Building a Bottom-Up Bioeconomy

Engineering biology could play a role in creating a sustainable, resilient, and equitable regenerative economy. To achieve this goal, we need to reimagine industrialization. It's not an easy thought, and we'll have to go through some stages. But this world is possible. When I watched Sara Richardson's talk on the way to Asia. It became clear to me that I have to write more about it. So I have gathered some from the Internet and tried to reproduce here once. 

The year is 2032 and biology, applied to some of mankind's biggest problems, has changed the world. Since the COVID-19 pandemic in 2019, global supply chains for chemicals, materials, food, medicines, and energy have become shorter and more resilient as thousands of small biorefineries around the world drive biomanufacturing. Applied engineering biology has solved many stalled problems while bringing fulfilling jobs to communities. As materials and energy are increasingly derived from biobased and renewable sources, petroleum consumption is declining sharply. Renewable resources - plants and algae, as well as waste materials and recycled gases - are sustainably managed to preserve biodiversity and minimize carbon emissions and pollution. 

We can rethink the bioeconomy

Engineering biology combines biology, engineering, and information technology to produce bio-based products and materials, offering a sustainable solution for the future. This field of research has already demonstrated its potential by developing rapid vaccines for various diseases. Building on the advances of synthetic biology, engineering biology aims to transform existing products and create new ones by utilizing nature's inherent diversity. This approach does not require valuable resources from the earth, making it a more environmentally friendly option. Unlike traditional petrochemical refineries, which are concentrated in a few locations, the technologies of a bioeconomy can be developed and deployed in a more targeted manner, using renewable and sustainably sourced raw materials.

The technologies of a new bioeconomy could be developed and deployed in a targeted manner, using local renewable and sustainably sourced feedstocks. We are thus able to produce locally, energy and materials that we need for our society. 

The current energy crisis in Europe has highlighted the need for a more sustainable industrial ecosystem that can better address the changing needs of society. Advances in engineering biology have made it possible to develop new approaches that support more equitable and resilient societies and promote a regenerative economy that reduces waste and pollution and reinvents materials.

Engineering biology can provide the technical solutions to this vision, but it requires collaboration between policymakers, researchers, businesses, and communities. Additionally, the field must evolve to enable professionals to see their role as more than just developing microbes. Without proper social engagement, the field risks repeating past mistakes and reinforcing current inadequate economic and ecological systems. In this way, engineering biology can play a crucial role in achieving not only a dynamic bioeconomy, but also a sustainable and equitable one. If you are interested in supporting this mission, please feel free to contact us. https://inti.institute/

The current state of the science

To date, engineering biology has made significant scientific progress, utilizing CRISPR gene editing technologies and bringing biologically engineered products to market. However, it has yet to fulfill its potential to create a more sustainable economy and society.

Some engineering biology products are already penetrating specialty markets, offering alternatives to current products and processes. For example, to meet the increasing demand for plant-based diets, many companies are offering animal-free products made with ingredients derived from engineered microbes and plants. Other companies are converting industrial waste gases and modifying proteins through biological processes to create novel materials and textiles. Additionally, biological nitrogen fertilizers that target genes in corn roots have recently hit the market, replacing petrochemical fertilizers that do not emit nitrogen. In the healthcare industry, cells from a patient's own immune system have been modified to attack cancerous tissue. The construction industry is also exploring the use of new materials derived from engineering biology.

However, biomanufacturing still faces several challenges that hinder its growth, including scaling up biological processes, environmental concerns about feedstocks, strong competition from conventional sources, and regulatory instability. Bioproducers are learning from past mistakes, such as the failed attempts to produce biofuels from genetically modified yeast. These issues highlight the need to overcome technical production hurdles and demonstrate clear advantages over established petroleum-based processes and products. Additionally, petrochemical products already on the market benefit from externalities, such as carbon emissions and pollution, which create an uneven economic playing field. Biomanufacturing must find a way to produce at competitive prices to overcome these challenges.

If engineering biology does not prioritize social engagement, it risks repeating past mistakes and reinforcing current inadequate economic and environmental systems.

Because of these challenges, many biobased manufacturers are focused on making high-value specialty chemicals like molecules for perfumes and medicine. Until biobased manufacturers can make products for mass markets like plastics and chemicals, these industries will continue to rely on petrochemical feedstocks. Additionally, policies like carbon taxes that could promote deep decarbonization have not been implemented.

New biomanufacturing approaches face regulatory uncertainty. The rules for biotech products are complex and hard to understand. There is also concern that biology could be used for harm, whether intentionally or by accident. Both American and global regulatory systems need to be more proactive and adaptable to ensure safety.

Having clear guidelines and working closely with communities could help create a transformative bioeconomy.

I would like to look at the challenges of biotechnology in a new light

Until now, the challenges of biotechnology-like scaling, sustainability, establishment, and regulation-have been seen as separate issues that different groups of experts handle. Social and environmental impact and equity have been given lower priority and addressed later. We think it's time for a new, integrated, and holistic approach to achieve the vision of the bioeconomy.

Unlike traditional engineering and manufacturing, engineering biology uses complex systems that evolved naturally. The field itself offers new ways of thinking and working because it includes different subjects like microbiology, molecular biology, chemistry, engineering, automation, data science, economics, and the humanities. This interdisciplinarity can create new and unique perspectives that can make products to replace those made from petroleum while addressing global, societal, and environmental challenges.

Established petrochemical products have gained a tremendous advantage in the marketplace.

Why has the translation of engineering biology to industrial contexts been difficult? The jump from academic research to industrial scale needs more investment in advanced process technologies and intermediates. Behind this problem, however, is a bigger challenge: policymakers must address the nature of industrialization. Instead of trying to industrialize biology, we need to biologize industry.

One way to achieve this potential is to rethink the biofactory. Instead of copying the centralized systems of today's industry, biomanufacturing should be promoted as a decentralized system. In this model, the production of biological products-chemicals, fuels, materials, and medicines-would happen in green biorefineries near local, sustainable sources of microbial feedstocks and raw materials, as well as end users. This decentralized biomanufacturing could use locally unique solutions to make products for users. This model would create local jobs and expertise and improve resilience by reducing dependence on global supply chains.

By bringing together networks of local companies with public biofoundries for early-stage development and introducing these networks with regionally focused initiatives such as education and training, this model could produce a variety of biobased products and bring economic benefits to many areas. A decentralized approach to biomanufacturing offers opportunities for rural regions and for reindustrialization and job creation in places where traditional manufacturing industries are gone.

However, to develop sustainably, biomanufacturing must be designed to fit with local systems. This could be done, for example, by using sustainable feedstocks or recycling municipal waste. To do this, the biorefinery must be developed at a scale that matches local conditions and demand. It will also require developing microbes that can use different feedstocks that are available in different places and at different times of the year. To make sustainability the center of the bioeconomy, the practice of bioengineering must change from trying to turn one feedstock into one bulk product to creating platforms that allow agile bioproducers to use multiple inputs and create multiple products at the same time or one after the other.

Instead of trying to industrialize biology, the real task is to biologize the industry.

If you replace petrochemical production and consumption systems with bio-based alternatives, you will not automatically have a more sustainable, environmentally friendly system unless new initiatives are implemented. These initiatives must avoid "problem shifting," where fixing one sustainability problem causes or makes another problem worse. Therefore, initiatives should be developed with the circular economy in mind, where biomass is grown sustainably for use and attention is paid to recycling or safe biodegradation. Changing to a local production model offers communities the opportunity to reduce long-distance transportation of raw materials and finished products, use local waste, and engage in new forms of agriculture. Biomass and food production need to be considered together to make sure they are complementary instead of competitive.

Engineering biology could reduce international inequalities, promote sustainable development, and contribute to net-zero emissions goals. However, engineering biology could also make existing inequalities worse. To be successful, the distributed design we recommend must be accompanied by an expansion of governance processes.

Making this new bioeconomy equitable will require extensive engagement of society at multiple levels, including business and community interactions. Collaboration of bioengineers with policymakers, communities, and other stakeholders at national and international levels will also be important to build consensus on responsible innovation and appropriate regulation, and to ensure consistent governance and regulatory frameworks. Developed countries should use their own renewable bioresources as much as possible and deepen global collaboration through open knowledge sharing, training, and development partnerships so that developing countries can gradually build their local capacity for sustainable bioproduction.

FOUR PRIORITIES FOR REBALANCING THE BIOECONOMY.

To date, policy has largely focused on advancing the science of synthetic and genetic biology. Much more needs to be done to design and implement policies that address the real challenges in scaling engineering biology to build a sustainable, resilient, and expanded bioeconomy that meets societal needs.

Include diverse perspectives.

n order for engineering biology to be successful, it is important to include diverse perspectives and involve different groups of people in the decision-making process. This includes combining different fields of study, such as biology, engineering, and environmental science. It is also important to have inclusive governance mechanisms in place to ensure that the needs of people and the planet are considered.

To make sure that the bioeconomy is sustainable, it is necessary to have a culture shift in the industry toward open-ended approaches that allow for uncertainty and promote learning. This means moving beyond existing methods of assessment and creating more deliberate processes that involve a variety of stakeholders.

It is also important to consider the potential for engineering biology to exacerbate existing inequalities. Research funders and government agencies should ensure that evaluation and learning are integrated into the process. This will help to determine which feedstocks are more sustainable and ensure that scaling occurs in a responsible and locally sensitive manner. Policymakers should regularly evaluate and reflect on bioeconomy strategies to ensure that they meet economic, social, and environmental goals.

Promote local capacity.

To support a decentralized bioeconomy, the training and value of local labor should be prioritized. The bioindustry should prioritize social well-being and community in addition to job creation. Policymakers should support the integration of education into the biomanufacturing industry. New ventures should be community-driven and locals should be invested in the growth and development of biofoundries. Host communities should be involved in workforce training and knowledge sharing. Biosecurity and biosafety measures should be considered in a decentralized system. All stakeholders should promote open science and innovation, with access to data and a fair intellectual property protection system. Agile biorefineries should have access to research and data for flexible on-site production. Collaboration and partnerships should foster a global network of local capabilities and sustainable production and consumption models.

Be results-oriented.

Instead of focusing on supporting bioproduction technologies, policy should actively promote and incentivize the building of sustainable and resilient systems. Rather than solely focusing on R&D, innovation, and venture capital, new initiatives should prioritize outcomes that benefit society, the environment, and the economy.

To encourage the growth of bioeconomies, policies should support the purchase and use of sustainably produced biomaterials. Addressing imbalances in current economic sectors requires coordination across countries and sectors. Governments can incentivize the demand for organic products through price support mechanisms and public procurement. For example, the United Kingdom's "contract for difference" financing mechanism, which protects renewable energy developers from electricity price fluctuations, has been credited with the rapid growth of wind power generation, which has now reached price parity with fossil fuels.

Policy should not solely promote bioproduction because it is "organic," but rather focus on bioproduction projects that are sustainable, resilient, and equitable. Criteria for sustainability and resilience should be integrated into all policies and programs. Furthermore, representatives from business, academia, and government should collaborate with social and environmental organizations to address social needs, including job security, well-being, inclusion, equity, and environmental sustainability. These social missions should be at the core of business strategies, research plans, and policy initiatives.

Delivering on the promise of organic production.

Bringing new biomanufacturing processes and products out of the lab and into the marketplace has already proven difficult. Researchers and business leaders may worry that focusing more on societal and environmental challenges will make it even more difficult. But such a shift is essential - after all, organic production usually begins with the promise of promoting sustainability and addressing global challenges, but has failed to deliver on that promise. If bioproduction is to make a positive contribution to addressing global challenges and benefit society and the planet, it must explicitly include these goals in its mission statement from the outset.

The vision for the future of the bioeconomy is one that prioritizes sustainability, resilience, and inclusion. This means that biomanufacturing processes and products are developed and implemented with a focus on their impact on society and the environment. Policymakers and industry leaders work together to create and implement policies that support the growth of a sustainable, resilient, and equitable bioeconomy. This includes incentivizing the purchase and use of sustainably produced biomaterials and promoting open science and innovation. The bioeconomy is decentralized, with a focus on building local capacities and fostering collaborations and partnerships across organizational and geographic boundaries. This allows for the development of a global network of local capabilities and infrastructure, renewable feedstock sources, and sustainable production and consumption models. Through these efforts, the bioeconomy becomes a driving force in addressing global challenges and promoting social and environmental well-being.