Abstract
Synthetic biology is a broad term covering multiple scientific methodologies, technologies, and practices. Pairing biology with engineering, synbio seeks to design and build biological systems, either through improving living cells by adding in new functions, or creating new structures by combining natural and synthetic components. As with all new technologies, synthetic biology raises a number of ethical considerations. In order to understand what these issues might be, and how they relate to those covered in ethics literature on synbio, we conducted an interview study with practicing synthetic biologists affiliated with a synthetic biology centre in Australia. Scientists identified a range of ethical challenges germane to the field, including precarious employment, pressures from industry, gender inequity, and the negative effects of the hyping of synbio. These challenges differed markedly from those identified in the ethics literature, whose treatment of the harms and benefits of synbio remains largely speculative and abstract. In our discussion of the pragmatic, every day ethical issues synthetic biologists face, we illustrate how issues of waste or research integrity play pivotal roles in everything from lived experiences in the laboratory, to long-term research trajectories guiding the field. In a confirmation of the ethical relevance of our participant’s views on the field, we argue that the subjects they raise must be included in any ethical analysis of synbio as a field.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Responsible Innovation and Responsible Research and Innovation (RI/RRI) literature on synbio, although clearly engaging with ethical issues (see e.g., Delpy, 2011; Kahl, 2015; Marris & Calvert, 2020), exists somewhat in parallel with the bioethics literature. We return to this point in the discussion.
See, for example, the code of practice for the Synthetic Yeast Genome Project in Sliva et al. (2015).
References
Anderson, J., Strelkowa, N., Stan, G. B., Douglas, T., Savulescu, J., Barahona, M., & Papachristodoulou, A. (2012). Engineering and ethical perspectives in synthetic biology. EMBO Reports, 13(7), 584–590. https://doi.org/10.1038/embor.2012.81
Arnason, G. (2017). Synthetic biology between self-regulation and public discourse: Ethical issues and the many roles of the ethicist. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 26(2), 246–256. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180116000840
Ashworth, A., Lacey, J., Sehic, S., & Dowd, A.-M. (2019). Exploring the value proposition for RRI in Australia. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 6(3), 332–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2019.1603571
Australian Research Council. (2019). Science and research priorities. https://www.arc.gov.au/grants/grant-application/science-and-research-priorities
Baertschi, B. (2013). Defeating the argument from hubris. Bioethics, 27(8), 435–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.1204
Balmer, A., Calvert, J., Marris, C., Molyneux-Hodgson, S., Frow, E., Kearnes, M., Bulpin, K., Schyfter, P., Mackenzie, A. & Martin, P. (2015). Taking roles in inter-disciplinary collaborations: Reflections on working in post-ELSI spaces in the UK synthetic biology community. Science and Technology Studies, 28(3), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.55340
Belt, H. (2009). Playing God in Frankenstein’s footsteps: Synthetic biology and the meaning of life. NanoEthics, 3, 257–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-009-0079-
Bloom, B., & Crabtree, B. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education, 40(4), 314–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02418.x
Brian, J. D. (2015). Special perspectives section: Responsible research and innovation for synthetic biology. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2(1), 78–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.1001971
Calvert, J. (2008). The commodification of emergence: Systems biology, synthetic biology and intellectual property. BioSocieties, 3, 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1745855208006303
Calvert, J. (2010). Synthetic biology: Constructing nature? The Sociological Review, 58(1), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2010.01913.x
Calvert, J., & Frow, E. (2015). The synthetic yeast project as a topic for social science investigation. Macquarie Law Journal, 15, 27–37.
Carter, S., & DiEuliis, D. (2019). Mapping the synthetic biology industry: Implications for biosecurity health security. Health Security, 17(5), 403–406. https://doi.org/10.1089/hs.2019.0078
Carter, L., Mankad, A., Hobman, E. V., & Porter, N. B. (2021). Playing god and tampering with nature: Popular labels for real concerns in synthetic biology. Transgenic Research, 30, 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-021-00233-2(0123456789(),-volV()012345869
Catts, O., & Zurr, I. (2012). Life as a raw material: Illusions of control. Somatechnics, 2(2), 250–262. https://doi.org/10.3366/soma.2012.0060
Cho, M. K., Magnus, D., Caplan, A. L., & McGee, D. (1999). Ethical considerations in synthesizing a minimal genome. Science, 286(5447), 2087–2090.
Cserer, A., & Seiringer, A. (2009). Pictures of synthetic biology: A reflective discussion of the representation of synthetic biology (SB) in the German-language media and by SB experts. Systems and Synthetic Biology, 3, 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11693-009-9038-3
Dalziell, J., & Rogers, W. (2022). Are the ethics of synthetic biology fit for purpose? A case study of artemisinin. IEEE, 11(5), 511–517. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2022.3157825
Davies, J. (2018). Synthetic biology: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
Delpy, D. (2011). Synthetic biology public dialogue. Science in Parliament, 68, 41–42.
Dixon, T., Freemont, P., Johnson, R., & Pretorius, I. (2022). A global forum on synthetic biology: The need for international engagement. Nature Communications, 13(3516), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-31265-9
Fernau, S., Braun, M., & Dabrock, P. (2020). What is (synthetic) life? Basic concepts of life in synthetic biology. PLoS ONE, 15(7), e0235808–e0235808. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235808
Fulvi, D. & Wodak, J. (2023). Using synthetic biology to avert runaway climate change: A consequentialist appraisal. Ethics, Policy & Environment, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2023.2215147
Ginsberg, A. D., Calvert, J., Schyfter, P., Elfick, A. & Endy, D. (2017). Synthetic aesthetics: Investigating synthetic biology’s designs on nature. MIT Press.
Gutmann, A. (2011). The ethics of synthetic biology: Guiding principles for emerging technologies. Hastings Center Report, 41(4), 17–22.
Heavey, P. (2013). Synthetic biology ethics: A deontological assessment. Bioethics, 27(8), 442–452. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12052
Hessel, A. (2014). Designer life using synthetic biology. Science Progress, 97(4), 387–398. https://doi.org/10.3184/003685014X14165845886089
Hobman, E., Mankad, A., & Carter, L. (2022a). Public perceptions of synthetic biology solutions for environmental problems. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10(928732), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.928732
Hobman, E., Mankad, A., Carter, L., & Ruttley, C. (2022b). Genetically engineered heat-resistant coral: An initial analysis of public opinion. PLoS ONE, 17(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252739
Holm, S. (2013). Health as a property of engineered living systems. Bioethics, 27(8), 419–425. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12053
Hunter, D. (2013). How to object to radically new technologies on the basis of justice: The case of synthetic biology. Bioethics, 27(8), 426–434. https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12049
Jin, S., Clark, B., Li, W., Kuznesof, S., & Frewer, L. J. (2021). Social dimensions of synthetic biology in the agrifood sector: The perspective of Chinese and EU scientists. British Food Journal, 123(12), 4135–4154. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-12-2020-1142
Kaebnick, G. E., Gusmano, M. K., & Murray, T. H. (2014). The ethics of synthetic biology: Next steps and prior questions. Hastings Center Report, 44(6), 811–826. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.392
Kahl, L. J. (2015). Realizing positive network effects in synthetic biology. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2(1), 137–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.1002168
Link, H. J. (2013). Playing god and the intrinsic value of life: Moral problems for synthetic biology? Science and Engineering Ethics, 19, 435–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-012-9353-z
Marris, C., & Calvert, J. (2020). Science and technology studies in policy: The UK synthetic biology roadmap. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 45(1), 34–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243919828107
Newson, A. (2011). Current ethical issues in synthetic biology: Where should we go from here? Policies and Quality Assurance, 18(3), 181n193. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2011.575035
Norton, A. (2022). Universities had record job losses, but not as many as feared—and the worst may be over. The Conversation, 22 February. https://theconversation.com/universities-had-record-job-losses-but-not-as-many-as-feared-and-the-worst-may-be-over-176883
Owen, R., Mcnaghten, P., & Stilgoe, J. (2012). Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society. Science and Public Policy, 39, 751–760. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs093
Oye, K., Esvelt, K., Catteruccia, F., Church, G., Kuiken, T., Lightfoot, S., Mcnamara, J., Smidler, A., & Collins, J. (2014). Regulating gene drives: Regulatory gaps must be filled before gene drives could be used in the wild. Science, 345(6197), 626–628. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1254287
Pansera, M., Owen, R., Meacham, D., & Kuh, V. (2020). Embedding responsible innovation within synthetic biology research and innovation: Insights from a UK multi-disciplinary research centre. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 7(3), 384–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2020.1785678
Parens, E., Johnston, J. & Moses, J. (2009). Ethical issues in synthetic biology: An overview of the debates. Synthetic Biology Project, pp 1–34.
Pope, C., Ziebland, S., & Mays, N. (2000). Analysing qualitative data. BMJ, 320(7227), 114–116. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208574
Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. (2010). New directions: The ethics of synthetic biology and emerging technologies. https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/pcsbi/sites/default/files/PCSBI-Synthetic-Biology-Report-12.16.10_0.pdf
Rai, A., & Boyle, J. (2007). Synthetic biology: Caught between property rights, the public domain, and the commons. Plos Biology, 5(3), 0389–0393. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0050058
Raman, S. (2015). Responsive novelty: Taking innovation seriously in societal research agendas for synthetic biology. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2(1), 117–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.1002066
Rogers, W. (2015). Ethical issues in synthetic biology: A commentary. Macquarie Law Journal, 15, 39–44.
Ross, M. B., Glennon, B. M., Murciano-Goroff, R., Berkes, E. G., Weinberg, B. A., & Lane, J. L. (2022). Women are credited less in science than are men. Nature, 608, 135–146. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04966-w
Sandler, R. (2019). The ethics of genetic engineering and gene drives in conservation. Conservation Biology, 34(2), 378–385. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13407
Sliva, A., Yang, H., Boeke, J. D., & Matthews, D. J. H. (2015). Freedom and responsibility in synthetic genomics: The synthetic yeast project. Genetics, 200(4), 1021–1028. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.115.176370
Stirling, A., Hayes, K. R., & Delborne, J. (2018). Towards inclusive social appraisal: Risk, participation and democracy in governance of synthetic biology. BMC Proceedings, 12(15), 43–64. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12919-018-0111-3
Taylor, K., & Woods, S. (2020). Reflections on the practice of responsible (research and) innovation in synthetic biology. New Genetics and Society, 39(2), 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2019.1709431
Zhu, X., Liu, X., Liu, T., Wang, Y., Ahmed, N., Li, Z., & Jiang, H. (2021). Synthetic biology of plant natural products: From pathway elucidation to engineered biosynthesis in plant cells. Plant Communications, 2(15), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xplc.2021.100229
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Australian Research Council Center of Excellence in Synthetic Biology under Project CE200100029. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Australian Research Council. Thanks to our participants in the CoESB and to Sakkie Pretorius, Ian Paulsen, Michael Gillings and Andrew Roberts for feedback on earlier drafts of the paper.
Funding
The work of Jacqueline Dalziell was supported by the Australian Research Council Center of Excellence in Synthetic Biology under Project CE200100029. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Australian Research Council.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization: JD; WAR. Methodology: JD; WAR. Formal analysis and investigation: JD; WAR. Writing—original draft preparation: JD. Writing—review and editing: JD; WAR. Funding acquisition: WAR. Resources: WAR. Supervision: WAR.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Dalziell, J., Rogers, W. Scientists’ Views on the Ethics, Promises and Practices of Synthetic Biology: A Qualitative Study of Australian Scientific Practice. Sci Eng Ethics 29, 41 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-023-00461-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-023-00461-1