Constructing Life The World of Synthetic Biology

Full text

November 2007
Constructing Life
The World of Synthetic Biology
Rinie van Est, Huib de Vriend, Bart Walhout

Constructing Life: the World of Synthetic Biology
Rathenau Instituut
2
© Rathenau Instituut, 2007
Rathenau Instituut
Anna van Saksenlaan 51
Postal address:
PO Box 95366
2509 CJ The Hague
The Netherlands
Telephone +31 70 342 1542
Fax +31 70 363 3488
E-mail info@rathenau.nl
Website www.rathenau.nl
The Rathenau Institute focuses on the influence of science and technology on our daily
lives and maps its dynamics; through independent research and debate. The Rathenau
Institute is an independent body founded in 1986 by the Ministry of Education, Culture
and Science. The institute’s administration falls under the Royal Academy of Arts and
Sciences (KNAW).
Preferred citation:
R. van Est, H. de Vriend and B. Walhout, Constructing life: the world of synthetic
biology, The Hague, Rathenau Instituut, 2007
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint,
microfilm or any other means without prior written permission
of the holder of the copyright.

Rathenau Instituut – Technology Assessment
Rathenau Instituut
1 Preface
In the summer of 2007 a group of seventeen international top researchers hailed
synthetic biology as a ‘new technology revolution’ which could provide solutions
to major problems. Synthetic biologists don't just want to create new biological
systems, they want to improve them. Clean bio fuels and cheap malaria drugs are
just some of the visions synthetic biologists cherish. But social and ethical
questions about the impact on health and the environment and abuse through
biological warfare, arise. And what of the commercial implications? Can you
patent life itself?
The construction of a completely artificial cell is still many years away. Yet with the
current knowledge of hereditary information (genomics) and the developments in
nanotechnology and IT, synthetic biology is a discipline that is developing extremely
fast. Molecular biologists, physicists, chemists and technicians are working together,
and influencing each other.
In 2006 the Rathenau Institute published the book Constructing Life, the world's first
review of the societal aspects of synthetic biology. Recently the Dutch edition, Leven
Maken appeared. In September 2007 the Rathenau Institute informed the Dutch
Parliament with a Letter to Parliament called: ‘Synthetic Biology: New Life in the Bio
Debate.’ The Dutch Labour Party (Partij van den Arbeid) responded by demanding
answers from seven departments of state. This document is the English translation of
the Letter to Parliament.
For more information, please visit our website: www.rathenau.nl or send an e-mail to
info@rathenau.nl

Constructing Life: the World of Synthetic Biology
2
Genetic modification Synthetic biology
Technology
Reading / analysing DNA
Trial and error
Writing / synthesisis of DNA
Software programming
Application
Adaption / modification of
existing biological systems
Design and construction / modulation
of new biological systems
2 Synthetic biology:
constructing life
If we view life as a machine, then we can also make it: this is the revolutionary
nature of synthetic biology. Until recently, biotechnologists focused on
modifying the DNA of existing organisms (genetic modification). Synthetic
biologists go one step further. They want to design new life and construct this
from scratch.
Craig Venter, famed for his contribution to unravelling the human genome, sees it as
the step everyone has always talked about: “Now that we have learned how to read the
genome, we are also in a position to write it”.
The transition from reading to writing DNA, entails a paradigm shift whereby the
process of construction takes centre stage. Synthetic biologists view things through the
eyes of engineers and regard a cell as a collection of cooperating nano machines.
According to Drew Endy of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) biology
has, until now, always been ‘nature at work’. “Yet”, he says, ”if you consider nature to
be a machine, you can see that it is not perfect and that it can be revised and
improved.”
The paradigm shift of synthetic biology
The Revolutionary Power of Converging Technologies
Synthetic biology has been hailed as the ‘third technological revolution’ that could
eventually provide solutions to climate change, energy - and water shortages, and even
our health. In June 2007 seventeen top researchers, including Cees Dekker, a Dutch
professor of molecular biophysics, drew a parallel with two other revolutionary
technologies that have had fundamental impact: the integrated circuit, the basis for
modern electronics, and the discovery of DNA, the basis for molecular biology. In
synthetic biology these technologies converge as molecular biologists, physicists,
chemists and technologists work together and influence and strengthen each other.
[see box 1: Converging Technologies].

Rathenau Instituut – Technology Assessment
Rathenau Instituut
3
Box 1 Synthetic Biology: converging technologies
Three scientific and technological developments converge in synthetic biology:
• Molecular biology
• Modern electronics and information technology
• Nanotechnology, the construction of machines and structures at a
molecular level

Constructing Life: the World of Synthetic Biology
4
Information technology
Information technology (IT) is a vital tool for reading and
interpreting the genetic code. Determining the DNA sequence
of viruses, bacteria, plants, animals and humans yields vast
quantities of data. Researchers use increasingly powerful
computers and specialised software to simulate, design and
test biological systems. In 2007, IBM launched BLUE
GENE/P, the fastest computer in the world. One second of its
processing power is equivalent to that of the processing power
of a pile of laptops of two-and-a-half kilometres high.
In genomics research, bioinformatics is used to further analyse
these data, with the result that we know increasingly more
about genes. Their role in metabolic processes in cells and
their significance for a whole host of biological processes is
becoming increasingly clearer.
Synthetic biology = construction
of biological circuits
“We want to do for biology what Intel
does for electronics. We want to
design and manufacture complex
biological circuits”, says George
Church, professor of genetics at
Harvard Medical School. IT is no
longer just a tool to design and test
biological circuits. For synthetic
biologists it is also a major source of
inspiration. The comparison with
micro electronics is particularly apt.
A printed circuit board is necessary
for the design and construction of
micro electronics. Electronic circuits
are built on this board, using
resistors, transistors and
condensers.
In the construction of a biological
system, a cell with a minimal
genome fulfils the function of a
printed circuit board. The electronic
components are replaced by DNA
sequences whose exact biological
functions are known. With this
approach, biological circuits with a
wide range of functions can be
constructed. An example of this is
the metabolic pathway that allows a
specific protein to be synthesised.
Synthetic biologists are therefore
focusing on both the development of
a suitable cell with a minimal
genome and the development of
relevant biological building blocks.
(see also Box 2)
Nanotechnology
Synthetic biologists want to use this knowledge to build their
own genetic structures, so that plant fibres or sugars, for
example, can efficiently be converted into ethanol, raw
materials for bio plastics, or drugs. By applying the design and
construction principles from nanotechnology, it is possible to
write the genetic code (synthesis). Companies have already
developed techniques with which the four nucleotides, (from
which DNA is constructed, indicated with the letters A, C, T
and G), can be attached to each other in any desired order.
Using this technology, researchers have successfully
reconstructed the poliovirus and, in 2002, the Spanish
influenza virus; the genome of both is known. DNA synthesis
provides the genetic building blocks with which the design can
be realised. Synthetic biologists use these to make
standardised biological components. The Biobricks initiative of
MIT is an electronic catalogue containing such parts.
Molecular biology
Genetically transferable information for biological processes is
encoded in the structure of DNA (the letters of the genetic
alphabet). By recombining (cutting and pasting) pieces of
DNA, the characteristics of natural organisms can be altered
artificially, currently a common practice in biotechnology.

Rathenau Instituut – Technology Assessment
Rathenau Instituut
5
Box 2 Two approaches: deconstruction and construction
Two research approaches lie at the heart of synthetic biology: deconstruction
and construction. These two approaches converge in the development of
artificial genetic networks with tightly defined and predictable functions.
Deconstruction
In this approach, existing biological life is unravelled. Functioning living cells are
deconstructed step by step until the minimal set of genes a cell needs to live, is
determined, - the idea behind the minimal genome. The idea is, that if you can limit the
complexity of biological processes by switching off as many genetic characteristics as
possiblek, such processes become more predictable and manageable.
These minimal cells can then serve as a living chassis into which standardised
biological building blocks can be plugged in. Researchers believe that in this way, they
can make viruses, micro organisms and other biological systems that function 'better'
than natural life forms, or even fulfil entirely new functions. The Craig Venter Institute is
one of the research laboratories that follows this method. In 2005, researchers from this
institute established that the minimum required number of genes for Mycoplasma
Genitalium is 387.
Construction
Another research line, the constructionist approach, focuses on the creation of new
material using bio molecular assembly. Researchers use detailed knowledge of the
functioning and structure of DNA and other bio molecules, to artificially reconstruct
biological components, such as genes and cell membranes, in the laboratory. An
example of this is the reconstruction of the Spanish influenza virus in 2002. To achieve
this, the entire genetic material of this virus was synthesised. The Biobricks initiative of
MIT is another example. Biobricks is an open source Internet catalogue containing a
range of standard genetic building blocks: Lego blocks of DNA.

Constructing Life: the World of Synthetic Biology
6
3 Application areas
Promising potential applications
Many researchers are enthusiastic about the possibilities of synthetic biology.
There are three key application areas, and the most important of these is the use
of microbial platforms to produce drugs, bio energy and fine chemicals.
Drugs
For some time now, genetically modified organisms have been used to produce drugs.
With the application of principles from synthetic biology, new possibilities arise. For
example, American researchers have developed a synthetic metabolic pathway that
causes yeast cells to produce artemisinic acid. This is a raw material for an anti
malarial drug that is currently extracted from plants. Thanks to this approach, the drug
can now be produced for a tenth of the current cost price. A similar approach can be
used for the production of taxol, which is used for the treatment of cancer, and
prostratin, which is being clinically tested for the treatment of HIV infections. Various
research institutes and companies (including oil company British Petrol) are currently
working on the development of micro organisms with optimised, synthetic metabolic
pathways for the production of bio fuels and fine chemicals.
Measuring instruments based on biosensors
A second application area is that of advanced measuring instruments based on
biosensors. These are cells that respond to specific signals from the environment. They
can be deployed to recognise (pathogenic) bacteria such as Salmonella or Legionella,
or to detect pollutants in the soil, air or water, and to measure bio molecules in the
human body, such as the sugar level in diabetic patients.
In 2005, students from the University of Texas hit the headlines in the international
scientific press with an imaginative experiment: with a smart combination of genetic
components from cells (so-called Biobricks, see Box 2) they successfully designed a
bacterium that responds to red light. Applied to a dish, these bacteria functioned as a
photographic film on which a print could be made if the film was illuminated. They are
now refining this system in the laboratory, with a view to developing new biosensors.
Living drugs and stem cells
A third promising application area is that of living therapeutics (drugs). With the help of
modified bacteria and viruses, researchers think it will eventually be possible to combat
cancer cells and inhibit HIV infections. There are also researchers who think that it will
be possible to use synthetic biology to guide the differentiation of stem cells in a
controlled manner to produce, for example, skin, nerve or muscle cells. This would
enable damaged tissues or organs to be replaced.

Rathenau Instituut – Technology Assessment
Rathenau Instituut
7
4 Current Research
At this stage, synthetic biology research is mainly focused on the exploration of
fundamental principles of artificial biological systems which might give the
impression that all of the promising applications are still a long way off. However,
there are reasons to assume that synthetic biology will make considerable
advances over the next few years. Major steps in the creation of artificial life are
being made by research institutes, the technology of DNA synthesis is
developing at a phenomenal rate with parallels to the microelectronics industry,
and synthetic biology is attracting significant industrial investment.
The Craig J. Venter Institute recently made world headlines with a successful attempt
to equip a bacterium with an entire DNA from another bacterium. This involved
introducing a large number of genes at the same time into an organism; it is seen as an
essential step towards the creation of artificial life.
In 2007 it is already possible to synthesise the complete genome of a virus, for which
the DNA sequence is known, and the use of synthetic genes in molecular biology
research is commonplace. Some researchers think that within ten years it will be
possible to synthesise entire yeast genomes. Yet in contrast, there are many
researchers who believe that living systems are so complex that it is doubtful whether
these expectation will be realised.
The speed of the development of DNA synthesis,
exhibits strong similarities with the dynamics in
micro electronics, where the calculating capacity
has increased exponentially for many years
(Moore's law, see below). Parallel to this, it is
expected that the speed and accuracy with which
DNA can be synthesised will exponentially
increase in the coming years. Specialised DNA
synthesis companies will produce more genes for
ever-lower prices and this will provide an
important impulse for research.
Synthetic biology is attracting considerable
interest from industry. In 2006, the American firm
Amyris Biotechnologies acquired twenty million
dollars of venture capital for the development of
synthetic biology applications in drugs and bio
energy. In the spring of 2007, the oil company BP
invested five hundred million dollars in a program
for developing efficient production systems for bio
fuels. During the last seven years, the German
gene synthesis company Geneart has become
one of the fastest growing companies in Bavaria
with over a hundred employees.
For synthetic biology developments in the
Netherlands, see Box 3.
Moore's law (exponential increase in the speed)
also applies to the analysis and synthesis of DNA

Constructing Life: the World of Synthetic Biology
8
Box 3 Synthetic biology in the Netherlands
Thanks to companies such as Genencor-Danisco, DSM and the Kluyver Centre for
Genomics of Industrial Fermentation in Delft, the Netherlands has a strong position with
regards to applications in the production of fine chemicals. The University of Groningen
envisages possibilities for the synthesis of large numbers of new proteins that will
subsequently be tested for their (biomedical) functionality. The use of biosensors can
be interesting for companies such as Philips, who are focusing on the development of
equipment for medical diagnostics. The Kavli Institute for Nanosciences in Delft plans
to initiate a large research program on bio-nano-synthetic biology in the future.
The developments in synthetic biology have caught the attention of several advisory
bodies and institutes. In 2006 the Netherlands Commission on Genetic Modification
(COGEM) published a monitoring report discussing the significance of synthetic biology
for the analysis of bio safety risks and current legislation.
At the end of 2006, the Rathenau Institute published the world’s first detailed study of
societal implications of synthetic biology: Constructing Life, followed by the Dutch
edition Leven maken. In the same year, the Minister of Education, Culture and Science
approached the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW) to
investigate, together with the Health Council of the Netherlands and the Advisory
Council on Health Research (RGO), whether a scientific foresight study in this area was
worthwhile. These advisory bodies have appointed a work group to ascertain what else
needs to happen following the monitoring report from COGEM and the publications
from the Rathenau Institute.

Rathenau Instituut – Technology Assessment
Rathenau Instituut
9
5 New life in the biodebate
For the past thirty years, developments in biotechnology have led to public
debate and disquiet; the marketing of genetically modified maize, for example,
and Dolly the sheep, and Herman, the bull. Synthetic biology raises important
ethical and social questions about the possible impact on human health and the
environment and possible abuses for biological warfare or terrorist attacks. A
number of themes need to be reconsidered.
Bio safety
In August 2007, British livestock was infected with the viral Foot and Mouth disease
(FMD), which was traced to a research laboratory in nearby Pirbright, raising again the
issue of bio safety. Synthetic organisms can also escape. At present, experiments with
synthetic biology follow the safety principles of genetic modification to which existing
legislation applies. There are three types of risk in genetic modification:
• Infection of laboratory staff. Despite all precautionary measures, laboratory
staff can become infected with synthetic viruses or micro organisms from the
lab with pathogenic characteristics.
• Synthetic viruses or micro organisms can escape via clothing, instruments or
laboratory animals and thereby cause harm to the environment or contribute to
the spread of new diseases for humans and animals. In the worst scenario, an
infection of laboratory personnel is discovered too late, leading to an epidemic.
• A disruption of the ecological balance. If synthetic biological systems are used
outside of the laboratory for a specific task and time period under specific
circumstances, for example to clean up an environmental contamination, such
organisms might have a disruptive effect on the ecological balance. In the
worst possible scenario, the situation gets out of control and there is a
presence of ‘Green goo’ (unidentifiable material), comparable with the ‘Grey
goo’ from nanotechnology. Also new organisms, which have escaped or have
been deliberately introduced to the environment, can lead to a contamination
Theme Genetic modification Synthetic biology Significance for the
biodebate
Biosafety
Original host organism as
reference
No more natural
reference
New questions and
uncertainties about risk
analysis
Misuse /
bioterrorism
Known, risky viruses and
bacteria
Difficult to establish what
short DNA fragments will
be used for
Monitoring misuse of
potentially risky
organisms and research
becomes more difficult
Intellectual
property
Limited number of genes Number of genes virtually
unlimited
Research & innovation
impeded
Ethics
The alteration of existing
organisms
The creation of (partially)
artificial life
Boundary between life
and machine blurs

Constructing Life: the World of Synthetic Biology
10
of natural genetic sources. The exchange of genetic material between
synthetic and natural biological systems leads, in principle, to the
contamination of the natural genetic pool.
The question is whether the current risk assessment system for genetically modified
organisms is prepared for the future developments in synthetic biology. The
Netherlands Commission on Genetic Modification (COGEM) published its first
monitoring report concerning this in 2006. This report made it clear that there are many
outstanding uncertainties and questions at policy level.
• Can the current risk assessment system be adjusted if it proves to be
unsatisfactory? And if so, how?
• What needs to be known about the characteristics of an organism for a good
risk assessment?
• Does a distinction need to be drawn between completely synthetic organisms
and existing organisms with new synthetic parts?
• How can the risks of synthetic genes and organisms be assessed if there is no
longer a natural reference?
Some researchers state that synthetic life will be so weak that it will never survive
outside of the lab. Others propose constructing artificial biological systems in such a
manner that they can only survive and reproduce under strictly controlled conditions (in
the laboratory or a fermentation vessel). For both propositions there is insufficient
scientific evidence and further research is needed.
Misuse and bioterrorism: monitoring is becoming more complex
The five deaths from Anthrax through letters sent shortly after the attack on the World
Trade Centre in New York in 2001, placed bioterrorism high on the agenda. The
international treaty on biological weapons (Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention –
BTWC), signed in 1972, is focused on combating the misuse of natural pathogenic
viruses, bacteria and toxins. It lists many different pathogenic organisms that can be
used to develop biological weapons. On the blacklist are Anthrax, the smallpox virus,
and the BSE virus; other examples include the Asian flu virus and the Ebola virus. Strict
controls on the trade and use of these viruses and bacteria can limit, but does not
completely exclude, misuse.
Supervision is more difficult
With the emergence of synthetic biology, supervision will be more complex still. The
reconstruction of the polio virus and the Spanish Influenza virus make it clear that it is
technologically possible (although still highly complex) to reconstruct pathogens on the
basis of existing DNA building blocks . A number of American and European gene
synthesis companies screen orders for potential misuse. This is already difficult for long
DNA chains at a gene or genome level, but for short DNA fragments, it is virtually
impossible and therefore scarcely effective.
Dual use research
In the United States in particular, the authorities fear misuse through ‘dual use’
research. This is research into pathogenic organisms for medical, biological or
agricultural applications which can also be used for biological weapons. In 2004 the
American National Scientific Advisory Board for Biosafety (NSABB) was founded,
whose task is to improve the safety measures involving research into the life sciences.
Synthetic biology is one of their priorities.

Rathenau Instituut – Technology Assessment
Rathenau Instituut
11
Bio security code of conduct
The awareness among biologists about bioterrorism is low. That is apparent from the
reaction of the sixteen hundred biologists who recently participated in bio security
workshops organised by the universities of Exeter and Bradford. Efforts are, however,
being made to change this, as, for example, various countries are working on ethical
codes of conduct. The Interacademy Panel (IAP), a worldwide network of scientific
academies, drew up the IAP Statement on Biosecurity at the end of 2005.
This document can serve as a guideline for the compilation of such a code of conduct.
Five items are crucial: making researchers aware, following safety requirements,
education and information, the responsibility of researchers to signal abuse, and
supervision. In the Netherlands, the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science asked
the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences to make a contribution to the
national Biosafety Code of Conduct. This code has now been compiled and will be
presented to the Minister of Education, Culture and Science in the autumn of 2007.
Some researchers are concerned that under the banner of national security, restrictions
will be imposed on the publication of research results. To date, there would seem to be
little basis for this concern. Science academies in particular, are well aware of the
importance of an undisturbed progress of science.
Intellectual property: the patent mountain
At the end of May 2007, the American patent Office announced that Craig Venter had
requested a patent for the minimal genome of a synthetic bacterium called Mycoplasma
Genitalium. British magazine The Economist commented: ”This time he is proposing
not just the patenting of a few genes, but of life itself”. The awarding of intellectual
property rights is thought to facilitate innovation. In exchange for publishing his
invention, the inventor receives a temporary monopoly on its commercial exploitation.
Recombinant DNA technologies and the results of this, are considered to be inventions
under patent law and therefore patentable.
DNA Patents
Genes that have been isolated from an organism, even if they are almost identical in
terms of structure (base sequence) as genes from nature (or the human body) are
considered patentable. These types of patents can be compared with substance
patents for new chemical products. Such a substance patent covers all – including
future – use of the new compound so also those that are unknown at the time of the
patent application. What applies for isolated genes, also applies for synthesised DNA
sequences and cells with a minimal genome, and these are also, in principle,
patentable.
Researchers, particularly in the United States, fear that the large number of patents on
biological building blocks will hinder the progress of their research. For new
applications in particular, where many different gene patents play a role, the bringing
together of widely spread and fragmentary rights can cause problems. This is already
playing a role in drug research into complex diseases such as Alzheimer's and cancer
that involve a large number of genes. Synthetic biology could exacerbate these
problems. What sort of bureaucratic nightmare will a company end up in when it tries to
construct a complete chromosome on the basis of these genes?

Constructing Life: the World of Synthetic Biology
12
Research exemption
In Europe, researchers make use of patented discoveries without patent infringement,
thanks to the right of research exemption, arranged at the national and European level.
Yet this research exemption applies to ‘research of the patented’, and is invalid as soon
as the research is focused on a commercial innovation. For public-private research in
particular, the boundary between academic and commercial research is often not clear.
When it comes to innovation programmes, such as the Dutch National Genomics
Programme, there is a strong emphasis on validating the research results via patents.
Patents can therefore have an inhibitory effect. In the Netherlands, this discussion
about this, is scarcely getting off the ground.
Emerging open source movement
In the United States the situation is more dire. There, research exemption does not
even exist since university research is considered to be a commercial activity.
Researchers therefore fear that the growing mountain of patents will increasingly
impede them. Alternatives are being sought to safeguard freer access to technological
knowledge. For example, the geneticist Richard Jefferson has set up the Biological
Innovation for Open Society (BIOS). This organisation promotes the free use of patents
in the area of agro biotechnology. In cooperation with the International Rice Institute,
researchers in Korea, China and Kenya have started to set up a freely accessible
database of rice-related patents. The American synthetic biology research community
recognises the importance of freely accessible knowledge in the public domain for
sustainable research. That is why the Biobricks initiative was developed in 2004 , which
is an open source system in which everyone has free access to well-defined DNA
sequences.
The need for ethical reflection and societal involvement
Should the patenting of genes be possible at all? We attribute different values to living
than to non-living material. We mostly regard life as being worth protecting, with the
level of protection being dependent on the life form concerned. In similar discussions,
such as therapeutic cloning and stem cell research, human gene therapy and the
permissibility of genetically modifying animals, it is the moral questions that colour the
debate.
The discussion about the patenting of genes and genetically modified organisms clearly
has an ethical aspect. The breast cancer related gene BRCA-1,was largely mapped
with public funding yet the company Myriad Genetics has obtained three European
patents on this. In 2002 this led to Dutch MPs asking whether such patents would lead
to a monopoly of Myriad Genetics on the diagnosis and treatment of that type of breast
cancer.
In the discussions about gene technology, key values such as autonomy, justice and
naturalness play an increasingly important role. There was strong reaction by the
Canadian ETC Group due to the awarding of a patent on a synthetic organism with a
minimal genome to Craig Venter. “Will Craig Venter's company become the
‘MicrobeSoft’ of synthetic biology?” There is considerable concern that patenting the
building blocks of life will favour rich countries and hinder free access to knowledge and
technology.

Rathenau Instituut – Technology Assessment
Rathenau Instituut
13
What is life?
Since synthetic biology is no longer based on existing life forms, but is focused on the
creation of biological systems that are entirely or partially synthesised, other ethical
questions also arise. May we intervene in life? What is our definition of life? To what
extent do we still view artificial biological systems as 'living material'? How does a
completely artificial cell differ from a machine? What criteria do we use to determine to
designate life? Do we restrict the principle of 'worthy of protection' to natural organisms,
to (evolved) creation, or do we consider artificial forms of life also worthy of protection?
Public involvement and the government
In May 2006, a group of 35 societal organisations sent a letter to the organisers of the
second International Synthetic Biology Conference in Berkeley. In this letter they stated
that synthetic biology is not just an issue for scientists: this development requires a
broader public involvement and dialogue.
Including all interested parties at an early stage in important policy questions regarding
potentially significant and controversial technologies is wise, but engaging public
involvement in a worthwhile and effective manner is far from easy, however. On the
one hand governments must take regulatory responsibility with respect to biosafety,
bioterrorism and intellectual property. But it is also important that an open discussion
can take place in society about the ethical questions associated with synthetic biology.
The debate about synthetic biology demands a facilitating, rather than an organisational
role from the government.

Constructing Life: the World of Synthetic Biology
14
6 Recommendations
Synthetic biology can challenge existing concepts and the resulting policy in
various ways. The challenge demands immediate action from the government.
The Rathenau Institute makes six reccomendations:
Biosafety
1. Initiate research
It is expected that synthetic biology will develop rapidly over the coming years. As
legislative changes are usually a lengthy process, we advise the Ministry of Housing,
Spatial Planning and the Environment, to develop a strategy in the short term.
Research into new biosafety-related uncertainties, associated with synthetic biology
must be quickly deployed. Here, the questions from the COGEM monitoring report form
a good starting point.
2. Feature on the European Agenda
Biosafety is regulated at European Union level. That is why the Ministry of Housing,
Spatial Planning and the Environment must place the question on the EU agenda as to
whether synthetic biology demands amendments to the European protocols and
directives for the introduction of genetically modified organisms into the environment
(2001/18/EC) or their contained use (98/81/EC).
Misuse and bioterrorism
3. Arrange national and international harmonisation
The current package of measures to counteract bioterrorism is focused on the products
(what), in this case the DNA sequences, those who place the order (who) and the
location from where the order is made (where). Developments in the area of synthetic
biology demand an expansion of the current approach. To counteract bioterrorism
where results of synthetic biology research are used, international harmonisation is
needed between safety experts, the universities and companies involved, and the
biosafety officers from research institutes. The Dutch National Coordinator for
Counterterrorism should take the initiative towards this.
4. Increase awareness of researchers
Researchers must report the misuse of biological agents and their possible
unintentional wrong use. Therefore the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
should increase the safety awareness of researchers. One way of doing this is actively
disseminating (for example via information campaigns and workshops) the Biosecurity
Code of Conduct compiled by the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Feedback from the research community must be arranged to increase the feasibility of
this code of conduct.

Rathenau Instituut – Technology Assessment
Rathenau Instituut
15
Patenting
5. Reconsider valorisation strategy
The patenting of genes does not always facilitate innovation. Particularly with new
applications, where a large number of patents play a role, the current patenting system
reaches its limits. The Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Ministry of Education,
Culture and Science should therefore consider using the options of open source
approaches in the case of publicly funded gene technology research.
Ethics and society
6. Encourage ethical reflection and societal involvement
Synthetic biology will fuel the public and ethical debate about biotechnology. The
government must create space for public involvement and reflection on fundamental
ethical questions about biosafety, bioterrorism, patenting and the definition of 'life'. This
requires facilitation as opposed to regulation. This could mean informing citizens to
enable them to form their own opinion.

Constructing Life: the World of Synthetic Biology
16
References
Vriend, H. de (2006) Constructing Life: Early Social Reflections on the Emerging Field
of Synthetic Biology. The Hague: Rathenau Institute.
Vriend, H. de, R. van Est en B. Walhout (2007) Leven maken: Maatschappelijke
reflectie op de opkomst van synthetische biologie. The Hague: Rathenau Institute.
Synthetische biologie; een onderzoeksveld met voortschrijdende gevolgen. Bilthoven:
Netherlands Commission on Genetic Modification, 2006. Monitoring Report
CGM/060228-03.
Synthetic Biology Applying Engineering to Biology. Brussels: European Commission,
Directorate-General for Research, 2005. Report.
Life, Reinvented. In: Wired Magazine, Issue 13.01, January 2005.
Engineering Life: Building a FAB for Biology. Baker, D., G. Church, J. Collins, D. Endy,
J. Jacobson, J. Keasling, P. Modrich, C. Smolke and R. Weiss in: Scientific American,
June 2006, pp. 44-51.
The Promise and Perils of Synthetic Biology. Tucker, J.B. and R.A. Zilinskas in: The
New Atlantis, Number 12, Spring 2006, pp. 25-45.
Extreme Genetic Engineering: An Introduction to Synthetic Biology. Montreal: Action
Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration, January 2007. Report.
Patenting the parts, Editorial in Nature Biotechnology, Vol. 25, no. 8 (August 2007), pp.
822.
Synthesizing the Future: a vision for the convergence of synthetic biology and
nanotechnology (“The Ilulissat Statement”), KAVLI Foundation, 25 June, 2007,
http://www.kavlifoundation.org/assets/docs/ilulissat_statement.pdf
Toepassing van genetica in de gezondheidszorg. Letter from the State Secretary for
Health, Welfare and Sport to the Minister of Economic Affairs and the Minister of
Education, Culture and Science, Parliamentary paper 27 424, no. 43, 28 November
2003.
Mag ik uw genen even patenteren? Henk van den Belt in: Krisis, 2004, no. 2.
De gevolgen van het octrooieren van humane genen voor het wetenschappelijk
onderzoek in Nederland, Advisory Report from the Gene Patents Committee of the
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Amsterdam, August 2003,
http://www.knaw.nl/publicaties/pdf/20031057.pdf