The Values of Synthetic Biology: Researcher Views of Their Field and Participation in Public Engagement

Abstract

The synthetic biology research community will influence the future development of synthetic biology and its emergence into the sociopolitical and regulatory arenas. Because of this influence, we provide a first look at those involved in the research fieldtheir views regarding the field and interactions with the publicusing a unique sample of U.S.-based researchers who have published in the broad field of synthetic biology. Our data indicates a range of views of the moral and regulatory aspects of the science, based in part on various values and professional judgements, with differences emerging across synthetic biologists (e.g., bench scientists, computer scientists) and researchers focusing on ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI). Importantly, the researchers are engaged in public outreach activities, which could provide opportunities for public discourse on the sociopolitical aspects of synthetic biology. Implications of these findings for the future of the technology and upstream engagement emerge.

Social dimensions of synthetic biology in the agrifood sector: the perspective of Chinese and EU scientists

“…Despite disparities in definition, scientists in our study anticipated a large number of applications across different sectors (see Table 2), and expected these to deliver economic, health and environmental benefits to society in future. Both the EU and Chinese scientists judged SB to be essentially high-benefit, low-risk and ethically acceptable; this aligns with findings among US synthetic biologists (Rose et al , 2018). Benefits of different applications were expected to target distinct groups of stakeholders.…”

Examining expertise: Synthetic biology experts’ perceptions of risk, benefit, and the public for research and applications regulation

“…After removing those who reported they did not work in synthetic biology, the final sample size was 790. This survey used the following definition of synthetic biology, “the creation of new biological parts and systems and the redesign of natural biological systems for application in medicine and therapy, chemical production, energy production and storage, environmental clean-up, agriculture, robotics, and nanomaterials, among other areas” (Howell et al, 2020a; Rose et al, 2018).…”

“…Indeed, synthetic biology tends to be more in conflict with lay publics’ moral and religious views than are other technologies, such as nanotechnology and nuclear energy (Akin et al, 2017). A study of scientific expert and public perceptions (using the expert sample we rely on for this study), found differences in risk and benefit perceptions for the two groups, as well as in how these perceptions related to religiosity and political ideology (Howell et al, 2020a), and an additional examination using the same scientific expert sample found that experts’ risk and benefit perceptions predicted their perceptions of regulations and the moral acceptability of their field (Rose et al, 2018). We build on this research to provide a more nuanced understanding of the experts’ science–society perceptions.…”

Political and personality predispositions and topical contexts matter: Effects of uncivil comments on science news engagement intentions

“…Given laypeople’s concerns that synthetic biologists may overstep human authority to manipulate the natural world, synthetic biology can trigger opposition especially among individuals who hold more traditional values and hierarchical norms, a description that fits many political conservatives (Kahan et al, 2009). Indeed, among synthetic biologists themselves, a tendency has been found for political conservatives to perceive their work as less morally acceptable (Rose et al, 2018).…”