

content in various food products such as flavour enhancers in a variety of
cheeses such as blue cheese, parmesan. Lipases can be used to modify oils
and fats to lower their amount of harmful trans fats. Additionally, they can
be utilised to create structured lipids that have particular health advantages,
including a lower calorie count or an enhanced fatty acid profile. The creation
of food products with better functionalities and nutritional profiles is made
possible by lipases (Teng et al., 2021). Lipase is widely used in cheese
production to enhance flavour and aroma. Certain types of cheese, such as
blue cheese and Parmesan, require the addition of lipase to develop their
characteristic flavours. Lipase acts on the milk fat, releasing free fatty acids
that contribute to the unique taste and aroma of these cheeses and also helps
in the modification of fats and oils, leading to improved emulsification,
aeration, and stability of dough and batters. Lipase can also enhance the
textural attributes of baked goods, such as the softness of bread and the
creaminess of fillings, using certain lipase-mediated reactions such as
catalysis of triglycerides into free fatty acids, resulting in fat modification
or reduction, which may have implications for product formulation and
nutritional considerations.
Cellulases
The typical sources of cellulase are microorganisms like bacteria and fungus.
These enzymes are highly substrate-specific and efficient at dissolving
cellulose into less complex sugars, making them useful tools in a variety
of industries. Particularly diverse uses for cellulase can be found in the
food business, food service, food supply, and food preservation. Cellulases
can, in fact, improve the flavour and aroma of food products, extract the
essential oil from olives and the polyphenols found in tea, hydrolyse roasted
coffee, lessen the roughness of dough, clarify fruit juices, and tenderise
fruit. However, they have mostly been ignored in the food industries.
Future possibilities, scientific and technological advancements, and the use
of cellulases in the food sector are all projected to increase their potential.
Potential applications for cellulase in the food sector include bacteria
(Paenibacillus and Bacillus) and fungus (Trichoderma and Aspergillus) (Ejaz
et al.,2021). In the juice industry, cellulases are applied in combination
with other macerating enzymes for increasing process performance and
yield, improving the extraction methods, clarification and stabilisation of
juices (D’souza et al., 2021). They can also reduce the viscosity of nectar
and puree from fruits such as apricot, mango, plum, papaya, pear and peach,
and are used for the extraction of flavonoids from flowers and seeds. The
preference for cellulase-mediated extraction over conventional methods is
due to higher yield, less heat damage and short processing time. Cellulases
 Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review 47

are utilized for the extraction of phenolic compounds from grape pomace
(Toy et al., 2022). Β-Glucosidases in combination with, pectinase alter the
structure, flavour and aroma of fruits and vegetables along with reducing
the bitterness of citrus fruits and improve the aroma and flavours of wines
Cellulases are used with other enzymes for efficient olive oil extraction
((Uzner et al., 2021).
Pectinase
Pectinesterase, which converts the polymer of pectin into monomers
through the reactionary process of trans-elimination, and Polygalacturonase,
which breaks down pectin into smaller fragments through the process of
hydrolysis, are two different types of pectinases depending on how they
react with their substrate. Pectin is broken down by the enzyme pectin lyase
through the reactionary de-esterification process. Two enzymes that work
on the glycosidic bonds of polygalacturonic acid and hydrolytic cleavage,
respectively, are polygalacturonase (PG) and polymethyl galacturonase
(PMG) (Samanta, 2019). Furthermore, fruits are a great source of pectinase.
It plays a part in fruit ripening and functions as a natural accelerator.
Microorganisms also contain pectinase, which is employed extensively in
industry.
Nowadays, enterprises use microorganisms to generate pectinase in a
controlled manner because they have a propensity to multiply themselves.
Pectinase is made by a variety of yeast, bacterium, and fungus strains.
Plants produce pectinase that is more active and so more resistant to alkali,
acid, and high temperatures. Pectinase generated by bacteria, on the other
hand, exhibits poor activity and is less resistant to high temperatures,
acid, and alkali (Hernández-Beltrán et al., 2020). This is the reason why
industries prefer to recombine several microbes to produce pectinase with
higher activity. Pectinases break down pectin, a complex carbohydrate
found in fruits and vegetables. They are used in fruit juice extraction,
wine clarification, and to enhance the texture and clarity of fruit products.
Pectinase increases the effectiveness of several food processing procedures
like clarifying, filtration, and extraction by breaking down pectin. Food
processing becomes more sustainable as a result of the decreased need
for surplus water, energy, and other resources. The clarity, stability, and
sensory qualities of food and beverage items are improved by pectinase
enzymes. Pectinase treatment improves juice clarity and decreases haze in
the fruit juice business, creating visually appealing products (John et al,
2020). This enhances the items’ general quality and marketability, lowering
the risk of food waste and helping to create a sustainable food system.
Hence, Pectinase effectively extracts juice from fruits, minimising waste
and maximising fruit consumption while promoting a more sustainable use
of agricultural resources.
48 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Other enzymes:
Likewise, Catalases break down hydrogen peroxide into water and oxygen.
They are used in the food industry to prevent oxidative damage and maintain
food quality, such as in the processing of fruits, vegetables, and dairy
products. Phytases break down phytic acid, a form of phosphorus found
in grains and oilseeds. They are used in animal feed and food processing
to improve nutrient availability and reduce environmental phosphorus
pollution. Invertases convert sucrose into glucose and fructose. They are
used in the production of inverted sugar syrups, candies, and sweeteners.
Lactases break down lactose, the sugar found in milk, into glucose and
galactose. They are used in dairy processing to produce lactose-free or
reduced-lactose dairy products. Invertase allows for the production of
fruit-based sweeteners using a more sustainable approach. It facilitates the
hydrolysis of sucrose, a naturally occurring sugar present in fruits, into
glucose and fructose, the primary sugars in fruit-based sweeteners. Fruit
juices or fruit purees can be used as substrates for this enzymatic conversion
process.
This encourages a more diverse and sustainable agricultural system and
lessens reliance on large-scale sugar monocultures. In general, growing
fruits uses less water than conventional sugar crops (Tan et al., 2023).
Water resources can be preserved by employing fruits as a source of sweets,
resulting in more sustainable water management techniques. Glucose
oxidases convert glucose into gluconic acid and hydrogen peroxide. They are
used in food preservation, as they can inhibit microbial growth and extend
the shelf life of food products. The requirement for artificial preservatives
or chemical additives can be decreased by using glucose oxidase as a
preservative, encouraging a more environmentally friendly method of food
preservation. Glucose oxidase can also be employed to enhance the texture
and calibre of bread goods. Glucose oxidase aids in converting extra glucose
in the dough into gluconic acid and hydrogen peroxide. The pH is lowered by
the gluconic acid, which improves bread volume and dough formation, and
reduces the use of chemical additions, like dough conditioners or oxidising
agents, in the making of bread, lessening the impact these compounds have
on the environment (Chen et al., 2020).

Environmental Impact of Bio Enzymes for Sustainable

Food Systems
In the context of sustainable food systems, instead of using conventional
chemical processes for manufacturing food, bio enzymes offer an alternative
that may have advantages for sustainable agriculture, reduced chemical use,
energy efficiency, waste reduction, biodegradability, and water conservation.
 Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review 49

The environmental implications of bio enzymes in sustainable food systems

are examined through the available recent evidences.

Reduction of Chemical Additives

Various studies have demonstrated that bio enzymes, such as proteases
and amylases, effectively replaced chemical additives like emulsifiers and
stabilizers in bakery and dairy products. Animal rennet has been replaced
by microbial proteases from Mucor or Endothia parasitica. However, it has
been discovered that pure chymosin is more specific than microbiological
rennin. It has been demonstrated that pepsin and chymosin-like enzymes
from harp seal and fish species that can withstand freesing temperatures
can curdle milk, although they are similarly less specific than microbial
enzymes. The most important upcoming development in the manufacturing
of microbial rennet is the introduction of microbial chymosin made by a
genetically modified organism (Ravindran et al.,2018).
Study by Sambaraju et al. (2023), explored anaerobic fermentation of
jaggery, plant waste (generally speaking, fruit, vegetable, flower, or plant
waste), water, and microorganisms in a plastic container. Six distinct samples
were taken from various fruit and vegetable peels to test their effectiveness
and suitability in various industries. After filtering, the liquid portion was
utilised to characterise bio-enzymes, while the solid Eco-enzyme is a sort
of naturally occurring substance that is typically extracted from citrus
fruit peels, trash, and other sources. It is a smart solution made from the
fermentation of fresh kitchen trash, such as fruit and vegetable peels. It is a
kind of vinegar produced by converting food waste and sugar into alcohol
through fermentation. Eco enzyme is a fermented liquid created mostly
from sugar, fruit peels, and water in a 1:3:10 ratio (Benny et al., 2023).
Citrus Eco-enzyme, citrus fruit extracts and citrus flavonoids, due to their
phenolic composition and antioxidant activities, have the potential to have
favourable biological traits.

Miguel et al., 2013 asserted that asparaginase has a high potential

for decreasing the synthesis of acrylamide during baking. Asparaginase
(L-asparagineamidohydrolases, EC 3.5.1.1) catalyses the hydrolysis of
asparagine to aspartic acid and ammonium, hence eliminating the precursor
to the synthesis of acrylamide. Asparagine and a carbonyl source undergo
the Maillard reaction, which results in the formation of acrylamide, which is
categorised as a potential human carcinogen Although asparaginase is present
in all living things, including animals, plants, and microbes, filamentous
fungus like Aspergillus oryzae and A. niger have been investigated for the
purpose of producing enzymes for use in industry (FAO, 2007)
50 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Potential Use in Sanitation and Hygiene in Food Industries

Toxic chemical compounds are largely affecting the worldwide food
sector due to anthropogenic and natural sources. As a result of chemical
contamination at various phases of food processing, food safety is at risk.
Pesticides and other chemicals, such as Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs),
are examples of persistent organic pollutants (POPs), which have a long-
lasting harmful impact on the environment. As heavy metals, antibiotics,
and POP contamination can have a negative impact on human health, they
must be regulated by effective legislative actions and appropriate monitoring
criteria that are based on reliable scientific evidence. The bioremediation
of contaminants is one of the already in place solutions that work well.
The sustainability and economic impact of these technologies as a control
technique in the food sector, however, require further study. These garbage
enzymes or bio enzymes work as enzymatic cleaning agent for food
industries as an eco-friendly alternative to chemical cleaning agents in the
food industry. The application of GE (garbage enzymes) to treat leachate
from metropolitan municipal landfills and domestic wastewater showed
a reduction of approximately 55-74 per cent. The concentrations were
significantly lowered, but they still didn’t match the disposal guidelines
however (Rani et al., 2020).
Energy saving using Bio- Enzymes
Sustainable processing is now of greater significance than ever because
of the urgent need to meet the ambitious net zero targets to reduce carbon
emissions and the effects of climate change. The use of inexpensive,
renewable materials, nature-inspired, highly selective biocatalysts operating
optimally under mild circumstances, and decreased energy consumption/
carbon footprint are all desired characteristics of bioprocessing that can
help it meet the challenge of sustainable processing. There has been a
lot of interest recently in developing intensified bioprocesses because
bioprocessing productivity is far from ideal for meeting the large-scale
demand for food, drugs, biofuels, and bio-based chemicals (Bodhoo et
al., 2020). Significant progress has been made in tailoring and utilising
the technologies in the toolbox traditionally applied in chemical process
intensification. Enzymes have the potential to provide a low-energy method
of recycling some of the textiles and single-use plastics that cause the most
pollution, but the cost of this technology will largely determine its global
adoption. Researchers have recently demonstrated that one common plastic
manufactured by enzyme-based recycling can be economically competitive
with conventional PET derived from fossil fuels, consume up to 80 per cent
 Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review 51

less energy, and emit up to 40 per cent fewer greenhouse gases than virgin
manufacturing (Zhu et al., 2022).
Energy Efficiency and Environmental Advantages
Compared to Conventional Methods
Compared to conventional approaches, bio enzymes are extremely effective
catalysts that enable chemical reactions to occur at lower temperatures
and softer conditions. In a variety of industrial operations, including food
processing, textile manufacture, and biofuel generation, this can result in
significant energy savings. Utilising bio enzymes can lessen the demand
for high-temperature processing, hence reducing energy needs and related
expenses. Perhaps the easiest way to describe the immense catalytic activity
of enzymes is to use the constant kcat, also known as the turnover rate,
turnover frequency, or turnover number. The number of substrate molecules
that can be transformed into products by a single enzyme molecule per unit
of time (often per minute or per second) is represented by this constant. For
instance, a single carbonic anhydrase molecule may catalyse the conversion
of nearly 500,000 molecules of its substrates, water (H2O) and carbon
dioxide (CO2), into the product, bicarbonate (HCO3), every second. This
is an incredibly impressive feat. The turnover rate (mole product s−1 mole
enzyme−1) of certain enzymes such as Carbonic anhydrase is 600,000,
catalase is 93,000, β–galactosidase is 200, Chymotrypsin is 100 and
tyrosinase is 1 (Robinson, 2015).
Latest Technological Developments and Innovations
Related to Bio Enzymes in the Food Industry
In recent years, there have been a number of technological advancements
and advances in the field of bio-enzymes in the food sector. In order to
increase the stability and reusability of bio enzymes in food processing,
immobilization techniques have been developed. In order to facilitate easy
separation and reuse, immobilization entails attaching the enzyme to a
support substance, such as nanoparticles, polymers, or matrices. With the
help of this technology, enzyme use in many food processes is now more
efficient and affordable (Brandy & Jordan , 2009). Bio enzymes can now be
modified and optimized for use in certain food-related applications because
of advancements in enzyme engineering techniques, including protein
engineering and directed evolution. Enzymes can be modified to have better
activity, stability, substrate specificity, and tolerance to difficult processing
conditions using genetic engineering and mutagenesis (Pang et al., 2021).
The combination of bio-enzymes and nanotechnology has created new
opportunities for food processing. In food systems, nano-scale carriers like
52 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

nanoparticles and nanofibers can shield enzymes, improve their stability,

and deliver regulated release. Potential uses for nanobiotechnology include
nutrient delivery, flavour enhancement, and food preservation. Over the
past forty years, advances in water purification techniques have been made,
with the utilization of nanomaterials and nanomembranes being the most
significant. TiO2, ZnO, CuO, Ag, CNTs, and mixed oxide nanoparticles,
for example, are modern examples of manufactured materials that employ
nanoparticles and nanomembranes (polymeric membranes) (Manikandan
et al., 2022). Bio enzymes and membrane technologies offer creative
approaches to food preparation. Enzymatic membrane reactors can be made
by immobilising enzymes on or inside of membranes. In processes including
juice clarifying, wine production, and milk fractionation, these systems offer
benefits like improved reaction speeds, higher-quality products, and less
energy and water use (De et al., 2022). Multiple enzymes act sequentially in
enzyme cascade reactions to create desirable food components or flavours.
Recent developments in enzyme cascade systems have made it possible to
synthesize complex molecules more effectively and sustainably, including
flavour compounds, natural sweeteners, and functional food components
(Niu et al., 2022).

Biosensors for evaluating the safety and quality of food have been
developed using enzymes. Biosensors can quickly and on-site analyse
food samples by identifying specific chemicals or pollutants. High
sensitivity, specificity, and cost-effectiveness are just a few benefits that
enzyme-based biosensors provide, making them useful instruments for
applications in the food sector (Rotario et al., 2016). Recent technical and
scientific studies based on optical sensing approaches, such as fluorescence
sensors, target-responsive hydrogels, chemiluminescence assay, tube
enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, enzymatic fiber-optic biosensor,
phosphorescence, lateral flow immunoassay, double-signal fluorescence
strategy, wearable glove-based sensors, and paper-based sensors, have
made novel advancements and stipulated scientific insight for the on-site
detection of pesticide residue (Umapathi et al., 2022). To comprehend
the interactions between enzymes and their substrates and to forecast
enzyme behavior, computational techniques such as molecular modelling
and simulations have been used. These methods support the creation and
improvement of bio enzymes for better catalytic stability, specificity, and
efficiency (Bahaman et al., 2020). Continued research and application
of these advancements will further enhance the role of bio enzymes in
achieving a more sustainable and technologically advanced food industry.
The Table 1 below summarises the various applications of bio enzymes for
maintaining a sustainable food system.
 Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review 53

Table 1 “Sustainable Food Solutions: Harnessing the Power of

Bio-enzymes”

Source: Author’s own compilation.

Role of Technology Transfer Offices in India’s Biotechnology

Sector
As one of the top hubs for bio innovation and biomanufacturing today,
India has been identified as an emerging sector and an essential element
of the nation’s effort to become a $5 trillion economy by 2024 through the
rising biotechnology market in India. As per the Invest India reports, 51
Biotech-KISAN (Biotech Krishi Innovation Science Application Network)
hubs have been financed by the Department of Biotechnology. These hubs
connect Indian farmers with the top scientists and institutions, enabling
them to access knowledge on soil health, irrigation, and innovative Agri
technologies. This is enabled by the Technology transfer, and knowledge
transfer from academic and research organisations to the commercial
sector is greatly aided by the work of Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs).
TTOs have grown to be crucial intermediaries in India’s biotechnology
industry, bridging the disparity between research and commercialisation
(Markan & Verma, 2019). TTOs are involved with negotiating licencing
deals and submitting patent applications arising from biotech research
and inventions, TTOs progress the conversion of research discoveries
into applications that are advantageous to both industry and academia
by fostering collaboration (Debackere, 2018). Asia and Pacific Centre
for Transfer of Technology (APCTT), National Research Development
Corporation (NRDC), Technology Information Forecasting and Assessment
54 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Council (TIFAC), Biotech Consortium India Limited, Technology Bureau of

Small Enterprises (TBSE) are some of the examples of TOTs functioning in
India involved in various initiatives, including promoting industry-academia
collaborations, technology transfer, and the development of biotechnology
parks and incubators through consultancy for investment opportunities,
regulatory requirements, setting up incubators, preparation of biosafety
dossiers, investment plans, identification of industry partners for technology
commercialisation and trainings and sector- specific workshops. The Figure
1 summarises the applications of TOTs in the biotechnology sector.
Figure 1: Contribution of TOTs towards sustainable
biotechnology ecosystem

Source: Author’s own compilation.

Gaps Identified through the Literature Review

Sustainability Studies on Bio-Enzymes and The Life Cycle
Assessment Studies
The overall environmental impact of employing bio-enzymes in food
production by measuring the net sustainability benefits, such as decreased
water and energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and waste generation,
needs to be evaluated through research. There are limited studies on the
life cycle assessment of the bio enzymes.
 Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review 55

Resource efficiency studies

There haven’t been many studies that quantify the increases in resource
efficiency that come from using enzymes. choosing enzymes that consume
less energy and waste.
Need for a Regulatory Framework
The legal framework governing the use of enzymes in food production is
still developing. To comprehend the complexity and guarantee adherence to
the changing laws governing food safety and labelling, research is required.
Limited Data on Long-Term Health Implications
There is a scarcity of research available on the long-term health effects
of eating food products that have been treated with bio enzymes. To fully
comprehend the potential health impacts and security issues connected
with their intake, more research is needed. It is crucial to comprehend how
bio enzymes interact with other components in complicated food matrices.
Clarification of the impact of various meal compositions on enzyme activity
and efficacy requires more study.
Synergy of Enzyme Combinations
There are few studies examining the synergistic impact of mixing several
enzymes in food systems. An important field of research on how enzyme
combinations can improve the sustainability and efficiency of certain
processes is still developing.

Conclusion
Bio-enzymes have the potential to make a major contribution in defining the
future of our food, rendering it healthier, and more environmentally friendly,
and adding value to waste streams. For the production of food ingredients
to be healthier and more sustainable in the future, enzyme research and
development is progressing, considering its benefits as a renewable resource.
Due to advancements in bio-enzyme engineering, businesses are now
transitioning to a circular economy, where resources are used, and waste
is recycled, from a linear economy, where resources are used but waste is
ignored. The natural biocatalysts are now being used as tools to valorise
agri-food and by-product waste, recover key nutrients, and turn some by-
products into revenue returns. It is evident that the advancement and future
of bio-enzymes is a significant contributing aspect to making this happen
if the food industry wants to become sustainable, accessible, and move
towards becoming carbon neutral.
56 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

References
Anese, M., Quarta, B. and Frias, J., 2011. Modelling the effect of asparaginase in reducing
acrylamide formation in biscuits. Food chemistry, 126(2), pp.435-440.
Aruna, K., Shah, J. and Birmole, R., 2014. Production and partial characterization of alkaline
protease from Bacillus tequilensis strains CSGAB0139 isolated from spoilt cottage
cheese. International Journal of Applied Biology and Pharmaceutical. pp.201-221.
Ayu, B.T., Chamnipa, N. and Apiraksakorn, J., 2023. The Potential of an Inexpensive Plant-
Based Medium for Halal and Vegetarian Starter Culture Preparation. Fermentation,
9(3), p.216.
Ayub, J., Saeed, M.U., Hussain, N., Zulfiqar, I., Mehmood, T., Iqbal, H.M. and Bilal, M.,
2023. Designing robust nano-biocatalysts using nanomaterials as multifunctional
carriers-expanding the application scope of bio-enzymes. Topics in Catalysis, 66(9-
12), pp.625-648.
Bahaman, A.H., Abdul Wahab, R., Hamid, A.A.A., Halim, K.B.A., Kaya, Y. and Edbeib,
M.F., 2020. Substrate docking and molecular dynamic simulation for prediction of
fungal enzymes from Trichoderma species-assisted extraction of nanocellulose from oil
palm leaves. Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics, 38(14), pp.4246-4258.
Barman, I., Hazarika, S., Gogoi, J. and Talukdar, N., 2022. A Systematic Review on
Enzyme Extraction from Organic Wastes and its Application. Journal of Biochemical
Technology, 13(3), pp.32-37.
Bashir, N., Sood, M., & Bandral, J. D. 2020. Enzyme immobilization and its applications in
food processing: A review. International Journal of Chemical Studies, 8(2), 254-261.
Benny, N., Shams, R., Dash, K.K., Pandey, V.K. and Bashir, O., 2023. Recent trends in
utilization of citrus fruits in production of eco-enzyme. Journal of Agriculture and
Food Research, p.100657.
Bhargava, N., Mor, R.S., Kumar, K. and Sharanagat, V.S., 2021. Advances in application
of ultrasound in food processing: A review. Ultrasonics sonochemistry, 70, p.105293.
Boodhoo, K.V.K., Flickinger, M.C., Woodley, J.M. and Emanuelsson, E.A.C., 2022.
Bioprocess intensification: A route to efficient and sustainable biocatalytic
transformations for the future. Chemical Engineering and Processing-Process
Intensification, 172, p.108793.
Brady, D. and Jordaan, J., 2009. Advances in enzyme immobilisation. Biotechnology
letters, 31, pp.1639-1650.
Chen, T., Wei, S., Cheng, Z. and Liu, J., 2020. Specific detection of monosaccharide by dual-
channel sensing platform based on dual catalytic system constructed by bio-enzyme
and bionic enzyme using molecular imprinting polymers. Sensors and Actuators B:
Chemical, 320, p.128430.
de Souza, T.S. and Kawaguti, H.Y., 2021. Cellulases, hemicellulases, and pectinases:
Applications in the food and beverage industry. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 14(8),
pp.1446-1477.
De, B. and Goswami, T.K., 2022. Nanobiotechnology–a green solution. Biotechnology for
Zero Waste: Emerging Waste Management Techniques, pp.379-396.
 Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review 57

Debackere, K., 2018. The TTO, an organizational innovation to facilitate technology transfer.
In World Scientific Reference on Innovation: Volume 1: University Technology Transfer
and Academic Entrepreneurship (pp. 23-41).
Ejaz, U., Sohail, M. and Ghanemi, A., 2021. Cellulases: From bioactivity to a variety of
industrial applications. Biomimetics, 6(3), p.44.
Esfandabadi, Z.S., Ranjbari, M. and Scagnelli, S.D., 2022. The imbalance of food and
biofuel markets amid Ukraine-Russia crisis: A systems thinking perspective. Biofuels
Research Journal, pp.1640.
Far, B.E., Ahmadi, Y., Khosroshahi, A.Y. and Dilmaghani, A., 2020. Microbial alpha-
amylase production: progress, challenges and perspectives. Advanced Pharmaceutical
Bulletin, 10(3), p.350.
Fiore, M., Chiara, F. and Adamashvili, N., 2019. Food Loss and Waste, a global
responsibility. Food Loss and Waste, a global responsibility.pp.825-846.
Graça, C., Lima, A., Raymundo, A. and Sousa, I., 2021. Sourdough fermentation as
a tool to improve the nutritional and health-promoting properties of its derived-
products. Fermentation, 7(4), p.246.
Gurumallesh, P., Alagu, K., Ramakrishnan, B. and Muthusamy, S., 2019. A systematic
reconsideration on proteases. International journal of biological macromolecules, 128,
pp.254-267.
Hamdan, S.H., Maiangwa, J., Ali, M.S.M., Normi, Y.M., Sabri, S. and Leow, T.C., 2021.
Thermostable lipases and their dynamics of improved enzymatic properties. Applied
microbiology and biotechnology, pp.1-26.
Handique, S., Saha, A., Saikia, K.K. and Gogoi, N., 2023. Agriculture Wastes: Generation
and Sustainable Management. Agriculture Waste Management and Bioresource: The
Circular Economy Perspective, pp.78-104.
Hernández‐Beltrán, J.U., Acosta‐Saldívar, C.A., Escobedo‐Morales, G., Balagurusamy,
N. and Luévanos‐Escareño, M.P., 2023. Bioreactor‐Scale Strategy for Pectinase
Production. Microbial Bioreactors for Industrial Molecules, pp.103-130.
Herrero, M., Thornton, P.K., Mason-D’Croz, D., Palmer, J., Benton, T.G., Bodirsky,
B.L., Bogard, J.R., Hall, A., Lee, B., Nyborg, K. and Pradhan, P., 2020. Innovation
can accelerate the transition towards a sustainable food system. Nature Food, 1(5),
pp.266-272.
Invest India. 2023. ‘Biotechnology India is emerging as the world’s major bioeconomy with
fast-growing Biotech Startups’ retrieved on 16th November,2023 from https://www.
investindia.gov.in/sector/biotechnology
John, J., Kaimal, K.S., Smith, M.L., Rahman, P.K. and Chellam, P.V., 2020. Advances in
upstream and downstream strategies of pectinase bioprocessing: A review. International
Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 162, pp.1086-1099.
Joint, F.A.O., World Health Organization and WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives,
2013. Evaluation of Certain Food Additives and Contaminants: Seventy-Seventh
Report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. World Health
Organization.
Jujjavarapu, S.E. and Dhagat, S., 2019. Evolutionary trends in industrial production of
α-amylase. Recent patents on biotechnology, 13(1), pp.4-18.
58 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Kee, P.E., Cheng, Y.S., Chang, J.S., Yim, H.S., Tan, J.C.Y., Lam, S.S., Lan, J.C.W., Ng, H.S.
and Khoo, K.S., 2023. Insect biorefinery: A circular economy concept for biowaste
conversion to value-added products. Environmental research, 221, p.115284.
Kües, U., 2015. Fungal enzymes for environmental management. Current opinion in
biotechnology, 33, pp.268-278.
Lakra, P., Saini, S.K. and Saini, A., 2022. Synthesis, Physio-Chemical Analysis and
Applications of Bio-Enzymes Based on Fruit and Vegetable Peels. Journal of Emerging
Technologies and Innovative Research, Volume 9, Issue 9, a670-a680
Lebelo, K., Malebo, N., Mochane, M.J. and Masinde, M., 2021. Chemical contamination
pathways and the food safety implications along the various stages of food production:
a review. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(11),
p.5795.
Manikandan, S., Subbaiya, R., Saravanan, M., Ponraj, M., Selvam, M. and Pugazhendhi, A.,
2022. A critical review of advanced nanotechnology and hybrid membrane-based water
recycling, reuse, and wastewater treatment processes. Chemosphere, 289, p.132867.
Markan, S. and Verma, Y., 2019. Blueprint for technology transfer in India: opportunities,
challenges and the way forward. International Journal of Technology Transfer and
Commercialisation, 16(4), pp.364-380.
Miguel, A.M., Martins-Meyer, T.S., Figueiredo, E.V.D.C., Lobo, B.W.P. and Dellamora-Ortiz,
G.M., 2013. Enzymes in bakery: current and future trends. Food industry, pp.287-321.
Niu, X., Liu, B., Hu, P., Zhu, H. and Wang, M., 2022. Nanozymes with multiple activities:
prospects in analytical sensing. Biosensors, 12(4), p.251.
Novianti, A. and Muliarta, I.N., 2021. Eco-Enzym Based on Household Organic Waste as
Multi-Purpose Liquid. Agriwar journal, 1(1), pp.12-17.
Parlindungan, E., Dekiwadia, C. and Jones, O.A., 2021. Factors that influence growth and
bacteriocin production in Lactiplantibacillus plantarum B21. Process Biochemistry, 107,
pp.18-26.
Patel, A.K., Singhania, R.R. and Pandey, A., 2016. Novel enzymatic processes applied to
the food industry. Current Opinion in Food Science, 7, pp.64-72.
Patel, N.S., Fung, S.M., Zanichelli, A., Cicardi, M. and Cohn, J.R., 2013, January. Ecallantide
for treatment of acute attacks of acquired C1 esterase inhibitor deficiency. In Allergy
& Asthma Proceedings (Vol. 34, No. 1).
Rani, A., Negi, S., Hussain, A. and Kumar, S., 2020. Treatment of urban municipal landfill
leachate utilizing garbage enzyme. Bioresource Technology, 297, p.122437.
Raveendran, S., Parameswaran, B., Ummalyma, S.B., Abraham, A., Mathew, A.K.,
Madhavan, A., Rebello, S. and Pandey, A., 2018. Applications of microbial enzymes
in food industry. Food technology and biotechnology, 56(1), p.16.
Reyes-Reyes, A.L., Valero Barranco, F. and Sandoval, G., 2022. Recent advances in lipases
and their applications in the food and nutraceutical industry. Catalysts, 12(9), p.960.
Rice, J.M., 2005. The carcinogenicity of acrylamide. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology
and Environmental Mutagenesis, 580(1-2), pp.3-20.
Samanta, S., 2019. Microbial pectinases: a review on molecular and biotechnological
perspectives. The Journal of Microbiology, Biotechnology and Food Sciences, 9(2),
p.248.
 Utility of Bioenzymes for Sustainable Food Systems: A Narrative Review 59

Sambaraju, S. and Lakshmi, V.S., 2020. Eco-friendly treatment of dairy wastewater using
garbage enzyme. Materials Today: Proceedings, 33, pp.650-653.
Samriti, S.S. and Arya, A., 2019. Garbage enzyme: A study on compositional analysis of
kitchen waste ferments. The Pharma Innovation Journal, 8(4), pp.1193-1197.
Sharma, A., Gupta, G., Ahmad, T., Mansoor, S. and Kaur, B., 2021. Enzyme engineering:
current trends and future perspectives. Food Reviews International, 37(2), pp.121-154.
Tan, W.Y., Gopinath, S.C., Anbu, P., Yaakub, A.R.W., Subramaniam, S., Chen, Y. and
Sasidharan, S., 2023. Bio-Enzyme Hybrid with Nanomaterials: A Potential Cargo as
Sustainable Biocatalyst. Sustainability, 15(9), p.7511.
Teng, Y., Stewart, S.G., Hai, Y.W., Li, X., Banwell, M.G. and Lan, P., 2021. Sucrose fatty
acid esters: Synthesis, emulsifying capacities, biological activities and structure-property
profiles. Critical reviews in food science and nutrition, 61(19), pp.3297-3317.
Toy, J.Y.H., Lu, Y., Huang, D., Matsumura, K. and Liu, S.Q., 2022. Enzymatic treatment,
unfermented and fermented fruit-based products: Current state of knowledge. Critical
Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 62(7), pp.1890-1911.
Umapathi, R., Park, B., Sonwal, S., Rani, G.M., Cho, Y. and Huh, Y.S., 2022. Advances
in optical-sensing strategies for the on-site detection of pesticides in agricultural
foods. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 119, pp.69-89.
Uzuner, S., 2023. Enzyme technology in value addition of wine and beer processing. Value-
Addition in Beverages through Enzyme Technology, pp.63-76.
Valero, F., 2012. Heterologous expression systems for lipases: a review. Lipases and
phospholipases: methods and protocols, pp.161-178.
Yao, M., Yang, Y., Fan, J., Ma, C., Liu, X., Wang, Y., Wang, B., Sun, Z., McClements, D.J.,
Zhang, J. and Liu, L., 2022. Production, purification, and functional properties of
microbial fibrinolytic enzymes produced by microorganism obtained from soy-based
fermented foods: developments and challenges. Critical Reviews in Food Science and
Nutrition, pp.1-26.
Zhu, B., Wang, D. and Wei, N., 2022. Enzyme discovery and engineering for sustainable
plastic recycling. Trends in biote
 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review
Vol. 25, No.3, pp 61-76
© 2023, RIS.

Sustainable biofuels and carbon footprints

Arpit Srivastava, Piyush Kant Rai, and Kamlesh Choure*

Abstract: Due to the sharp rise in world population, it is predicted that in

the next 20 years, the world’s energy demand would increase by 48 per
cent. Currently, fossil fuels provide 80 per cent of the world’s energy needs.
However, the increasingly diminishing supply of fossil fuels combined with
their damaging effects on the environment has generated a lot of interest in
sustainable biofuels. This will facilitate the shift to a bioeconomy that must
be carbon neutral. Biofuels are obtained from biomass like wood and straw,
released by direct combustion of dry matter and converted into a gaseous and
liquid fuel. In the ensuing decades, biofuels are anticipated to play a significant
role in the transition to green energy and sustainable development. Due to
their contribution to energy independence, urban and rural development,
improvement of the ecological footprint, and decrease in carbon emissions,
biofuels offer many appealing qualities. Despite technological advancements,
the sustainability aspects of biofuel production methods are of inherent
importance. In this review, we have discussed the significance of biofuel,
the energy demand and supply statistics and how biofuels are the upcoming
fuels playing a very important role in uplifting the global bioeconomy. but
on the other aspect, it has been observed through various reports that the
Carbon footprint of biofuel is also going to be a severe challenge in the
coming days. Thus, before framing the policy on biofuel, it is necessary
to look after all possible alternates to reduce the carbon footprint because
unless the carbon emission remains the same issue, then the use of biofuel
for global change may effect the bioeconomy with negative implications.
Keywords: Biofuels, Biomass, Carbon footprint, Bioeconomy, Sustainable
development.

Introduction
Environmental Sustainability of Biofuels and its Contribution in
Sustainable Economy
In certain cases, the term “conventional biofuels” is used to describe the
first types of biofuels since they were initially developed using standard
methods and equipment. Some common examples are fermentation,
distillation, and transesterification. When compared to their first-generation
counterparts, biofuels from the second generation are made from other than
food feedstocks like agricultural byproducts, residues of forests, and waste

* Department of Biotechnology, AKS University, Satna (MP), India Pune, India Email: kamlesh.
[email protected]
 62

Table 1: Estimation of Global Biofuel Demand from 2010 to 2050

(International Energy Agency, 2011)

Crop
Cane
Biofuel Conventional Residue Conventional Advanced
based Biomethane Total (in
Year Demand Bioethanol based biodiesel biodiesel
Bioethanol (Exajoules) Exajoules)
(Exajoules) (Exajoules) Bioethanol (Exajoules) (Exajoules)
(Exajoules)
(Exajoules)
2010 1.29 0.44 0.00 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.26
2015 1.35 0.90 0.15 0.68 0.15 0.08 0.00 3.31
2020 1.50 1.44 0.45 0.90 0.38 0.15 0.23 5.05
2025 1.20 1.88 1.05 0.98 1.13 0.83 0.38 7.45
2030 0.98 2.11 1.88 0.90 1.96 1.35 0.98 10.16
2015); (Khan et al., 2021); (Gheewala, 2023).
Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

2035 0.45 2.48 2.56 0.60 3.61 2.41 1.28 13.39

2040 0.15 2.63 3.46 0.23 5.34 3.16 1.66 16.63
2045 0.08 2.86 4.14 0.08 7.98 5.04 3.76 23.94
2050 0.00 3.24 5.04 0.00 10.91 6.70 5.87 31.76

Source: Author’s own compilation.

like Miscanthus and other lingo-cellulosic plants. Biodiesel made from

second and third-generation biofuels are still in its infancy, these fuels are
oil is a third-generation biofuel. Since studies on methods for producing
materials (including urban solid waste), as opposed to specific energy crops

microalgae using traditional transesterification or hydrotreatment of algal

sometimes referred to as “advanced biofuels” (Thangavel and Sridevi,

 Sustainable biofuels and carbon footprints 63

To encourage sustainable expansion, regulatory legislation like the RED

(Renewable Energy Directive) and RFS (Renewable Fuel criteria) provide
a wide range of sustainability criteria for biofuels, one of the most crucial
of which is their life cycle greenhouse gas emissions. The Renewable
Fuel Standard (RFS) mandates a minimum 50 per cent diminution of
emissions of greenhouse gases from advanced biofuels and a minimum 20
per cent decrease from conventional biofuels (National Service Center for
Environmental Publications (NSCEP) n.d.). This report gives the details of
the competition between traditional and cutting-edge biofuels in terms of
their prospective impact on bioenergy use, and a typographical representation
is shown in Fig.1. Because advanced biofuels are not yet cost competitive,
they are often more costly to produce than existing biofuels. What is often
neglected in discussions about biofuel is the industry’s contribution to global
animal feed supply and land utilisation for feedstock production.

The transport sector is responsible for about 20 per cent of the world
total energy use. Despite the fact that they only account for around 3 per
cent-4 per cent of global road transport fuel and just 5 per cent of overall
bioenergy consumption at now, transport biofuels are the fastest booming
bioenergy industry. Most capacity expansion and financing need is expected
for next generation biofuels in the longer term, and strong competition from
other renewable energy projects with lower risks (wind and solar) can be
experienced. Although only a small portion of the world’s biomass has
recently been used for biofuels production, there is a lot of buzz around
liquid biofuels for transportation. (Popp et al., 2014); (Calvin et al., 2021).
Figure 1: Various carbon footprint sources

Source: Author’s own compilation.

64 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Projected world primary energy demand by 2050 is expected to be in the

range of 600 to 1000 EJ/year compared to about 500 Exajoules (EJ) in 2008.
The expert assessment suggests potential deployment levels of bioenergy by
2050 in the range of 100–300 EJ/year. However, there are large uncertainties
in this potential, such as market and policy conditions, and there is a strong
dependence on the rate of improvements in the agricultural sector for food,
fodder and fiber production and forest products. The entire current global
biomass harvest would be required to achieve a 200 EJ/year deployment
level of bioenergy by 2050. Scenarios looking at the penetration of different
low carbon energy sources indicate that future demand for bioenergy could
be up to 250 EJ/year (Haberl et al., 2007); (Roux et al., 2021).

It is reasonable to assume that biomass could sustainably contribute

between a quarter and a third of the future global energy mix. The total
annual above ground net primary production (the net amount of carbon
assimilated in a time period by vegetation) on the Earth’s terrestrial surface
is estimated to be about 35 Gt carbon, or 1260 EJ/year, assuming an average
carbon content of 50 per cent and 18 GJ/t average heating value (Pospíšilová
2003), which can be compared to the current world primary energy supply
of about 500 EJ/year.

Greater yield potential, decreased losses and wastes throughout the food
chain, and reduced inputs will influence the amount of land available for
non-food crops. However, these volumes will remain limited relative to total
energy and transport sector fuel demand. Limited biomass resources will
be allocated to the sector (materials, chemicals, energy) that is most able
to afford them. The cost of biomass conversion into alternative final fuels
including bio-derived power, ethanol blends, biodiesel, and bio-derived jet
fuel, will have to be weighed against the price of currently available fossil
fuel-based products. Alternative fuel and energy source prices, government
actions (such as excise rates), and the emission intensity of different
industries will all have a role. No additional farmland is needed for bioenergy
production, and there are few to no environmental dangers associated with
using waste and residue as a fuel source. Several factors may discourage
the use of these “lower-risk” resources. Using residues and surplus forest
growth, and establishing energy crop plantations on currently unused land,
may prove more expensive than creating large-scale energy plantations on
plowable land. In the case of residues, opportunity costs can occur, and
the scattered distribution of residues may render it difficult in some places
to recover them (IEA 2020). Future policy structures, such as greenhouse
gas emission reduction objectives, will determine the extent to which these
potentials may be realised. Cost, logistics, and resource and environmental
 Sustainable biofuels and carbon footprints 65

concerns all play a role in determining whether or not biomass is used (The
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2011).

The risk-adjusted net present value (r-NPV) method, which recently

emerged in the biotech industry, uses the development attrition rate as a
discount factor to reflect risk during each development phase. Notably,
there is limited research on the attrition rate and development period of
new substance drugs and the research results are not consistently presented
(Woo et al., 2019). Enzymatic biofuel cell (EBC) attracts much attention
recently in the fuel cell community because of its unique feature to enable
the enzyme as a catalyst, rather than a precious metal, to oxidise the fuel. The
embedment of carbon nanotubes, commonly used in the anodic electrode
of EBC to electrically wire the enzyme, suffers from their complicated
synthetic procedure and fragile assembly. In this regard (Duong et al.,
2019) demonstrate a facile and low-cost route to achieve the desired
immobilisation of the glucose oxidase on a robust, flexible conducive carbon
cloth. (Sakamoto et al., 2019) prepared a CNT-enzyme complex with highly
oriented immobilisation of enzyme onto the CNT surface.

The complex showed excellent electrical characteristics and could

be used to develop biodevices that enable efficient electron transfer. The
growing power demands of wearable electronic devices have stimulated
the development of on‐body energy‐harvesting strategies. Jeerapan et al.
(2019) review the recent progress on rapidly emerging wearable biofuel
cells (BFCs), along with related challenges and prospects. The brown midrib
mutants (bm) of maize, with reduced lignin content, can be exploited for the
development of cultivars with better digestibility. Choudhary et al. (2019)
study enabling technologies for utilisation of maize as a bioenergy feedstock.
The improvement of maize as a feedstock and biological conversion
strategies of lignocellulosic biomass are assessed. Kumar et. al. (2020) aim
to present an insight into currently available pre-treatment technologies
for the deconstruction and fractionation of lignocellulosic biomass for the
development of lignocellulosic feedstock based biorefinery. Kumar, et. al.,
(2020) will enable a better understanding of already available processes
and help overcome the limitations and develop an improvised technology
to ease the pretreatment process to make the concept of biorefinery a reality.
Ott et al. (2020) present the ecological effects of energy development and
production on grassland systems.

During energy production operations, noise and road traffic reduction

plans and atmospheric monitoring will enable more informed mitigation
measures. Khan et al. (2021) investigate the benefits, limitations, and trends
66 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

in different generations of biofuels through a review of the literature. (Khan

et al., 2021) also addresses the newer generation of biofuels, highlighting
the social, economic, and environmental aspects, providing the reader with
information on long-term sustainability. The development of highly active
and stable noble metal-free ORR electrocatalysts remains as one of the
major challenges. (Feng et al., 2021) report cobalt/nitrogen co-doped porous
carbon materials (Co-N-C) originated from well-designed bimetal-organic
frameworks (Zn100-xCox-ZIF) as efficient ORR electrocatalysts in both
pH-neutral and alkaline solutions.
Biofuels and progress in Biotech and Synthetic Biology:
Prospect
The biotech industry’s use of the risk-adjusted net present value (r-NPV)
approach has introduced a more sophisticated method for evaluating
projects. This method incorporates the development attrition rate as
a discount factor (Montagna et al. 2020). However, there is a lack of
research on the attrition rate and development period of new substance
drugs, highlighting the need for a more comprehensive understanding.
Recent research in enzymatic biofuel cells (EBC) has focused on the use
of enzymes as catalysts to reduce reliance on precious metals (Mukherjee
et al., 2022). Duong et al. 2019 presented a cost-effective method for
immobilizing glucose oxidase on a flexible, conducive carbon cloth,
addressing the challenges associated with the complicated synthesis of
carbon nanotubes. Meanwhile, (Sakamoto et al. 2020) showcased a CNT-
enzyme complex with highly oriented immobilisation, exhibiting superior
electrical characteristics for the development of efficient biodevices. All this
research focuses on and addresses the progress, challenges, and prospects
of wearable biofuel cells (BFCs) in response to the surging demand for
wearable electronic devices. Choudhary et al. 2020 explored the potential of
brown midrib mutants (bm) in maise for the development of cultivars with
enhanced digestibility, contributing to advancements in bioenergy feedstock.
Kumar et al., (2020) provided insights into pre-treatment technologies
for lignocellulosic biomass, aiming to facilitate the development of
lignocellulosic feedstock-based biorefineries. The ecological impacts of
energy development and proposed mitigation measures during production
operations (Ott et al., 2021). Lastly, the challenge of developing noble
metal-free ORR electrocatalysts and introduced cobalt/nitrogen co-doped
porous carbon materials as efficient solutions in diverse pH environments
(Qin et al., 2021).

Recent advancements in synthetic biology and metabolic engineering

have significantly improved the efficiency of advanced biofuels. Shanmugam
et al., 2020) discuss the use of CRISPR-Cas-based techniques for genetic
 Sustainable biofuels and carbon footprints 67

manipulation, emphasising the importance of reducing off-target effects for

safer and more successful implementation. These strategies instill confidence
in the use of these methodologies for enhanced biofuel production. The
integration of biotechnological advancements into modern city development
and their seamless integration within the Internet of Things (IoT) framework.
The transformative impact of these developments on urban landscapes paves
the way for innovative and sustainable urban solutions. These advancements
have the potential to and revolutionise the way cities are built and operated,
creating a more sustainable future for urban dwellers (Gotovtsev 2020).
India’s Biofuels Alliance in the G20 Summit: A Step
Towards Sustainability
On September 9, 2023, the G20 New Delhi summit announced the formation
of the Global Biofuel Alliance (GBA) to encourage the development and
acceptance of sustainable biofuels and to establish applicable standards
and certification. The GBA is made up of 19 countries and 12 international
entities. Argentina, Brazil, Canada, India, Italy, South Africa, and the United
States are among the G20 members who support the alliance. Bangladesh,
Singapore, Mauritius, and the UAE were the four G20 Invitee countries
that endorse GBA. Iceland, Kenya, Guyana, Paraguay, Seychelles, Sri
Lanka, Uganda, and Finland are the eight non-G20 countries. The World
Bank, Asian Development Bank, World Economic Forum, World LPG
Organisation, International Energy Agency, International Energy Forum,
International Renewable Energy Agency, and World Biogas Association
are among the international organisations (Kala, 2023).

It aims to provide an overview of the Biofuels Alliance launched by

India at the G20 Summit. The alliance signifies a strategic move towards
sustainable energy solutions, fostering international cooperation in the
development and promotion of biofuels. India has been actively pursuing
green energy initiatives to address environmental concerns and reduce
dependence on fossil fuels. The G20 Summit provided a platform for India
to introduce a Biofuels Alliance, emphasising the importance of biofuels
in achieving global sustainability goals. Promotion of Sustainable Energy:
The alliance focuses on promoting biofuels as an environmentally friendly
alternative to conventional fossil fuels. Biofuels are derived from organic
materials and contribute significantly to reducing carbon emissions.

Research and Development: Collaborative efforts in research and

development will be a key aspect of the alliance. Member countries will
share knowledge and expertise to enhance the efficiency and viability of
biofuel production.
68 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Policy Harmonisation: The Biofuels Alliance aims to create a framework

for harmonising policies related to biofuel production, distribution, and
consumption. This will facilitate smoother international trade and encourage
investment in the biofuel sector.
Capacity Building: The alliance will prioritise capacity building initiatives
to support member countries adopting and implementing biofuel
technologies. This includes training programs, technology transfer, and
sharing best practices.
Alliance Structure: The Biofuels Alliance will be structured with a
Secretariat responsible for coordinating activities, sharing information, and
organising collaborative projects. Regular meetings and conferences will
provide a platform for member countries to discuss progress and address
challenges. The consequences of India’s Biofuels Alliance in the G20
Summit were:
Economic Growth: The alliance anticipates significant economic growth
through the development of a robust biofuel industry. This includes job
creation, investment opportunities, and the establishment of a sustainable
energy sector.
Environmental Impact: By promoting the use of biofuels, the alliance aims
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, mitigate climate change, and contribute
to global efforts in achieving a carbon-neutral future.
Global Energy Security: Diversifying energy sources through biofuels
enhances global energy security by reducing reliance on finite fossil fuel
resources and minimising geopolitical risks associated with traditional
energy supplies.

The launch of the Biofuels Alliance by India at the G20 Summit

represents a commendable step towards a sustainable and greener future.
This initiative underscores the importance of international collaboration in
addressing shared challenges related to energy security and environmental
sustainability. As the alliance progresses, it is expected to make significant
contributions to the global transition towards a more sustainable energy
landscape.

According to a study released by the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural

Gas, Government of India, India has made great strides in the development
of biofuels through initiatives like the National Biodiesel Mission and
the Ethanol Blended Petrol Program. Several interventions by the Indian
government have facilitated an increase in average ethanol blending from
1.53 per cent in 2013-14 to 10.02 per cent in 2021-22, the introduction of
E20 fuels, commissioning of Asia’s first 2G Ethanol bio-refinery in Panipat,
Haryana. The commissioning of 40 compressed bio-gas plants with a total
capacity of 225 tons per day and, the introduction of M15 (petrol blended
with 15 per cent Methanol) and the research and testing of 15 per cent
 Sustainable biofuels and carbon footprints 69

Methanol in Diesel, and so on. As a result, the 10 per cent blending target
was met months ahead of schedule, and the 20 per cent blending target was
moved up from 2030 to 2025. Additionally, 130 specific ethanol plants in
deficit states have signed long-term offtake agreements, guaranteeing an
annual volume of 4.3 billion litres of ethanol for offtake. By 2025, a 20
per cent ethanol blend will save foreign exchange of more than 6.6 billion
US dollars annually, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 21.6 million MT
annually, boost farmers’ cumulative income by more than 5.1 billion US
dollars annually, and generate thousands of new job opportunities (Biofuels
Study Report, 2023).
Competition between Conventional and Advanced Biofuels
Long-term diversification and decarbonisation of transportation need
substantial development of advanced biofuels. Despite several claims and
the completion of several studies on second-generation bioethanol, none
of these facilities are yet producing bioethanol on an industrial scale. In
order to come up with a product that can compete with first-generation
bioethanol, processing costs will need to be reduced further. The pre-
treatment process yields a number of useful byproducts, including lignin,
which can be burned to power the ethanol plant’s operations, used as a
dispersant and binding agent in concrete admixtures, substituted for phenolic
and epoxy resins, or used as the primary component in thermoplastic
material blends, polyurethane foams, or surfactants. By using both first-
and second-generation feedstocks, bottlenecks may be avoided and product
competitiveness increased(Paulova et al., 2013).

Many nations already generate conventional biofuels using standard

methods and feedstock. Large-scale extraction of traditional biofuels, other
than sugarcane ethanol, is unlikely to be sustainable in the future since
it would divert feedstock and land from food cultivation and forestry. In
addition, they are somewhat costly and provide marginally lower GHG
emissions than fossil fuels (Kumar, Tirkey, and Shukla, 2021).

Advanced biofuels promise to be more sustainable, with higher carbon

emissions reductions. They are based on biomass resources and land not used
for other primary needs, such as food production and farming. Agriculture
and forestry lignocellulosic wastes, fast-rotation crop residues (perhaps
produced on small, non-arable land), the organic part of municipal garbage,
and micro-algae all qualify as feedstock. The conversion of these resources
into biofuels requires processes that are currently under commercial
demonstration or under development, with small plants in operation and
large plants under construction or planned all over the world (Yana et al.,
2022).
70 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Algae Based Advanced Biofuel: A Domain of Bioeconomy

Algae represent another potential feed-stock that is suddenly attracting
attention and venture capital to dozens of startups. Chevron is working
with NREL to produce transportation fuel from algae. The high-risk, high-
reward Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has a project to use
it to make jet fuel.
Algae have many potential advantages from the point of view of carbon
impact. It doesn’t compete with food crops for land or even necessarily fresh
water, since many species can grow in brackish or briny water. It reproduces
in hours, which means it is potentially far more productive than terrestrial
plants. Algae naturally produce oils that have a roughly 50 per cent higher
energy content than ethanol and can fit more easily into the current fuel
infrastructure. A major part of algae’s productivity potential stems from the
fact that a critical limiting factor in plant growth the very low concentration
of CO2 can easily be mitigated in water, merely by bubbling in a highly
concentrated source, such as the exhaust emissions from a fossil fuel fired
power plant. However, the need for such a carbon source places some limits
on locations (Yaashikaa, Devi, and Kumar, 2022).

Does Biofuel reduce the Carbon footprint!

The entire quantity of greenhouse gases created by a product or service from
the moment it is thought of as a product or service all the way through the
time it is used is referred to as the carbon footprint. There are a variety of
approaches, both analog and digital, that may be used to calculate a precise
carbon footprint. In the definition of the carbon footprint, scope-3 emissions
are automatically included. Third phase biofuel emissions are those that
occur farther upstream in the supply chain. In the real world, businesses
may utilise the carbon footprint of a product either as a selling point or as
a purchasing guide in order to attract customers. In the context of the fight
against climate change, the concept of the “carbon footprint” may be used
to differentiate between “high” and “low” categories of economic activity
(Brankatschk and Finkbeiner 2017); (Brandão, Heijungs, and Cowie 2022).
Carbon footprint of Biofuels
The amount of carbon that is included in each kind of biofuel was calculated
using the information that was presented in (Defra 2013), specifically for
bioethanol, biodiesel, and biomethane, in that order. This information was
then used to calculate the carbon footprint of one liter of biofuel (Defra
2013). The total carbon footprint was obtained from the concatenated
results for the individual footprints per litre of bioethanol, biodiesel and
biomethane multiplied by the annual IEA biofuel projections out to 2050
(IEA 2020). In 2010, it was estimated at 0.085 billion worldwide hectares,
 Sustainable biofuels and carbon footprints 71

and it is projected to increase to 0.64 billion hectares by 2050. Sugarcane

bioethanol and high-tech biodiesel production are mostly to blame for this
expansion. Sugarcane bioethanol produced 0.80 kg CO2 per litre of biofuels,
whereas advanced biofuels were found to produce 1.22 kg CO2 per liter of
biofuels. Consequently, sugarcane contributed 18 per cent of the total carbon
footprint in 2010 and is expected to exhibit a similar proportion by 2050.
Carbon footprint is one of the significant factors that been calculated to
understand how basic substrates, medium and sources of biofuel generate an
amount of carbon footprint and how it is affecting the biofuel driven economy
(Jeswani, Chilvers, and Azapagic, 2020). The major question arises here that
the biofuel which is going to be the futuristic fuel and globally governments
are making a policy for these alternate fuels, but at some extent hike in
carbon footprint has been measured in some microalgae-based biofuels.
Recent studies reveal that microalgae-based biodiesel may produce and
burn more carbon than its petroleum-based counterpart(Khan et al. 2021).
The biofuel’s poor performance is due to its manufacturing process, which
requires more energy than the final product can produce as shown in Fig. 2.

Figure 2: Schematic representation of Bioeconomy and

Carbon emission

Source: Author’s own compilation.

As a group, biofuels, fuels made from renewable natural resources,

such as plants, coffee grounds, and vegetable oils emit less carbon dioxide
into the environment than fossil fuels. And microalgae, phytoplankton that
grow in fresh and salt water, have qualities that made them particularly
hopeful candidates. Because it contains a significant amount of lipids
that may be turned into fuel, some types of phytoplankton are capable of
producing up to 30 times the amount of energy that is produced by other
types of biofuels. And phytoplankton develop quickly, thriving in a broad
72 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

range of temperatures and ecosystems, even on wastewater land, and do

not need the diversion of food towards fuel production, in contrast to
maize, soybeans, and other biofuel crops. Yet these advantages alone don’t
translate to energy efficiency. As per the report published in International
Journal of Life Cycle Assessment in April 2023, a recent study provides
a significant data on the increased emission in Carbon footprint by algal
biofuels (Bradley et al., 2023).
Conclusion
Biofuels are considered carbon neutral because the carbon dioxide emitted
when they are burned is offset by the carbon dioxide that was absorbed by
the plants during photosynthesis. But, the modern research is contradictory
resulting in higher emission of carbon footprint and that led the global
civilisation to rethink before framing the policies. The organic material
that makes biofuels is made of carbon dioxide absorbed by plants from the
atmosphere as they grew. When the plant biomass is burned, it releases this
absorbed carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere which might increase
the pollution of CO2 in the atmosphere which clearly do not fulfill the
futuristic objectives of Biofuels. The use of biofuels can help to reduce our
reliance on fossil fuels and contribute to a more sustainable energy system.
However, it is important to carefully evaluate the environmental impacts of
biofuels in order to ensure that they are being used in the most sustainable
and responsible way possible. By using biofuels as an alternative energy
source, we can reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, which can help to reduce
our impact on the environment and contribute to a more sustainable energy
system that is more locally based. The transition to biofuels will affect the
economic sectors of agriculture, manufacture, reprocessing, recycling, and
transportation. By opening up new markets for crops and other agricultural
goods, the establishment of a biofuels sector has the potential to play a
significant role in the promotion of economic expansion in rural areas that
have fewer opportunities for employment. Except providing new livelihood
opportunities for local families, they could also represent a sustainable and
innovative option that will contribute to rural development. But certain
negative implication can possibly withdraw these alternate sources from
potential replacement candidate against fossil fuel.

References
Thangavel, P. and G. Sridevi, 2015. Environmental Sustainability, Springer New Delhi,
XVII, 324.
Khan N, Sudhakar K, Mamat R. Role of Biofuels in Energy Transition, Green Economy
and Carbon Neutrality. Sustainability. 2021; 13(22):12374.
Gheewala, S. (2023). Life cycle assessment for sustainability assessment of biofuels and
bioproducts. Biofuel Research Journal, 10(1), 1810-1815.
 Sustainable biofuels and carbon footprints 73

European Commission. 2018. Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable
sources. Brussels, Belgium: Official Journal of the European Union.
Calvin, K., Cowie, A., Berndes, G., Arneth, A., Cherubini, F., Portugal-Pereira, J., Grassi,
G., House, J., Johnson, F. X., Popp, A., Rounsevell, M., Slade, R., & Smith,
P. (2021). Bioenergy for climate change mitigation: Scale and sustainability. GCB
Bioenergy, 13, 1346– 1371.
J. Popp, Z. Lakner, M. Harangi-Rákos, M. Fári, The effect of bioenergy expansion: Food,
energy, and environment, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 32,
2014, Pages 559-578.
Haberl H., Erb K.H., Krausmann F., Gaube V., Bondeau A., Plutzar C., Gingrich S., Lucht
W., Fischer-Kowalski M. Quantifying and mapping the human appropriation of net
primary production in earth’s terrestrial ecosystems. PNAS. 2007; 104:12942–12945.
Nicolas Roux, Thomas Kastner, Karl-Heinz Erb, Helmut Haberl, Does agricultural trade
reduce pressure on land ecosystems? Decomposing drivers of the embodied human
appropriation of net primary production, Ecological Economics, Volume 181, 2021,
106915.
Pospíšilová, J. Larcher, W.: Physiological Plant Ecology. Ecophysiology and Stress
Physiology of Functional Groups. Fourth Edition. Biologia Plantarum 47, 500 (2003).
IEA (2020), Energy Technology Perspectives 2020, IEA, Paris
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change . Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources
and Climate Change Mitigation. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, UK: 2011.
p. 246).
Paulová L., Melzoch K., Rychtera M., Patáková P. Production of 2nd generation of
liquid biofuels. In: Fang Z., editor. Liquid, Gaseous and Solid Biofuels: Conversion
Techniques. InTech Open Access Publisher; Rijeka, Croatia: 2013. pp. 47–78.
Ajeet Kumar, Jeevan Vachan Tirkey, Shailendra Kumar Shukla, Comparative energy and
economic analysis of different vegetable oil plants for biodiesel production in India,
Renewable Energy, Volume 169, 2021, Pages 266-282.
Syaifuddin Yana, Muhammad Nizar, Irhamni, Dewi Mulyati, Biomass waste as a renewable
energy in developing bio-based economies in Indonesia: A review, Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 160, 2022, 112268.
P.R. Yaashikaa, M. Keerthana Devi, P. Senthil Kumar, Algal biofuels: Technological
perspective on cultivation, fuel extraction and engineering genetic pathway for
enhancing productivity, Fuel, Volume 320, 2022, 123814.
Brandao, M., Heijungs, R., & Cowie, A. (2022). On quantifying sources of uncertainty in
the carbon footprint of biofuels: crop/feedstock, LCA modelling approach, land-use
change, and GHG metrics. Biofuel Research Journal, 9(2), 1608-1616.
Brankatschk, G., Finkbeiner, M. Crop rotations and crop residues are relevant parameters
for agricultural carbon footprints. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 37, 58 (2017).
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [Defra] 2012 Guidelines to Defra/
DECC’s GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting: Methodology Paper for
Emission Factors. Defra, London.
74 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Bradley, T., Rajaeifar, M.A., Kenny, A. et al. Life cycle assessment of microalgae-derived
biodiesel. Int J Life Cycle Assess 28, 590–609 (2023).
Khan N, Sudhakar K, Mamat R. Role of Biofuels in Energy Transition, Green Economy
and Carbon Neutrality. Sustainability. 2021; 13(22):12374.
Jeswani Harish K., Chilvers Andrew and Azapagic Adisa, “Environmental sustainability of
biofuels”: a review Proc. R. Soc. (2020)
Kala, Rishi Ranjan, “G20 leaders launch Global Biofuel Alliance”. Business Line. (2023).
Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Government of India, “Biofuels Study Report”
(2023).
Bradley, Tom, Mohammad Ali Rajaeifar, Andrew Kenny, Chris Hainsworth, Victória Del
Pino, Yago Del Valle Inclán, Ines Povoa, Pedro Mendonça, Laura Brown, Andrew
Smallbone, Anthony Paul Roskilly, Sharon Joyce, and Oliver Heidrich. 2023. “Life
Cycle Assessment of Microalgae-Derived Biodiesel.” The International Journal of Life
Cycle Assessment 28(5):590–609. doi: 10.1007/s11367-023-02140-6.
Brandão, Miguel, Reinout Heijungs, and Annette L. Cowie. 2022. “On Quantifying Sources
of Uncertainty in the Carbon Footprint of Biofuels: Crop/Feedstock, LCA Modelling
Approach, Land-Use Change, and GHG Metrics.” Biofuel Research Journal 9(2):1608–
16. doi: 10.18331/BRJ2022.9.2.2.
Brankatschk, Gerhard, and Matthias Finkbeiner. 2017. “Crop Rotations and Crop Residues
Are Relevant Parameters for Agricultural Carbon Footprints.” Agronomy for Sustainable
Development 37(6):58. doi: 10.1007/s13593-017-0464-4.
Calvin, Katherine, Annette Cowie, Göran Berndes, Almut Arneth, Francesco Cherubini,
Joana Portugal‐Pereira, Giacomo Grassi, Jo House, Francis X. Johnson, Alexander
Popp, Mark Rounsevell, Raphael Slade, and Pete Smith. 2021. “Bioenergy for Climate
Change Mitigation: Scale and Sustainability.” GCB Bioenergy 13(9):1346–71. doi:
10.1111/gcbb.12863.
Choudhary, Mukesh, Alla Singh, Mamta Gupta, and Sujay Rakshit. 2020. “Enabling
Technologies for Utilization of Maize as a Bioenergy Feedstock.” Biofuels, Bioproducts
and Biorefining 14(2):402–16. doi: 10.1002/bbb.2060.
Defra. 2013. “2012 Guidelines to Defra/DECC’s GHG Conversion Factors for Company
Reporting: Methodology Paper for Emission Factors.” GOV.UK. Retrieved July 1, 2023
(https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2012-guidelines-to-defra-decc-s-ghg-
conversion-factors-for-company-reporting-methodology-paper-for-emission-factors).
Duong, Ngoc Bich, Chih-Liang Wang, Li Zhen Huang, Wan Ting Fang, and Hsiharng Yang.
2019. “Development of a Facile and Low-Cost Chitosan-Modified Carbon Cloth for
Efficient Self-Pumping Enzymatic Biofuel Cells.” Journal of Power Sources 429:111–19.
Gheewala, Shabbir H. 2023. “Life Cycle Assessment for Sustainability Assessment of
Biofuels and Bioproducts.” Biofuel Research Journal 10(1):1810–15. doi: 10.18331/
BRJ2023.10.1.5.
Gotovtsev, Pavel. 2020. “How IoT Can Integrate Biotechnological Approaches for City
Applications—Review of Recent Advancements, Issues, and Perspectives.” Applied
Sciences 10(11):3990.
Haberl, Helmut, K. Heinz Erb, Fridolin Krausmann, Veronika Gaube, Alberte Bondeau,
Christoph Plutzar, Simone Gingrich, Wolfgang Lucht, and Marina Fischer-Kowalski.
 Sustainable biofuels and carbon footprints 75

2007. “Quantifying and Mapping the Human Appropriation of Net Primary Production
in Earth’s Terrestrial Ecosystems.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
104(31):12942–47. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0704243104.
IEA. 2020. “Energy Technology Perspectives 2020 – Analysis.” IEA. Retrieved July 1,
2023 (https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-technology-perspectives-2020).
Jeswani, Harish K., Andrew Chilvers, and Adisa Azapagic. 2020. “Environmental
Sustainability of Biofuels: A Review.” Proceedings of the Royal Society A:
Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 476(2243):20200351. doi: 10.1098/
rspa.2020.0351.
Khan, Nida, Kumarasamy Sudhakar, and Rizalman Mamat. 2021. “Role of Biofuels in Energy
Transition, Green Economy and Carbon Neutrality.” Sustainability 13(22):12374. doi:
10.3390/su132212374.
Kumar, Ajeet, Jeevan Vachan Tirkey, and Shailendra Kumar Shukla. 2021. “‘Comparative
Energy and Economic Analysis of Different Vegetable Oil Plants for Biodiesel Production
in India.’” Renewable Energy 169:266–82. doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2020.12.128.
Kumar, Bikash, Nisha Bhardwaj, Komal Agrawal, Venkatesh Chaturvedi, and Pradeep
Verma. 2020. “Current Perspective on Pretreatment Technologies Using Lignocellulosic
Biomass: An Emerging Biorefinery Concept.” Fuel Processing Technology 199:106244.
Montagna, Dennis Marco, Emanuele Fino, Giovanni Nocera, and Antonio Amendola. 2020.
“Spotlight on Biotechnology: Valuation Challenges of Early-Stage Companies. A
Case Study on CRISPR Therapeutics AG and Allakos, Inc.” A Case Study on CRISPR
Therapeutics AG and Allakos, Inc.(December 1, 2020).
Mukherjee, Anwesha, Vishwata Patel, Manisha T. Shah, and Nasreen S. Munshi. 2022.
“Enzymatic and Microbial Biofuel Cells: Current Developments and Future Directions.”
Pp. 551–76 in Handbook of Biofuels. Elsevier.
National Service Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP). n.d. “Document
Display|NEPIS|USEPA.” Retrieved July1, 2023 (https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/
ZyNET.exe/P1006DXP. TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&Index-
=2006+Thru+2010&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&To-
cRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntry=&QField=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QField-
Day=&IntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuery=&File=Dpercent3Aper-
cent5Czyfilespercent5CIndexpercent20Datapercent5C06thru10percent5CTxtper-
cent5C00000015percent5CP1006DXP.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=anon-
ymous&SortMethod=hpercent7C&MaximumDocuments=1&FuzzyDegree=0&Im-
ageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/x150y150g16/i425&Display=hpfr&DefSeekPage=x&Search-
Back=ZyActionL&Back=ZyActionS&BackDesc=Resultspercent20page&MaximumP-
ages=1&ZyEntry=1&SeekPage=x&ZyPURL).
Ott, Jacqueline P., Brice B. Hanberry, Mona Khalil, Mark W. Paschke, Max Post Van Der
Burg, and Anthony J. Prenni. 2021. “Energy Development and Production in the Great
Plains: Implications and Mitigation Opportunities.” Rangeland Ecology & Management
78:257–72.
Paulova, Leona, Petra Patakova, Mojmir Rychtera, and Karel Melzoch. 2013. “Production of
2nd Generation of Liquid Biofuels.” in Liquid, Gaseous and Solid Biofuels - Conversion
Techniques, edited by Z. Fang. InTech.
76 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Popp, J., Z. Lakner, M. Harangi-Rákos, and M. Fári. 2014. “The Effect of Bioenergy
Expansion: Food, Energy, and Environment.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews 32:559–78. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.056.
Pospíšilová, J. 2003. “Larcher, W.: Physiological Plant Ecology. Ecophysiology and Stress
Physiology of Functional Groups. Fourth Edition.” Biologia Plantarum 47(4):500–500.
doi: 10.1023/B:BIOP.0000041119.93332.43.
Qin, Zhiyi, Xiupeng Jiang, Yue Cao, Shanshan Dong, Feng Wang, Leiyu Feng, Yinguang
Chen, and Yingqing Guo. 2021. “Nitrogen-Doped Porous Carbon Derived from Digested
Sludge for Electrochemical Reduction of Carbon Dioxide to Formate.” Science of The
Total Environment 759:143575.
Roux, Nicolas, Thomas Kastner, Karl-Heinz Erb, and Helmut Haberl. 2021. “Does
Agricultural Trade Reduce Pressure on Land Ecosystems? Decomposing Drivers of the
Embodied Human Appropriation of Net Primary Production.” Ecological Economics
181:106915. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106915.
Sakamoto, Hiroaki, Ikuya Fujiwara, Eiichiro Takamura, and Shin-ichiro Suye. 2020.
“Nanofiber-Guided Orientation of Electrospun Carbon Nanotubes and Fabrication
of Aligned CNT Electrodes for Biodevice Applications.” Materials Chemistry and
Physics 245:122745.
Shanmugam, Sabarathinam, Anjana Hari, Ashok Pandey, Thangavel Mathimani, LewisOscar
Felix, and Arivalagan Pugazhendhi. 2020. “Comprehensive Review on the Application
of Inorganic and Organic Nanoparticles for Enhancing Biohydrogen Production.” Fuel
270:117453.
Thangavel, P., and G. Sridevi, eds. 2015. Environmental Sustainability: Role of Green
Technologies. New Delhi: Springer India.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2011. “Renewable Energy Sources
and Climate Change Mitigation — IPCC.” Retrieved July 1, 2023 (https://www.ipcc.
ch/report/renewable-energy-sources-and-climate-change-mitigation/).
Yaashikaa, P. R., M. Keerthana Devi, and P. Senthil Kumar. 2022. “Algal Biofuels:
Technological Perspective on Cultivation, Fuel Extraction and Engineering
Genetic Pathway for Enhancing Productivity.” Fuel 320:123814. doi: 10.1016/j.
fuel.2022.123814.
Yana, Syaifuddin, Muhammad Nizar, Irhamni, and Dewi Mulyati. 2022. “Biomass
Waste as a Renewable Energy in Developing Bio-Based Economies in Indonesia: A
Review.” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 160:112268. doi: 10.1016/j.
rser.2022.112268.
 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review
Vol. 25, No.3, pp 77-100
© 2023, RIS.

Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology to

Produce Environmentally Sustainable
Biotechnology Products
Punit Kumar* and Archana**

Abstract: Due to the rise of global population, pollution, and the limitation of
natural resources, sustainability is now becoming a fundamental requirement
of industries. Sustainable processes support all the dimensions of ecological,
social, and economic parameters. Industry 4.0 concept originated from the
German industry, and the main aspect is the use of advanced technology
for efficient production. Industry 4.0 comprises technologies such as digital
technology, machine learning, robotics, Internet of Things, and cyber-physical
systems etc. Industry 4.0 is capable to transform the traditional manufacturing
units into smart factories. The biotechnology industry uses the principles of
molecular biology, genetic engineering, and fermentation technology etc
to produce a variety of products. Similar to the industrial revolution, the
biotechnology industry also underwent a similar revolution. Biotechnology
industry uses technologies like recombinant DNA technologies, metabolic
engineering, and fermentation technologies. Biotechnological processes
have certain limitations, like instability of biological catalysts, complex
biological systems, and difficulties in upstream and downstream processes.
Biotechnological processes are environment friendly and are considered,
creating less harm to nature as compared to chemical industrial processes.
In this article authors have discussed the role of Industry 4.0 technologies
in the production of environmentally sustainable biotechnology products.
Keywords: Industry 4.0, biotechnology, smart factories, sustainability, digital
technology, Internet of Things, automation

Introduction
Since the inception of human civilization, there has been continuous
development in science and technology. These developments have
revolutionised all sectors including, research, space, medical, and industries.
Throughout history, industrial revolutions changed the processes and
tools that were used to make products and created an impact on more
than one type of industry. Initially, things and products were produced for
domestic utilisation, later on, development, demands and markets led to
the distribution of products outside the localised boundaries. These trades
increased the profits. Simultaneously, new markets and new demands were
identified that created the requirements for more production. More profits
*Department of Morphology and Physiology, Karaganda Medical University, Karaganda,
Kazakhstan. Email:[email protected]; [email protected]
**
Department Electronics and Communication Engineering, Kashi Institute of Technology Varanasi,
Uttar Pradesh, India. Email: [email protected]
78 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

attracted the investment to establish more production units that were further
transformed into industries. The initial production activities were performed
using simple tools and equipments in small warehouses that were further
transformed into manufacturing facilities using new technologies. Thus,
the industrial revolution led to the transformation of handicraft economy
into machine industry (Simon, 2023). Now, we can clearly analyse how
advanced technologies and production tools substituted less sophisticated
tools. Nowadays, industries are using more intelligent tools. These
advancements have allowed us to make goods in big quantities and for profit.
Industrial revolutions significantly transformed the social and economic
structures of countries. These are associated with economic development,
increase in productivity, and advanced welfare in the countries, including
high-quality goods and services.

Though, the Industrial Revolutions made economic developments

but industrial activities are also associated with critical environmental
concerns, such as; pollution, emission of greenhouse gases, deforestation,
loss of biodiversity, climate change and unsustainable developments. Out of
these, the rapid depletion of Earth’s resources and unsustainability became
some of the important global challenges that should be considered during
technological development. Moreover, The United Nations’ global initiative
towards sustainable development goals (SDGs) strongly supports inclusive
social and economic development (Morrar et al., 2017; United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals, 2015; United Nations, 2023).

The Fourth Industrial Revolution (Industrie 4.0 in German) was started

in Germany in 2011 as an initiative of the German government (Vogel-
Heuser & Hess 2016). The idea was formulated at the Hannover Fair in
2011, and it was officially announced 2013 by the German government
as an initiative to transform the manufacturing sector. It transformed the
Cyber Physical Systems concept into Cyber Physical Production Systems.
This project was a high-tech strategy for automation and digitization of the
manufacturing industry (Daudt & Willcox, 2018).

Biotechnology has contributed to improve the healthcare, environment

agriculture, and industry etc. (Figure 1).
 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 79

Figure 1: Some important products of biotechnology based industries

Source: Author’s own compilation.

Biotechnology is making significant contributing towards energy supply

(biogas, biofuels, bioethanol, and microbial fuel cells etc), health protection
(antibiotics, enzymes, vaccines, cell and gene therapy, diagnostics, and
nanotechnology etc), food supply (biofertilizers, high yielding varieties,
hybrids, genetically modified crops, and tissue culture etc), biomolecules
(fermentation, genetic engineering, and metabolic engineering etc), and
environment protection (biodegradation, bioremediation, manipulations
of biogeochemical cycles, waste management, biomonitoring), and finding
of new biotherapeutics etc (Awais et al., 2010; Gavrilescu & Chisti, 2005;
Martin et al., 2021; Rabaey & Verstraete, 2005; Singh, 2017; Verma et al.,
2011). Biotechnology is also showing advancements in synthetic biology,
which is offering alternatives to fossil-derived materials (Matthews et al.,
2019). Moreover, biotechnology is also playing a key role in achieving the
Goal 2, Goal 3, and Goal 9 of sustainable development goals. Biotechnology
also has the ability to transform life and generate new products and
services (UNESCO, 2023). Furthermore, biotechnology is providing its
importance in technology that can significantly contribute for the sustainable
development (Primer, 2001). Moreover, the involvement of industry 4.0
approaches is playing important roles in biotechnology.

In this paper, authors have discussed the background and history of

Industry revolutions, development of biotechnology, and the role of industry
80 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

4.0 in the biotechnology sector. Including this, the role of industry 4.0 is also
discussed to produce environmentally sustainable biotechnology products.
Development of Biotechnology
The biotechnology term was first used in 1919 by Karl Erkey (Verma et
al., 2011). It involves the utilisation of techniques to manipulate living
organisms or their components to generate useful services and products.
Thus, techniques used in biotechnology use the information obtained by
modern discoveries in different fields, including biochemistry, molecular
biology, cell biology, microbiology, bioinformatics, genetic engineering,
and industrial microbiology (Bhatia 2018). Moreover, it would be good to
say that biotechnology is the integration of different principles of biological
science and engineering to utilize living organisms (microorganisms, plants,
and animals) in industry, research and technology for verity of applications.
At present, principles of biotechnology are being utilised in medical,
agricultural, pharmaceutical, and industrial sectors with the ultimate goal
to benefit humanity.

The development of biotechnology has been categorized into three main

stages, such as Ancient Biotechnology, Classical Biotechnology, and Modern
Biotechnology. The ancient biotechnology (Pre, 1800) is associated with
early uses of biotechnology for humans, such as the production of curd,
cheese, vinegar, bread and liquor. Moreover, some other applications of
ancient biotechnology were food preservation, improvement in crop and
animal varieties by cross-breeding. Classical biotechnology existed from
1800 to middle of 20th century. This phase is associated with the starting
of the scientific development of biotechnology. In this phase, remarkable
developments were performed, such as laws of inheritance, the structure
of chromosome, initiation of vaccination, the theory of genes, and the
discovery of antibiotics, etc. The modern biotechnology phase comprises
major scientific discoveries, such as the double helix model of DNA,
synthesis of DNA, genetic engineering, gene cloning, DNA fingerprinting,
gene sequencing, artificial gene synthesis, protein synthesis, genomics,
proteomics, hybridoma technology, recombinant DNA technology, gene
editing, cell and gene therapy etc (Verma et al., 2011).

At present, biotechnology is making a significant contribution as an

industry in energy production, healthcare, food and beverage, diagnostics,
and environment protection, etc. All these factors are driving bioeconomy
forward.
 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 81

Sustainable Production of Biotechnology Products

Sustainable industry is assumed to be economically viable, environmentally
compatible, and socially responsible. Thus, sustainable production of
products comprises all the processes associated with production that are
ecofriendly (or cause minimum harm to the environment), reduced use of
resources, and economically viable.

An Increase in population and industrialisation is causing global

environmental issues such as waste generation, depletion of natural resources,
generation of greenhouse gases, pollution, and loss of biodiversity etc. The
unsustainable manufacturing processes are one of the main factors that are
suggested to cause pollution, intensive use of energy and raw materials, and
poor discharge of waste (Olah et al., 2020). Thus, it becomes important to
use resources in an optimised way, reduce the effects of waste, and waste
management. Biotechnology industry harnesses living organisms or their
products and processes to produce the products and services for humans
(Gavrilescu & Chisti, 2005). In association with sustainable development,
Biotechnology has the capacity to alleviate real-world environmental
problems such as waste, pollutants (micropollutants also), non-degradable
materials (chemicals, and plastics etc), and lignocellulosic biomass through
microorganisms and biocatalysts.

The sustainable production of biotechnology products is based on

technological innovation. It is found that for a given level of production,
biotechnology reduces the cost and environmental footprint as compared
to chemical processes. Biotechnology was found to reduce the capital and
operating cost by 10-50 per cent. Including this, it was also observed that
biotechnology can develop new products with unique properties, cost and
environmental performances that are difficult to be obtained byproducts
produced by conventional chemical synthesis methods (Primer, 2001).

Biotechnology processes are considered sustainable as all bio-organic

chemicals, products are biodegradable and renewable. Moreover, byproducts
of one biochemical reaction are substrates for another biochemical
reaction; thus, technically, biotechnological processes do not generate any
waste. Biotechnology processes have the potential to transform waste into
renewable energy. For example, lignocellulosic waste may be used in the
production of biogas (Wei, 2016). Biotechnology is actively contributing
to biofuel production, ethanol production, biodiesel production, bio-
methane production, and biogas production (Kilbane, 2016). In this way
biotechnology is contributing to sustainable development by reducing the
consumption of fossil fuels.
82 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

History of Industry Revolutions and Industry 4.0

Every industrial revolution is associated with benefits and challenges to
the social and economic status of the country where such revolutions are
taking place (Morrar et al., 2017). The duration of industrial development
has been divided into different stages. Industrial Revolution 1.0 was started
in the 18th century and covered the duration of about 1760-1840. This
industrial revolution witnessed the transformation of hand-based production
into machine based manufacturing. The Industrial revolution 2.0 led to the
development of telecommunication technologies, technologically improved
machines, and establishment of the assembly lines in the industries etc.
This phase also marked an improvement in industry culture (Morrar et al.,
2017; Simon, 2023). Industry 3.0 was led by the invention of the internet,
transistors, and Integrated Circuits. This phase witnessed the involvement
of electronics and digital technology for manufacturing (Pereira & Romero,
2017; Simon, 2023). This phase is also referred to as the digital revolution
and computer era (Simon, 2023). More important, internet was considered a
public infrastructure technology (Carr, 2003). The Industrial 3.0 revolution
started partial automation in manufacturing.
The present stage is categorised as industry 4.0. It is a collective
term for technologies comprising digital technologies, and automation
in industrial manufacturing processes. This revolution is also associated
with the development of Smart Factory (Dutton, 2014). The important key
elements of industry 4.0 are fully automated data acquisition, evaluation
and quantification, and analysis (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Technologies that are driving Industry 4.0

Source: Author’s own compilation.

 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 83

Including this, there is a requirement for a digital data acquisition

approach (Uhlemann et al., 2017). In industry revolution 4.0, Cyber
physical systems (CPS) are playing an important role (Wu et al., 2020). The
Industry 4.0 technologies offer a large number of objectives, such as; IT-
enabled manufacturing of goods, facilitating communication between parts,
implementing human-machine interaction (HMI) paradigms, automation,
and predictive control. The organisations have incorporated key digital
technologies for Industry 4.0, such as; artificial intelligence (AI), big data,
Machine Learning (ML), cloud computing, digital twin, Internet of Things
(IoT), robotics, remote sensing, and CPS (Ahsan & Siddique, 2021; Chen
et al., 2017; Gupta & Jauhar, 2023; Javaid et al., 2022; Rifkin, 2014).

The industry 4.0 led the way for social and technological transformation.
Industrial 4.0 is enabling digital transformation into smart machines that
collect data and analyse this data by AI. IoT devices connect machines, and
exchange the information without human intervention to provide real time
information about manufacturing facilities.
Industry 4.0 and Environmental Sustainability
It is found that industrial production processes are associated with air
pollution, poor waste discharge, and the intensive use of energy, raw
materials, and information. The traditional industrial production processes
exhibit a negative impact on environmental sustainability as the production
process takes place in a weak sustainability model. Thus manufacturers
are constantly trying to identify the methods to decrease the operating cost
associated with production processes.

Sustainability is associated with optimized utilisation of resources

during the entire production cycle. Sustainable manufacturing produces
products using economically viable procedures with decreased negative
environmental impact while preserving the natural resources and energy.
Innovative technologies play a critical role in managing the production
of manufacturing units and their environmental impacts. Therefore, the
adoption of new technologies has the capability to provide solutions to
the existing environmental challenges. The industry 4.0 technologies have
unlocked the doors for industrial development by improving the efficiency
and production in modern industrial units (Ali et al., 2022).

Industry 4.0 demonstrates the interrelationship between different

aspects of industrial manufacturing through advanced information and
communication systems. It enables the transformation of traditional
84 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

manufacturing units into smart factories. Industry 4.0 technologies have

the potential to integrate manufacturing lines, teams, business processes,
regardless of international boundaries and other aspects. These technologies
provide more knowledge about the production environment of industry,
supply and delivery chains, and the market. These technologies monitor
production processes, and enable the operators to collect big data and
analyze to recognise the crucial areas of production. The study of de Soto et
al. (2018) demonstrated that the involvement of robotics in the production
has improved the productivity and higher production with reduced cost.
The adoption of Industry 4.0 would lead to reduced negative impacts on the
environment with respect to the use of energy, raw materials, information,
and production of high-quality products (Bai et al., 2020; Olah et al.,
2020; Javaid et al., 2022). Thus, the huge economic and sustainability
potential of Industry 4.0 is leading manufacturers to optimise their value
chain’s production and its associated processes. It is reported that Industry
4.0 technologies create an innovative ecosystem that allows integration of
resources. These technologies enabled firms to transform production system,
decision-making, and operations (Benitez et al., 2020).

It is also observed that sustainable organisations should support triple

bottom lines (economic, environmental and social) of sustainability. The case
study conducted by Braccini et al. (2019) demonstrated that the adoption
of Industry 4.0 technologies supported the economic, environmental, and
social dimensions of sustainability.

Utilisation of industry 4.0 approaches (such as digital technology,

artificial intelligence, and machine learning, etc.,) may play an important role
in the sustainable production of biotechnology products. The combination
of different technologies is the core value of Industry 4.0. Though, the
examination of each technology separately is crucial for determining the
right combination of technologies for each specific case (El Merroun et al.,
2022). Real time monitoring and predictive control using AI could improve
the robustness of the processes, minimise waste generation, maintain the
quality of products, and also improve cycle times. Here, we discuss two
approaches by which Industry 4.0 technologies may provide sustainable
production of biotechnology products while managing global environmental
problems. Biotechnology industry is research driven sector hence, one
approach focuses on the involvement of Industry 4.0 technologies in research
and development, where these technologies could contribute to improve the
catalytic properties of enzymes, identification of new enzymes, structure
determination, genetic engineering, metabolic engineering and fermentation
 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 85

process optimisation etc. Second approach focuses on the involvement of

Industry 4.0 technologies in the establishment of smart factories.
State of Biotechnology Industry at Global Level
The development of biotechnology led to the development of industrial
activities involved in the production of antibiotics, production of vaccines,
production of enzymes, production of recombinant proteins, production of
biomolecules, and production of personalised therapies (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Some important technologies used in biotechnology

based industries.

Source: Author’s own compilation.

Besides this, the demand for biobased materials is constantly increasing

from the consumers and industry (Danielson et al., 2020). All these
factors are driving bioeconomy forward. It is assumed that in the last three
decades about 260 novel biotechnology products have been approved.
The research and development in biotechnology started in 1980s. In 1973,
scientists genetically engineered E. coli bacteria with foreign genes via the
process of recombination. In 1977, a biotechnology company (Genentech)
produced somatostatin by recombinant E. coli. Following this, the company
also produced human hormone Insulin. Since the initial advancements in
biotechnology from 1973, nowadays the biotechnology industry is focusing
on gene therapy, nanobiotechnology, human microbiome, immunotherapy,
86 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing, CAR-T cell therapy, and many more fields
(Smith, 2022).

At present, there are more than 10000 biotechnology industries across

the world. These industries have been established in almost all the countries
across the world and major biotechnology activities are focused in North
America, Europe, and Asia Pacific. Some of the major companies performing
biotechnology-based businesses are Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, Biogen,
Genentech, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi,
and Samsung Biologics, etc. Although biotechnology-based industries are
established around the world, but maximum share of biotech industries
is occupied by the North America. The countries which have a high
number of biotechnology industries are Australia, Canada, China, France,
Germany, India, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, UK, and the USA. The
biotechnological sector is continuously developing worldwide. The main
factors behind the growth are initiatives taken by governments, favourable
regulations, collaborations and investment.

As per the IBISWorld report, there are 11076 global biotechnology

businesses in 2023, and the global biotechnology business growth rate
in 2023 was 4.8 per cent. Moreover, in the last five years (20018-2023)
biotechnology sector has shown the growth rate of 5.9 per cent per year
(Industry statistics, 2023). Another report published in 2022 (BioSpace,
2022) suggested that biotech industry is expected to grow at the CAGR
of 17.83 per cent during the 2021-2030. This report also suggested that
in 2020 biotech industry was valued about USD 852.88 billion, and it is
expected to be worth USD 3.44 trillion by 2030. In the biotech sector, the
healthcare sector (biopharmaceuticals) occupies the highest share of 48.7
per cent. Including this, other sectors like fermentation, bio-services, agri-
biotech, bio-services are also contributing to the growth of the biotech sector.
Moreover, due to advancements in the informatics tools, bioinformatics
sector is expected to grow at CAGR of 21.5 per cent from 2020-2030
(BioSpace, 2022).
State of Indian Biotechnology Industry
The biotechnology industry in India mainly comprises Bio-agriculture, Bio-
Industrials, Biopharmaceuticals, Bio-IT, and Bio-services etc (Figure 4).
 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 87

Figure 4: Sector wise share of Indian biotechnology sectors in 2022

Source: Invest India (2023)..

As per the government report (Biotechnology, Make in India 2023),

there were more than 2500 biotech companies in India in 2022. Some
examples of major companies with biotech related business in India are
Aurobindo Pharma, Alembic, Biocon, Bharat Serum and Vaccine, Panacea
Biotech, and Serum Institute of India etc. India’s biotechnology industry
has grown to USD 80 billion in 2022, and further, it is expected to be worth
about USD 300 billion by 2030. The expected CAGR during 2022-2025 is
expected about 17 per cent. India is a major biotechnology hub across the
globe. Including this, India is among the top 12 biotechnology destinations
across the world, top 3 in South Asia and also contributes about 3 per cent
share in biotechnology industry at global level. Moreover, India has the2nd
largest number of USFDA approved manufacturing facilities outside the
USA. The number of Indian start-ups has also increased about 100 fold
during 20014-2022, and their number has increased by more than 5300.
Furthermore, the Government of India aims to increase the number of
biotech start-ups to more than 10000 by 2025 (Biotechnology, Make in
India 2023; Invest India, 2023).

India’s biotechnology sector is expanding continuously. For its further

growth, the department of Biotechnology (DBT) is entering into different
collaborations with leading global organisations. Moreover, Government
of India has taken many initiatives such as establishment of Biotechnology
Parks/Incubators, development of bioclusters, Make in India Facilitation
Cell (Biotechnology), National Portal for Biotech researchers and Start-Ups
(BioRRAP), and foreign direct investment policy etc. (Biotechnology, Make
in India, 2023). Biotech Consortium India Limited (BCIL) is also playing a
key role in technology transfer. BCIL has experience of more than 3 decades
in the transfer of technologies to industries from research institutes and
88 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

universities. Technology Transfer Office has been setup at BCIL with the
support of Department of Biotechnology - Biotechnology Industry Research
Assistance Council - National Biopharma Mission (DBT-BIRAC-NBM).
Till date, BCIL has transferred about 60 technologies (like biofertilizers,
biomedical devices, biopesticides, diagnostics, and vaccines etc.,) which
are developed in India to many industries in India and abroad. Including
this, Technology Transfer Office also invites innovators and technology
developers across the world to explore the technology transfer prospects
and intellectual property management. Moreover, BCIL is also providing
services in setting and operationalisation of biotech parks/incubators
(Biotech Consortium India Limited, 2023).
Application of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology
The biotechnology processes comprise the biomolecules and organisms.
Microorganisms produce a variety of biomolecules via fermentation
processes. Microorganisms are genetically engineered, and fermentation
conditions are optimised to enhance t productivity. Microorganisms may
produce a variety of organic chemicals for industrial applications such
as adipic acid, succinic acid, diols, diamines and many other synthetic
polymers (Lorenzo, 2018). In the recent time, the biotechnology is also being
used as synthetic biology (SynBio) to produce products that are produced
by chemical and manufacturing industries (Hanson & Lorenzo, 2023).
Moreover, biological systems are also producing the products that would
be costly to produce by traditional manufacturing methods. Still, chemical
and manufacturing industries are reluctant to adopt bio-based processes
due to the difficulty of transforming of laboratory scale bioprocesses into
economically viable industrial processes (Lorenzo, 2018). Including this, the
instability of biological catalysts, difficulties in downstream processing, and
complexity of biological systems also pose difficulties for new engineering
technologies in biotechnology industry (Zamacona, 2021). Thus, for the
adoption of new technologies in biotechnology based industries, various
issues on the biological and industrial sides need to be addressed.

Like the industrial revolution, biotechnology also undergone

technological revolutions. The Industry 4.0 technologies, such as
digitalisation, robotics, automation, and machine learning etc., are enabling
biotechnologists to perform research, development, and creating favourable
production conditions. These technologies look promising in the development
and advancement of biotechnology (Massabni & da Silva, 2019). Big data
and AI are becoming key factor in biotechnology to provide competitive and
sustainable advantage. Big data analysis and machine learning are assumed
to be helpful in synthetic biology. Automation, additive manufacturing,
and simulations are considered helpful in providing optimised production
 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 89

conditions (Zamacona, 2021). The biotechnological developments are

increasingly dependent on the use of big data that is produced by high-
throughput methods and is stored in databases (Oliveira, 2019). It is found
that machine learning, and artificial intelligence etc., are becoming helpful
in data analysis, data integration, and process optimisation. Including this,
it is also expected that big data analysis will be a key factor in experiment
design, drug discovery, genomics, pharmacogenetics, pharmacogenomics,
and proteomics etc. (Oliveira, 2019).

The digitalisation and automation are providing smart manufacturing

solutions that are governed by Industry 4.0. To enhance the efficacy of the
production, there is an increased need of modelling tools such as machine
learning, including multivariate data analysis. The Data Integrity (DI) in
biopharmaceutical industries is also a key factor for product quality. Smart
manufacturing solutions like cloud platforms are considered to play an
important role in maintaining the DI throughout the processing (Alosert et
al., 2022). Thus, Industry 4.0 technologies are paving the way for automated
laboratories, automated manufacturing platforms, and the integration of
production units into large manufacturing facilities.
Transformation of Biotechnology into New Age Global Industry
Industry 4.0 technologies such as Internet of Things (IoT), artificial
intelligence, machine learning, robotics, big data analytics, and automation
etc., have capabilities to transform biotechnology in a new age global
industry where advanced technologies are involved in research and
development and manufacturing. These technologies could be helpful in
establishing a collaborative network between different research laboratories,
different pharmaceutical and biotechnology manufacturing facilities across
the world to maintain the productivity, competitiveness and supply cycle.

The Internet of things technologies are assisting researchers in minimising

the manual handling of specimens, better control over environmental factors,
and effective data management using the sensors (Kamal, 2022). Artificial
intelligence is widely used in drug discovery (David et al., 2020), drug
safety (Diaw et al., 2022), genomics (Lin & Ngiam, 2023), proteomics,
cancer biomarker discovery (Xiao et al., 2021), and metabolomics (Barberis
et al., 2022) etc. Machine learning is helpful in the analysis of complex
metabolomic data, disease modelling and diagnosis (Galal et al., 2022).
Robotics and automation are playing key role in biotechnology research
and development facilities and manufacturing facilities. Automation is
improving reproducibility, research efficiency, enhanced production,
and safety (Holland & Davies, 2020). Many companies are utilising
90 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

robotic and automation platforms in the production, synthesis of DNA,

and production of new microbial strains. Various examples demonstrate
that biotechnology companies are using robotics technology to enhance
efficiency, such as Amyris producing new bacterial strains, Ginkgo Bioworks
working on robot-assisted strain design technology, Zymergen and Counsyl
are generating biological data using automated robots and isolating the
strains and proteins through deep learning, and Transcriptic and Riffyn are
working to develop a platform technology for fast production and analysis
of large amount of complex biological data through cloud-based synthetic
biology software (Kim, 2019). Recently the world has seen the potential of
digital technology and computational approaches to develop vaccines for
COVID-19 in a short span. The rapid development of effective vaccines
against this virus offered long-term control.
Industry 4.0 Technologies in Research and Development in
Biotechnology
Biomanufacturing processes comprise biocatalysts, microorganisms,
animal cells and plant cells. At the cellular level, biochemical processes
are performed by enzymes (biocatalysts), and thus, enzymes are used
in industrial applications for bioprocess, production, and improving the
quality of products. For sustainable production of biotechnology products,
and to manage the environmental issues (like resource depletion, and
waste generation), the catalytic properties of existing enzymes should be
increased or new enzymes with higher catalytic properties may be isolated
or synthesised (Figure 5).

Figure 5: Some important approaches for redesigning the

biocatalyst for improved biocatalysis

Source: Author’s own compilation.

 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 91

In this direction, various approaches such as; site directed mutagenesis

(Yang et al., 2019), genetic engineering, metabolic engineering (Nevoigt,
2008), directed evolution (Kumar & Singh, 2013), and high throughput
screening etc., are playing a key role (Sharma et al., 2019). Many of scientific
reports are available that demonstrate role of these approaches to increase
the biocatalytic potential of industrially important enzymes.

Site-directed mutation has been used to improve the enzymatic activity

of an industrially important enzyme (5-carboxy-2-pentenoyl-CoA reductase)
for increased biosynthesis of Adipate. Adipate is used as raw material to
produce lubricants, nylon-6,6, pesticides, polyurethane foam, and synthetic
rubber (Yang et al., 2019). While routine chemical methods producing these
items are found to generate greenhouse gas, toxic chemicals and pollutants.

α-amylases are used biocatalysts in baking industries, starch

saccharification, and textile desizing. Due to the acidic nature of starch,
the acidic amylases are demanded from industry. However, acid stable,
Ca++ independent, and thermo stable α-amylases are commercially not
available. Biotechnological approaches are playing key role to produce
α-amylases such as; α-amylases gene cloning and expression, structural
conformational studies, protein engineering of α-amylases, directed
evolution, study of molecular dynamics and computational modelling
(Sharma & Satyanarayana, 2013).

Saccharomyces cerevisiae has a long history of application to produce

alcohol and Baker’s yeast. It is widely used in the food and beverage
industries. Activity of S. cerevisiae could be increased by metabolic
engineering approaches (Lian et al., 2018; Nevoigt, 2008; Ostergaard et al.,
2000). Including this, genetic engineering approaches (random mutagenesis,
site directed mutagenesis, and recombinant DNA technology, etc.) are also
being explored to improve the activity of S. cerevisiae.

The potential of biocatalysis has been observed in the synthesis of

COVID-19 drug, where engineered Ribosyl-1-Kinase was used to synthesise
Molnupiravir in a short and sustainable process. The engineered enzyme
shortened the synthetic pathway by 70 per cent and about 7-fold more yield
(McIntosh et al., 2021). Similarly, engineered Cytidine Deaminase has been
reported to produce N-hydroxy-cytidine which is a key intermediate for the
synthesis of Molnupiravir (Burke et al., 2022). Including this, a large-scale
manufacturing process for Molnupiravir has been developed. This process
is demonstrated 1.6 fold improvement in yield (Fier et al., 2021). Recently,
scientists have used smart library design and machine learning approaches
92 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

to engineer the iron/α-ketoglutarate dependent halogenase WelO5 (Büchler

et al., 2022).

These examples reflect that enzyme engineering is a promising approach

for the sustainable production of biotechnology products because a lesser
amount of raw materials will be used for the generation of the same or more
amount of products. Thus, resources will be less used and less amount of
waste would be generated while productivity will be increased. However, the
approaches like directed evolution, protein engineering, structure prediction
(using X-Ray crystallography, NMR) are time-consuming.

Industry 4.0 technologies could be explored in research and

development. Artificial intelligence and digital tools may be used for the
analysis of genomic and proteomic data, enzyme active site determination,
protein design, reverse genetics and artificial synthesis of novel enzymes
possessing high bio-catalytic activity. Metagenomic screening is emerging
as a novel tool to identify enzymes with high metabolic activity. Industry
4.0 technologies may integrate the research output of different research
groups, analysis of available DNA and protein databases, in silico screening,
enhance the pace of biocatalyst identification, optimisation and improve
the biocatalytic properties (active site modification, substrate tolerance, pH
tolerance, temperature tolerance, control of feedback inhibition), cofactor
recycling, structure-guided engineering, computational modelling. Out of
these, may processes may be automated. It is expected that computational
tools will lead the revolution in enzyme engineering (Büchler et al., 2022).

Machine Learning (ML) methods have been used in bioprocess

development, strain selection, strain improvement, and bioprocess
optimisation etc (Helleckes et al., 2023). ML approaches are also used
in protein engineering via directed evolution (Yang et al., 2019). AI
technology could be used in protein engineering, and pathway design to
construct microbial cell factories. AI technology is being used for metabolic
engineering to increase biological production via protein engineering and
pathway design. Including this, AI technology is also explored in directed
evolution (Jang et al., 2022). AI with Microfluidic technologies may be used
in biotechnology research, prognostics, diagnostics, the development of
personalised medicines, and the development of regenerative medicine (Zare
Harofte et al., 2022). Digital Twin technology is virtually representation of
complex bioprocesses. Bioprocess Digital Twin platforms of cell cultures
may developed to regulate the manufacturing environment of mammalian
cells (for example CHO cells) and bioreactors (Park et al., 2021).
 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 93

Industry 4.0 Technologies in Smart Manufacturing in

Biotechnology
Industry 4.0 technologies have immense potential for the sustainable
production of biotechnology products. In biopharma, automated platforms
will improve the productivity, competitiveness, modernise manufacturing
and environmental sustainability (Silva et al., 2020). It is expected that the
adoption of 4.0 technologies in biotechnology will take biomanufacturing
to new heights.

Industry 4.0 technologies allow communication between machine and

people in regulated environment equipped with self adapting capabilities
(Artico et al., 2022). Integration of technologies like AI, machine learning,
Internet of Things (IoT), and cloud computing etc., are transforming
production facilities into smart factories. These smart factories are
equipped with embedded software, advanced sensors, and robotics that
monitor and optimise the production processes (Soori et al., 2023). These
technologies increased automation, predictive control, self optimisation of
processes, optimised usage of resources that improve the productivity and
environmental sustainability.

Smart manufacturing led by Industry 4.0 technologies offers benefits

in manufacturing, monitoring the production processes, and waste
management. The technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI), robotics,
and Machine Learning will lead to the establishment of smart manufacturing
units that will increase the productivity and reduce waste generation. These
approaches are capable to improve the economics of production through
sustainable production of existing and novel products. AI approaches
are capable to improve the design and processing engineering strategies
in bioprocessing (Yang et al., 2023). Big data and Artificial Intelligence
are playing key roles in smart ecosystem design. Big Data and AI are
fundamentally generating competitive and sustainable advantage (Artico
et al., 2022). Machine learning approaches are useful in monitoring, scale-
up and control of bioprocesses (Helleckes et al., 2023). An automated and
high-throughput platform has been developed with the help of ML for de
novo synthesis of artificial enzymes (Wu et al., 2023).
Future Prospects
The future of biomanufacturing seems to be very promising as the demand
for biotechnology based products, medicines, and therapeutic proteins
is increasing. The aim of biomanufacturing is to provide high quality
products at affordable cost. However, the process for manufacturing of
biotherapeutic molecules is complex, costly and associated with high
failure rate. It also contains regulatory challenges. Industry 4.0 technologies
94 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

guided manufacturing is expected to replace traditional biomanufacturing

production model. These technologies have the capacity to increase the
productivity, efficiency, and sustainable production of biotechnology
products while managing global environmental issues. Moreover, the
adoption of such technologies will create jobs for trained and skilled
manpower.

Although industry 4.0 technologies seem to be very promising in

bioprocessing and biotechnology but there are certain challenges to adoption
of industry 4.0 technologies that need to be addressed. Some of them are; the
complexity of biological systems to be automated, regulatory requirements,
lack of qualified professionals, lack of availability of funds, and lack of
organisational strategies for implementation etc. Some other challenges
are market uncertainty of the firm’s business, competition, financial and
knowledge constraints.

Many companies have established advanced facilities that use principles

of Industry 4.0 and biotechnology. For example, Gingko Bioworks perform
bioengineering using a platform based on automation, data analysis and
software development. Strateos offers cloud based biological research and
testing services (Zamacona, 2021). Merck & Co., pilot plant facility at
West Point, PA (USA), is performing bioprocess research and development
activities using analytics platforms that leverage cloud-based software.
Merck Sharp & Dohme established the Werthenstein BioPharma facility
(Switzerland) that is involved in the development and analysis of new
large molecule drugs using automated analysis technology. Human vaccine
research facility of GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals is exploring the artificial
intelligence–based predictive controllers to improve the robustness of
manufacturing processes, improving quality of products, and reducing
waste (Macdonald, 2020). Amgen’s Singapore manufacturing facility has
implemented a platform to perform centralised monitoring of processes
across the entire manufacturing network (Innovate, 2021).
Conclusion
Industry 4.0 technologies have immense potential in the biotechnology
sector for sustainable production of products, as these technologies could
improve the performance and productivity. However, biological systems
and processes seem to be complex for modelling and automation. Though
the involvement of industry 4.0 technologies like automation, AI based
production and robotics could improve the production efficiency, waste
minimisation, and forecasting of demands etc. The technologies like
automation, digitalisation may contribute in research and development
 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 95

in biotechnology by contributing the analysis of protein structure, gene

sequences and play an important role in genetic engineering, protein
engineering and fermentation technology etc. It is also assumed that
the adoption of these technologies will also increase the employment
opportunities of skilled manpower in industries. However, digital
transformation of biomanufacturing facilities exhibits some obstacles, but it
could offer long term advantages in bioprocessing utilising process control
real time monitoring.

References
Ahsan, M.M., & Siddique, Z. 2022. Industry 4.0 in Healthcare: A systematic review.
International Journal of Information Management Data Insights, 2(1): pp.100079.
Ali, Q., Parveen, S., Yaacob, H. & Zaini, Z. 2022. The management of Industry 4.0
technologies and environmental assets for optimal performance of industrial firms in
Malaysia. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(35): pp.52964-52983.
doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-19666-1
Alosert, H., Savery, J., Rheaume, J., Cheeks, M., Turner, R., Spencer, C., S. Farid, S. &
Goldrick, S. 2022. Data integrity within the biopharmaceutical sector in the era of
Industry 4.0. Biotechnology Journal, 17(6): pp.2100609.
Artico, F., Edge III, A.L., & Langham, K. 2022. The future of artificial intelligence for
the BioTech big data landscape. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 76: pp.102714.
doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2022.102714
Awais, M., Pervez, A., Yaqub, A., Sarwar, R., Alam, F. & Siraj, S. 2010. Current status of
biotechnology in health. Am Eurasian J Agric Environ Sci, 7(2): pp.210-220.
Bai, C., Dallasega, P., Orzes, G. & Sarkis, J. 2020. Industry 4.0 technologies assessment:
A sustainability perspective. International journal of production economics, 229:
pp.107776.
Barberis, E., Khoso, S., Sica, A., Falasca, M., Gennari, A., Dondero, F., Afantitis, A. &
Manfredi, M. 2022. Precision medicine approaches with metabolomics and artificial
intelligence. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 23(19):11269.
Benitez, G.B., Ayala, N.F. & Frank, A.G., 2020. Industry 4.0 innovation ecosystems: An
evolutionary perspective on value cocreation. International Journal of Production
Economics, 228: pp.107735.
Bhatia, S. 2018. “Chapter 1. History, scope and development of biotechnology” in Saurabh
Bhatia and Divakar Goli (eds) Introduction to Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Volume
1. Basic techniques and concepts. Bristol: IOP Publishing. doi:10.1088/978-0-7503-
1299-8ch1
BioSpace. 2022. Biotechnology Market Size to Worth Around US$ 3.44 Trillion by 2030.
Retrieved on June 3, 2023 from https://www.biospace.com/article/biotechnology-
market-size-to-worth-around-us-3-44-trillion-by-2030/
Biotech Consortium India Limited, 2023. Services offered by BCIL-At a Glance. Retrieved
on Nov 19, 2023 from https://www.biotech.co.in/en/about/services-offered
96 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Braccini, A.M., & Margherita, E.G. 2018. Exploring organizational sustainability of industry
4.0 under the triple bottom line: The case of a manufacturing company. Sustainability,
11(1): pp.36. doi: 10.3390/su11010036
Büchler, J., Malca, S. H., Patsch, D., Voss, M., Turner, N. J., & Bornscheuer, U. T., et
al. 2022. Algorithm-aided Engineering of Aliphatic Halogenase WelO5* for the
Asymmetric Late-Stage Functionalization of Soraphens. Nat. Commun., 13 (1): pp.
1–11. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-27999-1
Burke, A.J., Birmingham, W.R., Zhuo, Y., Thorpe, T.W., Zucoloto da Costa, B., Crawshaw,
R., Rowles, I., Finnigan, J.D., Young, C., Holgate, G.M., & Muldowney, M.P. 2022.
An engineered cytidine deaminase for biocatalytic production of a key intermediate
of the Covid-19 antiviral molnupiravir. Journal of the American Chemical Society,
144(9): pp. 3761-5.
Carr, N. 2003. IT Doesn’t Matter. Harvard Business Review, 81(5): pp. 41–49
Chen, J.Y., Tai, K.C., & Chen, G.C. 2017. Application of programmable logic controller
to build-up an intelligent industry 4.0 platform. Procedia Cirp., 63: pp. 150-5.
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2017.03.116
Danielson, N., McKay, .S, Bloom, P., Dunn, J., Jakel, N., Bauer, T., Hannon, J., Jewett,
M.C., & Shanks, B. 2020. Industrial biotechnology—An industry at an inflection point.
Industrial Biotechnology, 16(6): pp. 321-32.
Daudt, G.M., & Willcox, L.D. 2018. Critical reflections from US and German experiences
in advanced manufacturing. Revista de Gestão, 25(2): pp.178-193
David, L., Thakkar, A., Mercado, R. & Engkvist, O. 2020. Molecular representations in AI-
driven drug discovery: a review and practical guide. Journal of Cheminformatics, 12(1):
pp.1-22.
de Soto, B.G., Agustí-Juan, I., Hunhevicz, J., Joss, S., Graser, K., Habert, G. & Adey, B.T.
2018. Productivity of digital fabrication in construction: Cost and time analysis of a
robotically built wall. Automation in construction, 92: pp.297-311.
Diaw, M.D., Papelier, S., Durand-Salmon, A., Felblinger, J. & Oster, J. 2022. AI-Assisted
QT Measurements for Highly Automated Drug Safety Studies. IEEE Transactions on
Biomedical Engineering, 70(5): pp.1504-1515.
El Merroun, M., Bartók, I.J. & Alkhlaifat, O., 2022. Industry 4.0 technologies’ effects on
environmental sustainability-A systematic literature review. Journal of Manufacturing
Engineering, 17(4): pp.132-152.
Fier, P.S., Xu, Y., Poirier, M., Brito, G., Zheng, M., Bade, R., Sirota, E., Stone, K., Tan,
L., & Humphrey, G.R., & Chang, D. 2021. Development of a Robust Manufacturing
Route for Molnupiravir, an Antiviral for the Treatment of COVID-19. Organic Process
Research & Development, 25(12): pp. 2806-15.
Galal, A., Talal, M. & Moustafa, A. 2022. Applications of machine learning in metabolomics:
Disease modeling and classification. Frontiers in genetics, 13, 1017340.
Gavrilescu, M., & Chisti Y. 2005. Biotechnology—a sustainable alternative for
chemical industry. Biotechnology advances, 23(7-8): pp. 471-99. doi:10.1016/j.
biotechadv.2005.03.004
 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 97

Gupta, M., & Jauhar, S.K. 2023. Digital innovation: An essence for Industry 4.0. Thunderbird
International Business Review, 65: pp. 279-292. doi: 10.1002/tie.22337
Hanson, A.D., & Lorenzo, V.D. 2023. Synthetic Biology─ High Time to Deliver?. ACS
Synthetic Biology, 12(6): pp. 1579-82. doi:10.1021/acssynbio.3c00238
Helleckes, L.M., Hemmerich, J., Wiechert, W., von Lieres, E., & Grünberger, A. 2023.
Machine learning in bioprocess development: from promise to practice. Trends in
Biotechnology, 41: pp. 817-835. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2022.10.010
Holland, I. & Davies, J.A. 2020. Automation in the life science research laboratory. Frontiers
in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 8, 571777.
Industry Statistics – Global. 2022. “Global Biotechnology - Number of Businesses 2005–
2028”. Retrieved on June 3, 2023 from https://www.ibisworld.com/global/number-of-
businesses/global-biotechnology/2010/
Innovate. 2021. “Why Biomanufacturing 4.0 is a Game-Changer”. Retrieved on June 30,
2023 from https://www.a-star.edu.sg/News/a-star-innovate/innovates/innovate/why-
biomanufacturing-4-is-a-game-changer
Invest India. “Sector Biotechnology. India- Soaring Towards a $ 300 Bn BioEconomy”.
Retrieved on June 3, 2023 from https://www.investindia.gov.in/sector/biotechnology
Jang, W.D., Kim, G.B., Kim, Y., & Lee, S.Y. 2022. Applications of artificial intelligence
to enzyme and pathway design for metabolic engineering. Current Opinion in
Biotechnology, 73: pp. 101-7. doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2021.07.024
Javaid, M., Haleem, A., Singh, R.P., Suman, R., & Gonzalez, E.S. 2022. Understanding
the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies in improving environmental sustainability.
Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3: pp. 203-217. doi:10.1016/j.susoc.2022.01.008
Kamal R. 2022. IoT And Biotechnology: An Incredible Technology Fusion Not To Miss
In 2023. Retrieved on Nov 20, 2023 from https://www.intuz.com/blog/iot-and-
biotechnology-incredible-technology-fusion.
Kilbane, J.J. 2016. Future applications of biotechnology to the energy industry. Frontiers
in Microbiology, 7: pp.86.
Kim, H., 2019. AI, big data, and robots for the evolution of biotechnology. Genomics &
informatics, 17(4): e44. doi: 10.5808/GI.2019.17.4.e44
Kumar, A., & Singh, S. 2013. Directed evolution: tailoring biocatalysts for industrial
applications. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 33(4): pp. 365-78.
Lian, J., Mishra, S., & Zhao, H. 2018. Recent advances in metabolic engineering of
Saccharomyces cerevisiae: new tools and their applications. Metabolic Engineering,
50: pp. 85-108.
Lin, J. & Ngiam, K.Y. 2023. How data science and AI-based technologies impact
genomics. Singapore Medical Journal, 64(1):59.
Lorenzo, V.D. 2018. “How biotechnology is evolving in the Fourth Industrial Revolution”.
Retrieved on June 26, 2023 from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/05/
biotechnology-evolve-fourth-industrial-revolution/
Macdonald, G.J. 2020. “Biomanufacturing Makes Sense of the Industry 4.0 Concept”.
Retrieved on June 27, 2023 from https://www.genengnews.com/insights/
biomanufacturing-makes-sense-of-the-industry-4-0-concept/
98 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Make in India. “Biotechnology”. Retrieved on June 3, 2023 from https://www.makeinindia.

com/sector/biotechnology
Martin, D.K., Vicente, O., Beccari, T., Kellermayer, M., Koller, M., Lal, R., Marks, R.S.,
Marova, I., Mechler, A., Tapaloaga, D., & Žnidaršič-Plazl, P. 2021. A brief overview
of global biotechnology. Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment, 35(sup1): pp.
S5-14. doi:10.1080/13102818.2021.1878933
Massabni, A.C., & da Silva, G.J. 2019. Biotechnology and Industry 4.0: The professionals of
the future. International Journal of Advances in Medical Biotechnology, 2(2): pp. 45-53.
Matthews, N.E., Cizauskas, C.A., & Layton, D.S. et al. 2019. Collaborating constructively
for sustainable biotechnology. Sci Rep., 9:19033. doi:10.1038/s41598-019-54331-7
McIntosh, J. A., Benkovics, T., Silverman, S. M., Huffman, M. A., Kong, J., & Maligres, P. E.,
et al. 2021. Engineered Ribosyl-1-Kinase Enables Concise Synthesis of Molnupiravir,
an Antiviral for COVID-19. ACS Cent. Sci., 7 (12): pp. 1980–1985. doi:10.1021/
acscentsci.1c00608
Morrar, R., Arman, H., & Mousa, S. 2017. The fourth industrial revolution (Industry 4.0): a
social innovation perspective. Technol Innov Manag Rev., 7(11): pp. 12–20
Nevoigt, E. 2008. Progress in metabolic engineering of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 72(3): pp. 379-412.
Oláh, J., Aburumman, N., Popp, J., Khan, M.A., Haddad, H., & Kitukutha, N. 2020.
Impact of Industry 4.0 on environmental sustainability. Sustainability, 12(11):4674.
doi:10.3390/su12114674
Oliveira, A.L. 2019. Biotechnology, big data and artificial intelligence. Biotechnology
Journal, 14(8): 1800613. doi: 10.1002/biot.201800613
Ostergaard, S., Olsson, L., & Nielsen, J. 2000. Metabolic engineering of Saccharomyces
cerevisiae. Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews, 64(1): pp. 34-50.
Park, S.Y., Park, C.H., Choi, D.H., Hong, J.K. & Lee, D.Y. 2021. Bioprocess digital twins of
mammalian cell culture for advanced biomanufacturing. Current Opinion in Chemical
Engineering, 33: 100702.
Pereira, A.C., & Romero, F. 2017. A review of the meanings and the implications of the
Industry 4.0 concept. Procedia Manuf., 13: 1206–1214.
Primer, A. 2001. The Application of Biotechnology to Industrial Sustainability. OECD.
https://www.oecd.org/health/biotech/1947629.pdf
Rabaey, K., & Verstraete, W. 2005. Microbial fuel cells: novel biotechnology for energy
generation. Trends in Biotechnology, 23(6): pp.291-298.
Rifkin, J. 2014. The Zero Marginal Cost Society: The Internet of Things, the Collaborative
Commons, and the Eclipse of Capitalism. New York: St. Martin’s Press
Sharma, A., & Satyanarayana, T. 2013. Microbial acid-stable α-amylases: characteristics,
genetic engineering and applications. Process Biochemistry, 48(2): pp. 201-11.
Sharma, A., Gupta, G., Ahmad, T., Mansoor, S., & Kaur, B. 2021. Enzyme engineering:
current trends and future perspectives. Food Reviews International, 37(2): pp. 121-54.
 Role of Industry 4.0 in Biotechnology 99

Silva, F., Resende, D., Amorim, M., & Borges, M. 2020. A field study on the impacts
of implementing concepts and elements of industry 4.0 in the biopharmaceutical
sector. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6(4):175.
doi:10.3390/joitmc6040175
Simon. 2023. “Industry 1.0 To 4.0 – Brief History Of The Industrial Revolution”. Retrieved
on June 17, 2023 from https://sustainability-success.com/industry-1-0-to-4-0-2-3-
revolution/
Singh, R.L. 2017. Introduction to Environmental Biotechnology. In: Singh, R. (eds)
Principles and Applications of Environmental Biotechnology for a Sustainable Future.
Applied Environmental Science and Engineering for a Sustainable Future. Springer,
Singapore. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-1866-4_1
Smith S. 2022. “Humble Beginnings: The Origin Story of Modern Biotechnology”. Retrieved
on Jun 3, 2023 from https://www.labiotech.eu/in-depth/history-biotechnology-
genentech/
Soori, M., Arezoo, B., & Dastres, R. 2023. Internet of things for smart factories in industry
4.0, a review. Internet of Things and Cyber-Physical Systems, 3: pp. 192-204.
Uhlemann, T.H., Lehmann, C., & Steinhilper, R. 2017. The digital twin: Realizing the
cyber-physical production system for industry 4.0. Procedia Cirp., 61: pp. 335-40.
UNESCO. 2023. “Biotechnology: effective solutions for sustainable development. Apr 2023”.
Retrieved on Jun 21, 2023 from https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/biotechnology-
effective-solutions-sustainable-development
United Nations. “The 17 Goals”. Retrieved on June 21, 2023 from https://sdgs.un.org/goals
Verma, A.S., Agrahari, S., Rastogi, S., & Singh, A. 2011. Biotechnology in the realm of
history. J Pharm Bioallied Sci., 3(3): pp. 321-3. doi: 10.4103/0975-7406.84430.
Vogel-Heuser, B., & Hess, D. 2016. Guest editorial Industry 4.0–prerequisites and
visions. IEEE Transactions on automation Science and Engineering, 13(2): pp. 411-413.
Wei, S. 2016. The application of biotechnology on the enhancing of biogas production from
lignocellulosic waste. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol, 100: pp. 9821–9836. doi: 10.1007/
s00253-016-7926-5
Wu, G., Zhou, H., Zhang, J., Tian, Z.Y., Liu, X., Wang, S., Coley, C.W., & Lu, H. 2023. A
high-throughput platform for efficient exploration of functional polypeptide chemical
space. Nature Synthesis, 2: pp. 515-526. doi:10.1038/s44160-023-00294-7
Wu, X., Goepp, V. & Siadat, A. 2020. Concept and engineering development of cyber physical
production systems: a systematic literature review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol ., 111: pp.
243–261. doi: 10.1007/s00170-020-06110-2
Xiao, Q., Zhang, F., Xu, L., Yue, L., Kon, O.L., Zhu, Y. & Guo, T. 2021. High-throughput
proteomics and AI for cancer biomarker discovery. Advanced drug delivery
reviews, 176: pp.113844.
Yang, C.T., Kristiani, E., Leong, Y.K., & Chang, J.S. 2023. Big Data and Machine Learning
Driven Bioprocessing-Recent trends and critical analysis. Bioresource Technology,
13:128625. doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2023.128625
100 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Yang, J., Lu, Y., Zhao, Y., Bai, Z., Ma, Z., & Deng, Y. 2019. Site-directed mutation to improve
the enzymatic activity of 5-carboxy-2-pentenoyl-CoA reductase for enhancing adipic
acid biosynthesis. Enzyme and Microbial Technology, 125: pp. 6-12.
Yang, K.K., Wu, Z., & Arnold, F.H. 2019. Machine-learning-guided directed evolution for
protein engineering. Nat Methods, 16: pp. 687–694. doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0496-6
Zamacona, E.D. 2021. “Biotechnology 4.0”. Retrieved on June 26, 2023 from https://www.
linkedin.com/pulse/biotechnology-40-enrique-de-zamacona/
Zare Harofte, S., Soltani, M., Siavashy, S., & Raahemifar, K. 2022. Recent Advances of
Utilizing Artificial Intelligence in Lab on a Chip for Diagnosis and Treatment. Small,
18(42):2203169. doi: 10.1002/smll.202203169
 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review
Vol. 25, No.3, pp 101-119
© 2023, RIS.

Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences

Based Innovations : An Indian Perspective
Shiv Kant Shukla* and Susmita Shukla**

Abstract: Transfer of technology (ToT) developed in research institutes to

industry has been one of the most discussed areas in the recent past. ToT
helps in accelerated commercialisation for rapid industrial growth and
generates revenue for the institutes by monetising research outcomes. The
role of TTOs in the process of developing, protecting intellectual property
and disseminating technologies through licensing to spinouts or established
companies has generated special interest. TTOs are academic or commercial
entities that facilitate the management of intellectual property rights and ToT by
bridging the gap between research and industrial needs. They provide support
for collaboration and mediate relationships between different innovation
stakeholders, namely academia and industry. The present article highlights
the role and importance of TTOs in the Indian context with a backdrop of
the ecosystem of developed countries. It also suggests the need for having
TTO at individual research organisation for better outreach and academia-
industry connects. The study suggests a need for having a larger network of
professional TTOs, harmonised policy for managing IP and technology and
a robust tech-transfer system which will help all the stakeholders leading to
creation of a large number of start-ups, job-creations and, overall, in building
the robust innovation and tech-transfer ecosystem for industrial growth
Keywords: Intellectual Property, Technology transfer, TTO, Licensing,
Commercialisation, Spinout

Introduction
Concerted and multi-stakeholders’ efforts, which facilitate the transition of
scientific outcomes, knowledge and intellectual property from its creators,
mainly universities and research institutions, to the uses of public and
private sectors, is called technology transfer (TT). It transforms inventions
and scientific outcomes into new products and services for the benefit of
society. Association of University Technology Managers, popularly known
as AUTM, defines it as, “the process of transferring scientific findings (such
as inventions) from one entity to another (i.e., industry) for further scaling
up, validation, refinement and commercialization” (McDevitt et al, 2014).
Key drivers for industrial growth include a strong base of innovation
research in universities and research institutions. In the present time,
the priority of institutions has changed towards research and technology
*
School of Services, Kaushalya the Skill University, Ahmadabad, Gujarat, India
**
Amity Institute of Biotechnology, Amity University, Noida (U.P), India. Corresponding Author
Email: [email protected]
102 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

development, including IP creation and its commercialisation. India, which

is a fast-developing country, the creation of IP and its commercialisation
are of the matter of high priority for rapid industrial growth. The Innovation
Index of India, published in 2021, mentioned that the overall spending on
R&D has been comparatively at a lower side. The overall share of gross
expenditure on R&D (GERD), as a percentage of GDP, was about 0.7 per
cent. in which the private sector contributes just 0.1 per cent. Developed
countries like Denmark, the United States, Sweden, and Switzerland spend
about 3.0 per cent, 2.9 per cent, 3.2 per cent and 3.4 per cent, respectively.
In the case of Israel, expenditure on R&D is 4.5 per cent of its GDP, which
is the highest in the world.

As per the views expressed in the Economic Times (2022) quoting the
report of NITI Aayog, it has been emphasized that if India has to achieve
its goal of a $5 trillion economy, countries’ GERD needs significant
improvement and needs to touch at least 2 per cent. India ranked 40 in the
Global Innovation Index in the year 2022 as compared to 48 in 2020 as
per the report of WIPO published in 2020 (WIPO, 2020). This situation
can be improved significantly through a robust technology transfer system
by facilitating the creation of a large number of spinouts and licensing of
promising technologies to existing companies. Industry should be motivated
to invest in acquiring research findings and technology development.

Life science industry, specifically biotechnology, has been identified as

the sunrise sector by the Indian government. One of the driving technologies
of the future is biotechnology. Professionals working in this area need
to orient themselves towards rapid changing technologies. The power
of digitalization has enabled biotech­nology towards the development of
new products and processes from the speedy understanding of genetic
information of cells/microorgan­isms. Integration of technologies with
robotics, 3D printing, and artificial intelligence are technologies that will
impact biotechnology on a large scale.

In 2022, the Indian Bio-Economy grew from USD 70.2 billion to USD
80.12 billion in 2021 in spite of the pandemic period. The nation has set an
ambitious target for the BioEconomy to touch the $150 billion threshold
by 2025. It has the potential to reach $270-300 Billion by the year 2030
(India Bio-economy Report, 2022). The above ambitious target would be
achieved through supporting start-up innovation ecosystem, IP-driven
research, technology development and commercialization. The robust
technology transfer system is the key to rapid growth in which TTO has to
play a very important role.
 Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations 103

TTO and its Role Specially in Industry 4.0

As per the legal status, TTOs can be either an academic institute embedded
entity or independent commercial organizations which facilitate IPR
management and technology transfer by bridging the gap between research
and industry. TTOs provide assistance in making collaboration and facilitate
stronger relationships between different innovation stakeholders namely
academia and industry. The broad objectives of a TTO include – generating
affiliations with enhanced collaborations with industry, commercialising
research outcomes for public benefits, rewarding the inventors and assisting
them in planning applied research with commercial potential and monetize
the research towards generating additional resources for institutes which
can be utilised for further research (Tornatzky, 2000).
In India, the ratio of TTOs for alarge number of institutions is
significantly less as compared to other countries having a knowledge-based
economy. According to the Department of Science and Technology, a total
of 216 institutions are operational in different subject areas. UGC website
provides updates that 1074 universities, including 430 private universities
are operational in India. Considering this large number of institutional and
university base, there is a need to have a widespread network of TTOs across
the country to meet the demand of building the innovation and technology
transfer ecosystem.

With the presence of a large number of institutions, diverse geography

and socio-economic status of India, an ecosystem is relatively different
from any small European country. However, this base provides a clear
indication of the need for focused research through industry participation,
research leading to technology development and emphasis on monetising
the IP Assets in India. TTOs are crucial for building a culture of innovation
and technology management.

Society and government will be greatly benefitted if research outcome

is converted into products, leading to revenue generation for the institute
as well as the government. In India, shifting of gear is required from
publishing to patenting and, moreover, patenting with technology focus.
Further emphasis is required for monetising promising research outcomes
towards capitalising technological advancement.

In general, Industry 4.0 relies on transforming the industrial

manufacturing process by digitalising and adopting new technologies.
The expected market share of Industry 4.0 is projected to be more than
71.7 billion US $ and it is expected that it will exceed 150 billion US $
104 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

soon (Ammar et al., 2021). It is relevant to mention here that the Impact of
industry 4.0 technologies i.e. artificial intelligence, mechanization, use of
robotics/drones, 3D printing, on the Biotechnology sector is quite evident. In
biotech research and industry, new sensors, equipment with better efficiency
and artificial intelligence are being applied along with automation, big data,
advanced process analysis and the internet of things (IoT), which has greatly
impacted the speed and outcome of the work (Sezer et al., 2018). TTO has
to play an important role in the speedy transfer of such technologies and
knowledge from the developer/inventors to the user towards contributing
in rapid industrial growth. Razan et al. (2022) highlighted that technology
transfer plays a key role in the commercialization of new technology and
skill development for students and scientists. It creates a conducive climate
for university-industry collaborations, including industry 4.0 technologies.
A license agreement could be the most preferred method for technology
transfer as it allows the university to retain the IP rights, and at the same time,
it gives the industrial partner the right to develop and use the technologies
under stipulated conditions.

Process of Technology Transfer for Successful

Commercialisation
To initiate the process, TTO engages with the researchers, scientists or
inventors in order to understand the invention in an organised and systematic
manner. Once disclosure is received by TTO, it is evaluated mainly in terms
of its IP strength and market potential. The evaluation also includes technical
and regulatory aspects in order to have a complete SWOT analysis. Based
on the assessment, IP protection and licensing-strategy are finalised. In the
process, IP is valuated based on various approaches, namely cost-based,
market-based and income-based approaches or in a combination of these.
IP or technology is marketed among the potential licensees by TTO. Term-
sheet is discussed with the interested potential licensee. Once the deal is
finalized or the term sheet is approved by the licensor and licensee, the
licensing agreement is executed. After licensing, TTO monitors the progress
of technology commercialization in terms of attaining the milestones,
which is also called post-deal management (PDM. PDM is one of the very
important processes of technology licensing or commercialization. This
process is outlined in Figure 1
 Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations 105

Figure 1: Generalized process of technology-transfer

Source: Author’s own compilation.

Various Models of Technology-Transfer

There are various models of transferring the technologies. Some of the
very prevalent modals of technology transfer and its commercialization
are listed below:
• Licensing: This is an industry preferred method to grant legal rights
to a licensee to use IP for manufacturing products and services. The
consideration is provided for its exclusivity or non-exclusivity. In
addition to this, the field of use and territory are other important
parameters in the licensing agreement.
• Spinouts: It is the way of licensing startups affiliated with inventors
in the capacity as agreed by host institutions: Sometimes, spinouts is
an ideal means to increase the TRL or perfect the technology. In the
evolving entrepreneurial ecosystem for life sciences ventures in India,
it is very important that the startup has the involvement of experienced
entrepreneur as co-founder. Defined institutional policies should be in
place in order to provide supportive environment to spinout.
• Co-development: Sometimes, research results need further validation
or development is needed to match with requirement of the industry.
Option of co-development can be explored. Co- ownership can be
discussed and negotiated considering the contributions of parties in
background IP and foreground IP generation.
106 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

• Assignment: Assignment of IP is the transfer of ownership to the

second party. It is also called the sale of IP rights. In the case of start-
ups, sometimes it becomes crucial to transfer to IP rights enabling them
to raise funds. In case of a large portfolio, sometimes TTO prefers
to assign the IP in place of licensing in order to minimise the cases
of PDM. However, in case of assignment, due caution is required in
deciding the terms or value of IP.

Global and National Scenario: A brief Overview

In many countries, ToT is governed by an Act enforced by the respective
governments. For instance, Denmark has an Act on Inventions at Public
Research Institutions, which is effective from June 1, 1999. This act defines
that for any inventions originating through public funding, the University
as an employer has the right to acquire all rights to that which the employee
has invented in relation to his/her work. In other words, earlier, there
was Professor Privilege in Denmark, which later flipped into University-
owned IP after this Act (Baldini, 2006). Quite before the above, the USA
has mandated technology ownership by public research institutions and
technology licensing under the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. One of the objectives
of this Act was to encourage investment from the private sector in federally
funded research for societal benefits (Markel et al., 2013). South Africa has
also a similar provision under the Intellectual Property Rights from Publicly
Financed Research and Development Act, Act 51 of 2008(IPR-PFRDAct)
(Uctu & Essop (2022). IPR-PFRD Act clearly specifies that designated
institutions should establish a TTO. The IPR-PFRD Act emphasised faster
rate of transfer of technologies developed in universities or public research
organisations to industry, which can result into accelerated technological
innovation.

Similarly, the Japanese version of Bayh Dole Act, which was implemented
in 1999, revolutionised university research commercialisation in Japan by
increasing the number of applications of filing patents by universities and
enhancing the process of ToT to Japanese industries (Takenaka, 2005). It
is noteworthy to mention here another innovation-driven country in Asia
i.e Israel. ToT is one of the main reasons for the economic growth of Israel
where universities are called Economic Engines”. Israeli universities can
own a for-profit company called Technology Transfer Company (TTC).
TTCs handle the IP of universities and are responsible for the research
commercialization policy of the university. Government and private sector
both invest heavily in start-ups (Messer-Yaron, 2014).
 Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations 107

In India, the situation is different from the above countries, there are
many regulations governing technology transfer, including Indian Contract
Act, 1972, Competition Act, 2002, Copyright Act, 1957, Trademark Act,
1999, Patent Act, 1970 etc, make it comparatively complex process.

Institutions under the ambit of CSIR or ICMR or ICAR or DBT have

defined policies on IP protection and broad guidelines for technology
management and commercialisation. Among Universities in India, the
policy is quite variables, many of them have not published/documented their
policy framework, whereas some of them having a broad guideline on IP
management and up to some extent, on technology licensing. It is felt that
a harmonised policy in the country, including the University system, will
pave the way for effective IP management and its speedy commercialization.

National innovation system (NIS) and level of University Industry

linkages (UILs) are different in countries. Based on the requirements of
country, innovation policy should be devised.. NIS of any country revolves
around many factors, such as (i) performing R&D, (2) financing R&D,
(3) human resource development, (4) diffusing technology, (5) promoting
entrepreneurship, and (6) formulating technology and innovation policy.

In Indian academics, focus on the commercialisation of research

outcomes is evolving. Still, academicians emphasize on publishing research
papers rather than aiming at technology development and commercialization.
The study conducted by Ravi & Janodia, in 2021 suggested that (i) Indian
universities must leverage expertise commercialisation of research findings,
(ii) more focus should be given to the commercial viability of research, and
(iii) devise mechanisms to collaborate with industrial partners.

Many Indian universities have either established IP and technology

transfer cell or TTO in view of the UGC guidelines to assess the outcome
of teaching facilities in which score is allotted for of patents and its
commercialisation (The Gazette of India, Authority, 2018). Govt of India
launched “Make in India” in 2014 towards facilitating inventions, Intellectual
Property protection, and build the best manufacturing infrastructure in the
country. Later, a national IPR policy was published and the government
prioritized to bring the administration of IP laws under the Department of
Industrial Promotion and Policy (DIPP) (Joseph and Abrol, 2016). These
are all different efforts made at various levels to shift the gear towards
technology or product-based research.
108 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Guidelines governing ToT in Biotechnology and

Healthcare Sector in India (System laid down by DBT and
ICMR):
In India, the Department of Biotechnology is steering the research and
technology development in agriculture, healthcare, environment, energy and
other allied areas in life-science. Biotech-based technologies have various
limitations in terms of ToT, which include low market readiness, requirements
for further development and investments to commercialise research leads, a
limited number of biotech companies and long gestation period of biotech
products from promising research leads to commercialisation. In addition
to this, start-up companies (which are growing significantly in the recent
past) are not willing to license technologies which are in general available
on non-exclusive basis.

It is noteworthy to mention that DBT earlier adopted only non-exclusive

licensing provisions in order to promote market competitiveness and
increase affordability. Major policy shift happened in July 2023 when DBT
approved “Intellectual Property Guidelines”, which seems to be highly
significant for accelerating technology transfer and commercialization. This
change has been summarized in Table:1

Table 1: Comparative status of changes in modalities

post implementation of DBT- Intellectual Property Guidelines 2023

Before July 2023 After July 2023

It was decided to revise the grant

agreement in order to provide options
Agreement executed between for all forms of licensing.
DBT and the fund recipient
specifies that any IP that Technology having low TRL (Upto 5)
emerged through the support can be licensed out on an exclusive
of DBT has to be transferred basis, whereas technology with TRL
to the industry only on a non- 6 and more can be transferred on non-
exclusive basis exclusive basis.
Exclusivity in ToT is expected to attract
good companies

Name of DBT was to be

This procedural requirement is removed
included as Co-applicant in
now. IP is to be filed in the name of the
application for IP arising out of
host institution only.
funding

Source: Author’s own compilation.

 Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations 109

The above guidelines of DBT provided further clarity on the following

aspects:
• Decision making: Institutional Committee of DBT Autonomous
Institution has been empowered to make decisions.
• Commercialisation focus: Piling up IP for long periods without
transfer or licensing has been discouraged.
• Mechanism of licensing: It will be decided on a case-to-case basis
by the inventor and the host institute through the institutional IP
committees and informed to the Government.
• Exclusive licensing, for products/technologies that are intended for
large-scale public deployment, agreements should include a clause of
affordability in Indian.
• IP Assignment requests: The same would be dealt with case to case
basis under approval of competent authority with approval of competent
authority for encouraging spin-outs.

For healthcare technologies of public research institutions mainly

developed through funding of the Indian Council of Medical Research
(ICMR), limitations for ToT remain the same, similar to the as mentioned
for biotechnologies in the previous section. ToT of these technologies
are governed by ICMR Guidelines for Technology Transfer and Revenue
Sharing – 2021. In this case, non-exclusive licensing is the preferred
mode for increasing competition and maximizing public access. However,
licensing on an exclusive basis is also considered by the competent authority
of ICMR as a special case, particularly licensing to start-up companies
created with the support of ICMR.

Royalty model of ICMR on net Sales is well defined based on TRL

(reproduced below at Table 2), which is in addition to upfront or
milestone payment as per valuation of particular technology:

Table 2: Royalty model of ICMR

TRL Royalty per cent on net sale

1 -3 1-2 per cent

4-6 3-5 per cent

5 per cent and above (On approval of
7 and above
competent authority

Source: Author’s own compilation.

110 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Various Operational Technology Transfer Offices or

Organizations (TTOs) in India
There are many TTOs operational in India with the mandate of technology
transfer/ commercialisation and allied activities for supporting the innovation
ecosystem. Some of the leading TTOs are being discussed here. NRDC and
AgIn are example of specialised TTOs set up by the Government of India
under respective ministries for extending the technology transfer services
to various institutions functional in their domain.

National Research Development Corporation (NRDC): Govt of India

set-up NRDC in the year 1953. NRDC functions under the Department
of Scientific and Industrial Research, Ministry of Science & Technology.
NRDC has the mandate of developing, promoting and transferring
technologies coming from various national R&D institutions. NRDC has
been operational over the past seven decades and forged strong links with
various R & D organisations nationally and internationally. NRDC is known
for its large repository of the wide range of technologies spread over almost
all areas of industries. NRDC has been exporting promising and proven
technologies to industries both in developed as well as developing countries
(https://dsir.gov.in/national-research-development-corporation)

Agrinnovate India Ltd. (AgIn): Department of Agricultural Research

& Education (DARE), Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India
created AgIn in the year 2011. It acts as a focal point between the Indian
Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR- an autonomous organisation
under DARE) and the Stakeholders for the purpose of technology transfer
and commercialisation. AgIn facilitates the production, marketing and
popularisation of ICAR’s products, processes and technologies in agriculture
and allied sectors, such as seed, planting material, vaccines, diagnostics,
bio-technological products as a specialised agency in the agriculture domain.
(http://agrinnovateindia.co.in/index.html)

Biotech Consortium India Limited (BCIL) was set up in 1990 by the

All India Financial Institutions with shareholding of IDBI bank and other
corporate for facilitating technology commercialization in the area of
Biotechnology. It is also engaged in project management and consultancy
assignments in the area of biotechnology.
 Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations 111

New Space India Limited (NSIL) Government of India incorporated NSIL

in 2019 as a Public Sector Undertaking under the Department of Space
(although it’s not for life science, but its establishment shows the strong
commitment of the government to technology transfer) towards helping
companies in scaling up for space related programme by ToT mechanisms
and addressing the need of upcoming global commercial satellite market.

The above developments indicate that there is a good platform for the
technology transfer ecosystem in India. Considering the large country with
a significant number of institutions, universities and a pool of researchers,
there is a need for having a network of TTOs in the country for propelling
towards enhanced technology transfer and commercialisation. Setting up
of Regional Level TTOs (RTTOs) is an important step in this direction.
RTTOs are briefly discussed in the following section.
RTTOs under NBM of DBT-BIRAC
The National Biopharma Mission (NBM) is an Industry-Academia
collaborative Mission, for accelerating early development of
biopharmaceuticals, titled “Innovate in India” (i3) under the umbrella of
DBT-BIRAC. The NBM has taken the initiative to strengthen the technology
transfer ecosystem with the support of the World Bank. In this direction, NBM
established seven Regional Technology Transfer Organizations (RTTOs) to
foster technology transfer by bringing under their fold nationwide public
research organizations. These 7 RTTOs are housed in host organizations
namely (i) IKP Knowledge Park, Hyderabad; (ii) Centre for Cellular &
Molecular Platforms (CCAMP), Bangalore; (iii) KIIT Technology Business
Incubator, Bhubaneshwar; (iv) Foundation for Innovation and Technology
Transfer (FITT), New Delhi; (v) Entrepreneurship Development Center
(EDC), Venture Center, Pune; (vi) Biotech Consortium India Ltd, New Delhi
and (vii) Sree Chitra Tirunal Institute for Medical Sciences and Technology;
SCTIMST-TIMed, Trivandrum. These RTTOs have been assigned to
different territories for engaging themselves them different institutions
towards supporting them in innovation management and technology transfer
(BIRAC: Technology Transfer Offices, 2012). Locations of these 7 RTTOs
is depicted at Map (Figure 2)
112 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Figure 2: Map depicting the location of Regional Technology

Transfer Offices supported by DBT-NBM-BIRAC

Source: Author’s own compilation.

There are models of embedded or in-house or dedicated TTO for

Institutes or universities as well as standalone TTO working with various
institutions. Basic process of technology transfer remains similar in both
types of TTO. In-house TTO being an integral part of Institute, the flow
of invention is smooth, whereas stand-alone TTO is required to establish
formal linkage with the institution. Standalone TTO gets IP at various stages
of prosecutions, while in-house TTO gets the invention details at an early
stage, which is beneficial for early transaction. At the same time, managing
conflicts becomes easy for standalone TTO being the external agency.

TTO as an Effective Platform for Robust Innovation

Management and Technology Transfer System:
The role of TTO is highly important in the journey of technology
commercialisation right from identifying the invention or receiving the
disclosure of the invention from the inventor and taking it to the transfer
to the suitable entity through licensing out or facilitating in creating
spinout. It helps in making a strategy for the protection of IP in which close
coordination between TTO and the inventor is crucial. In certain cases, the
inventor is also advised to generate additional data or information in order
to form robust patent claims, which may attract industry for in-licensing.
 Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations 113

TTO has good connectivity with inventors on one hand and active
engagement with industry partners on the other hand towards identifying
the technological problems; they are strategically suited for bridging the
technological gap and finding new opportunities. This helps in establishing
connection even at an early stage, i.e innovation disclosures being received
at the TTO and having a potential licensee or industry partner for negotiation
at a very early stage to take the technology forward. Before proceeding
with IP protection, evaluation and marketing of invention; clarity on
inventorship is also important. Inter-institutional agreement becomes
important for joint inventorship and the same has to be thoroughly assessed
to understand rights and revenue sharing by the parties. Another important
aspect is that TTO helps institutes or universities to build patent portfolios
having good commercial potential in order to incentivise and monetize the
research programme. It is well established fact that the professional TTO
helps in the technical evaluation of invention, the right valuation (neither
undervalued nor overvalued) and identifying the right commercialisation
strategy (spinout or licensing to an established company).

To conclude, TTO has proved as an effective platform for institutes/

universities for managing the innovation and technology. In the presence of
effective TTO, inventors can focus on their core research activities without
worrying or engaging them in procedural aspects of IP and technology
transfer related activities.
Few Case Studies Highlighting Contribution of TTOs in
Technology Commercialisation

• Long Legacy of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation by

NRDC:
With the establishment of NRDC as a Not for Profit company, there
was a beginning of an organised Tech Transfer System in India almost
7 decades before. NRDC was the brainchild of Sir Shanti Swarup
Bhatnagar, known as the “Father of Indian Research Laboratories”.
It has signed more than 5000 license agreements and contributed
significantly to India’s ambition of building a science- and technology-
driven economy (http://www.nrdcindia.com/.).
Many important technologies were transferred, and their
commercialisation was facilitated by NRDC for the last many decades.
One of many success stories is the production technology of infant
food from buffalo milk. This technology was developed by CSIR-
114 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

Central Food Technological Research Institute, which was transferred

to Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation Limited, known
as Amul in 1960. India witnessed the importance of technology
development by research institutions and commercialisation by industry
partners with the involvement of technology transfer organisation like
NRDC in its initial years post independence period. This development
greatly contributed to the availability of indigenous products, which
were earlier being imported from other developed countries like
New Zealand and Switzerland, resulting in saving foreign currency,
providing economic options to consumers and uplifting the economy
of farmers/ milk producers (Shashidhara LS, 2017). Since then, many
impactful technologies were expeditiously transferred by NRDC and
also facilitated handholding to licensees.

• Transfer of technology developed through funding of DBT –

BIRAC
Several promising technologies were developed through funding
from the Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Government of India.
Technologies are developed at autonomous institutions under DBT as
well as other institutions under the extramural grant in aid support by
DBT. ToT of White Rust Resistant (WRR) Mustard varieties is a suitable
example of the impact of TTO for the speedy transfer of technology
to several companies on a non-exclusive basis for larger benefits of
the farming community. This technology-transfer was facilitated by
BCIL as authorised by the Biotech Industry R&D Assistance Council
(BIRAC). BCIL has 70 technologies of various domains, including
agri-biotech, medical biotech, medical devices, etc including the above
technology. This technology was developed by Delhi University South
Campus and there was a need to utilize the benefits of this research
to the public. There was huge scope to integrate the value of the
commercialised lines/varieties by multiple players of the seed business.
It is noteworthy that Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) is the most
important and major edible oil seed crop. White rust (Albugo candida)
is the most prevalent disease which causes major yield losses in Indian
Mustard (Lakra et al, 1989). In a short span of time, this technology was
transferred to 8 prominent Indian Seed companies, namely M/s Ajeet
Seeds Pvt. Limited, Aurangabad; M/s Bioseed Pvt. Ltd, Hyderabad;
M/s Ganga Kaveri Seeds Pvt. Ltd., Delhi; M/s Kalash Seeds Pvt Ltd,
Jalna; M/s Rallis India (Metahelix Life Sciences Limited) Bangalore;
 Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations 115

M/s Rasi Seeds Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu; M/s Tierra Agrotech Pvt. Ltd.,
Hyderabad and M/s Pioneer HI - Bred Private Limited, Hyderabad
(www.biotech.co.in). Licensee companies incorporated this gene/trait
in already commercialized varieties for better impact and crop yield.

• ICAR –Agrinnovate Infusing Technologies with Agriculture for

Sustainable Future
ICAR- Central Institute for Subtropical Horticulture (CISH) developed
technology called “ICAR-FUSICONT” to control Panama Wilt disease
caused by Fusarium species affecting banana, specially G-9 variety.
This technology is highly significant as Indian tissue culture companies
(more than 70 per cent) undertake mass multiplication and production
of this species due to high market demand. Approximately 350 million
plantlets were produced every year for plantation by farmers on
thousands of hectares of land, significantly contributing to the economy.
The above technology is a bio-formulation based on the antagonistic
fungal of Trichoderma reesei and bacteria Lysnibacillus fusiforms
grown in specific media/ substrate. This technology is also useful for
vegetables (tomato, potato, capsicum, chillies) and spice (cumin and
fenugreek) crops other than bananas. Agrinnovate India Ltd, as TTO of
ICAR, facilitated successful validation and transferred to Ms Innoterra
India on a non-exclusive basis (ICAR , 2022). This signifies the role of
TTO in the speedy translation and scaling up of technology by taking
the promising research outcome to a suitable industry partner for the
benefit of the public.

Spinouts as an Effective Tool for Tech Commercialisation

through TTO
Spinouts, in general, is an entity to which the technology from a university
or research institution is licensed out in which the university or research
institution has taken equity ownership in the licensee. It could be easy to
license an IP or technology to a well-established and financially sound
company. However, in case, technology needs more maturation through
further research, it is equally important to have a company around the
technology through the support of institutions. The process ensures that the
Institute does not leave its ownership of the technology before adequate
compensation. Having equity is part of that compensation. In Denmark,
it was seen that approximately 50 per cent of the technologies are being
transferred to spinout companies and the same is considered as an effective
116 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

way of job and wealth creation. In the case of spinout, it is critical to attract
investor(s). TTO plays a very important role not only in the creation of
spinouts but also in raising funds subsequently. Inventor of the technology
can be affiliated with Spinout Company as a non-executive director. Extent
of involvement of the inventor in spinouts should be approved by the
Director/Head of the Institute. As the TTO, it is critical to decide the way
forward towards identifying the path to market with the best way for the
success of technology for the benefit of the public at large.  Department
of Biotechnology (DBT), Govt of India has also come up with guidelines
vide No. office order - BT/NBDB/13/01/2018 towards “Encouraging
Development and Commercialization of Inventions and Innovations”
towards allowing innovators to have an equity stake in techno enterprises
/ spinoffs while in professional employment with their research academic
(Compendium of Instructions Issued for Departmental Officials, 2021)

Availability of seed funds and access to the biotech incubator /park or

central equipment facility of the institute by the spinout plays an important
role in the onward journey of commercialisation. Location of such a platform
is critical. Proximity of a leading research institute/university for biotech
park/incubator provides an ideal ecosystem through frequent interaction
with professors/mentors and other resources required for the success of
spinout. This also facilitates speedy technology transfer from research
group to spinout or start-up. Globally, the ecosystem developed by Stanford
University in California through Stanford Industrial Park is a great example
of academia and industry collaboration through speedy technology transfer,
paving the way for the development of Silicon Valley (Gromov, 2013). In
India, biotech clusters like Genome Valley in Hyderabad and incubators
housed within leading institutes like IITs have made significant progress
in technology development and commercialization. However, it needs
momentum through strengthening the technology transfer ecosystem in
order to realise its full potential.
Conclusion
• Technology transfer systems evolved in the US and Europe during
the 1980s and 1990s with the enactment Act on Innovation and tech-
transfer. The Indian ecosystem of technology transfer, especially in life
science, is in the process of evolving with the presence of specialized
TTO. Although there is a significant presence of TTOs with success
stories of technology transfer in the biotech/life science sector, there
is a need for a larger network of professional TTOs considering the
 Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations 117

number of universities/institutions in the country. It would be good to

have TTOs in the individual research organization connecting to the
state-level lead TTO (hub and spoke model) for greater outreach and
stronger academia-industry connect.
• There is a need to implement harmonised guidelines/policies on
managing IP and technology across the country in order to rule out
confusion among stakeholders. Such guidelines should focus on
increasing industry-academia collaboration and enhancing the share
of industry funding for research.
• In life-science/biotechnology, where most of the technologies developed
at the Institutional level have a low technology readiness level (TRL),
emphasis on creating spinouts should be given over licensing to existing
established companies. These spinouts will be an effective model for
the maturation of technology, attracting better revenue for the institute
and also facilitating in generating a large number of start-ups, leading
to job creation.
• The concept of applied or product-centric research and technology
development in academic institutions has started getting new impetus
through the implementation of the National Education Policy 2020 by
the Government of India. Recent move on cabinet approval of setting
up the National Research Foundation (NRF) will provide it a further
boost. Merging of autonomous institutions of the Department of
Biotechnology as a single society in the form of the Biotech Research
and Innovation Council (BRIC) will avoid potential overlap, leading
to focused research towards generating IPs/ technologies through
government funding.
• Various funding schemes of Government of India through Indian
Council of Medical Research (ICMR), Indian Council of Agricultural
Research (ICAR), Council of Scientific and Industrial Research
(CSIR), DBT-Biotechnology Industry R&D Assistance Council
(BIRAC), Department of Science and Technology (DST), Technology
Development Board (TDB) etc with network of large number of bio-
incubators and parks are catalyzing creation of technology-based
bio-entrepreneurs towards making India Self-reliant and global hub of
production of biotech products and services. Robust technology transfer
system through TTOs would definitely play a very important role in
building and operationalization of the entire ecosystem.
118 Asian Biotechnology and Development Review

References
Agri Innovate, Retrieved on July 16th 2023, http://agrinnovateindia.co.in/index.html
Ammar, M.; Haleem, A.; Javaid, M.; Walia, R. and Bahl, S (2021) Improving material
quality management and manufacturing organizations system through Industry 4.0
technologies. Mater. Today Proc., 45: pp. 5089–5096
Baldini, N (2006). The Act on inventions at public research institutions: Danish universities’
patenting activity. Scientometrics ,69: PP. 387–407.
Biotech Consortium India Limited, accessed on November 22, 2023 (www.biotech.co.in)
Compendium of Instructions Issued for Departmental Officials (2021) “Encouraging
Development and commercialization of inventions and innovations: A new impetus”,
Department of Biotechnology, Government of India, pp 353-361.
Gromov Gregory (2013) History of Internet and World Wide Web - Roads and Crossroads
of the Internet History http://www.netvalley.com/silicon_valley_history.html
ICAR (2022) Research Priorities & Technologies for Farmers’ welfare. Scientific
Achievements – 2014-2021
India Bioeconomy Report (2022), Inching towards the $150 billion BioEconomy by 2025,
Make in India Facilitation Cell for Biotechnology, Biotechnology Industry Research
Assistance Council, PP 14-17
Joseph, R. K. and Abrol. D (2016). National IPR Policy of India and Innovation, Technical
Report, Institute for Studies in Industrial Development, pp 1-9
Lakra, B.S. and Saharan, G.S (1989). Correlation of leaf and stag head infection intensities
of white rust with yield and yield components of mustard. Indian J. Mycol. Plant
Pathol. 19, 279–281.
Markel H. (2013) Patents, profits, and the American people–the Bayh‐Dole Act of 198,. The
New England journal of medicine, 369: pp 794–796
McDevitt, V.L.; Mendez-Hinds, J.; Winwood, D.; Nijhawan, V.; Sherer, T.; Ritter, J.F and
Sanberg, P.R (2014) More than money: The exponential impact of academic technology
transfer. Technology and Innovation. 16: pp 75–84
Messer-Yaron, H. (2014). Technology transfer policy in Israel. Retrieved March 21, 2021
from https://ec. europa.eu/assets/jrc/events/20140120-tto-circle/jrc-20140120-tto-
circle-messer.pdf
National Research Development Corporation, India. http://www.nrdcindia.com/. Retrieved
on July 16th, 2023
Ravi, R., and Janodia, M. D. (2021). Factors affecting technology transfer and
commercialization of university research in India: A cross-sectional study. Journal of
the Knowledge Economy, 13: pp 1692–1713
Razan Alkhazaleh , Konstantinos Mykoniatis and Ali Alahmer (2022) The Success of
Technology Transfer in the Industry 4.0 Era: A Systematic Literature Review, Journal
of Open Innovation:Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8:pp 1-18
 Technology Transfer Offices and Life Sciences Based Innovations 119

Sezer OB, Dogdu E and Ozbayoglu AM (2018). Context-aware computing, learning, and
big data in internet of things: a survey. IEEE Internet Things J. 5(1): pp 1-27.
Shashidhara L S (2017) “Indian science transforming India,” Indian National Academy of
Science. https://www.insaindia.res.in/pdf/ISTI.pdf.
Stephen W. Che (2010) Comparison of National Innovation Systems in China, Taiwan, and
Singapore: Is Bayh-Dole One-Size that Fits All? AUTM Technology Transfer Practice
Manual, 4(3): pp 1-21
Takenaka, T. (2005). Technology licensing and university research in Japan. International
Journal of Intellectual Property -Law, Economy and Management, 1(1): pp 27–36.
Technology Transfer Offices, National Biopharma Mission and Biotechnology Industry
Research Assistance Council(Accessed on July 14, 2023) https://birac.nic.in/nbm/cms/
page/technology-transfer-offices
The Gazette of India, Authority (2018), Methodology for University and College Teachers
for calculating Academic/Research Score, Dte. of Printing at Government of India
Press, Controller of Publications, pp 1-111.
Tornatzky LG (2000) Building state economics by promoting university-industry technology
transfer, National Governor’s Association, Washington DC, pp. 31
Uctu, R. and Essop, H (2022). Technology transfer models of universities and public
research organisations in South Africa: changes before and after the IPR-PFRD Act of
2008. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 17(1): pp 71–83.
WIPO 2020- https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_2000_2022/in.pdf.
Retrieved on July 16, 2023
 Guidelines for Contributors
1. ABDR is a refereed multi-disciplinary international journal. Manuscripts can be sent, preferably
as email attachment, in MS-Word to the Managing Editor, Asian Biotechnology and Development
Review, Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS), Core 4B 4th Floor,
India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110003, India (Email: [email protected];
Tel. +91-11-24682177-80; Fax: +91-11-24682173/74). Submissions should contain institutional
affiliation and complete mailing address of author(s). All submissions will be acknowledged on
receipt.
2. Manuscripts should be prepared using double spacing. The text of manuscripts should not
ordinarily exceed 7,000 words. Manuscripts should contain a 200 word abstract, and key words
up to six.
3. Use ‘s’ in ‘-ise’ ‘-isation’ words; e.g., ‘civilise’, ‘organisation’. Use British spellings rather than
American spellings. Thus, ‘labour’ not ‘labor’.
4. Use figures (rather than word) for quantities and exact measurements including percentages
(2 per cent, 3 km, 36 years old, etc.). In general descriptions, numbers below 10 should be
spelt out in words. Use thousands, millions, billions, not lakhs and crores. Use fuller forms for
numbers and dates— for example 1980-88, pp. 200-202 and pp. 178-84.
5. Specific dates should be cited in the form June 2, 2004. Decades and centuries may be spelt out,
for example ‘the eighties’, ‘the twentieth century’, etc.
References: A list of references cited in the paper and prepared as per the style specified below
should be appended at the end of the paper. References must be typed in double space, and should be
arranged in alphabetical order by the surname of the first author. In case more than one work by the
same author(s) is cited, then arrange them chronologically by year of publication.
All references should be embedded in the text in the anthropological style–for example ‘(Hirschman
1961)’ or ‘(Lakshman 1989:125)’ (Note: Page numbers in the text are necessary only if the cited
portion is a direct quote).
Citation should be first alphabetical and then chronological–for example ‘Rao 1999a, 1999b’.
More than one reference of the same date for one author should be cited as ‘Shand 1999a, 1999b’.
The following examples illustrate the detailed style of referencing:
(a) Books:
Hirschman, A. O. 1961. Strategy of Economic Development. New Haven: Yale University Press.
(b) Edited volumes:
Shand, Ric (ed.). 1999. Economic Liberalisation in South Asia. Delhi: Macmillan.
(c) Articles from edited volumes:
Lakshman, W. D. 1989. “Lineages of Dependent Development: From State Control to the Open
Economy in Sri Lanka” in Ponna Wignaraja and Akmal Hussain (eds) The Challenge in South
Asia: Development, Democracy and Regional Cooperation, pp. 105-63. New Delhi: Sage.
(d) Articles from Journals:
Rao, M.G., K. P. Kalirajan and R. T. Shand. 1999. “Convergence of Income across Indian States:
A Divergent View”. Economic and Political Weekly, 34(13): pp. 769-78.
(e) Unpublished Work:
Sandee, H. 1995. “Innovations in Production”. Unpublished Ph.D thesis. Amsterdam: Free University.
(f) Online Reference:
World Health Organisation. 2000. “Development of National Policy on Traditional
Medicine”. Retrieved on March 31, 2011 from http://www.wpro.who.int/sites/trm/documents/
Development+of+National+Policy+on+Traditional+Medicine.htm
Asian Biotechnology and Development Review (ABDR) is a peer
reviewed, international journal on socio-economic development,
public policy, ethical and regulatory aspects of biotechnology,
with a focus on developing countries. ABDR is published three
times a year by Research and Information System for Developing
Countries (RIS), a New Delhi based autonomous think-tank,
envisioned as a forum for fostering effective policy dialogue
among developing countries.

In this issue there are five articles. The first article provides a
detailed overview of the bioeconomy in some select countries
and the strategies that have been adopted by those countries to
promote bioeconomy while the second article describes the utility
of bioenzymes for sustainable food systems. The third article
is about exploring the connection between sustainable biofuels
and carbon footprints while the fourth article captures the role
of Industry 4.0 in biotechnology to produce environmentally
sustainable biotechnology products. The fifth and final article
is about highlighting the significance of Technology Transfer
Offices in strengthening technology transfer ecosystem and
translation of Life Sciences Innovation into commercialization
for rapid industrial growth.

Core IV-B, Fourth Floor

India Habitat Centre
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110 003
Tel. 91-11-24682177-80
Fax: 91-11-24682173-74
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.ris.org.in

/risindia @RIS_NewDelhi /RISNewDelhi