Intentions, Expectations and Institutions: Engineering the Future of Synthetic Biology in the USA and the UK

Abstract

Synthetic biology is a field in-the-making: a loosely-defined amalgamation of diverse disciplines, institutions, and practices. Where some practitioners identify as scientists, others consider themselves engineers; while some extol the simplicity of standardised biology, others dismiss it as counterproductive. Three different communities in synthetic biology (epistemics, sceptical constructors and committed engineers) can be distinguished by way of their intentions, practices and promises.Synthetic biologists' promises shape policy-makers' expectations, which in turn shape institutional arrangements. These institutional arrangements then influence practitioners' promises in an iterative fashion. In both the US and the UK, 'committed engineers' have succeeded in gaining support for an engineering-based and industry-centred vision of synthetic biology, which promises applications and economic growth. This group's intentions and promises have influenced policy-makers' expectations, which, in turn, have driven the major institutional developments in synthetic biology in the two countries.However, while the promises of the economic potential of this vision of the field have been embraced at policy levels, other aspects of this vision, such as the importance of enabling infrastructure, are often overlooked. In a sense, committed engineers' promises and rhetoric have been too successful, because they have overshadowed the institutional and infrastructural developments needed to make them a reality.

The intersections between infrastructures and expectations: repair and breakdown in Yachay, the city of knowledge in Ecuador

“…If expectations can be understood as a fundamental component of infrastructuring practices, then expectations, and not only infrastructures, may also require maintenance and readjustment in the face of breakdown or decay. Dealing with the constant tension and the gap between initial expectations and performance, is a growing challenge for sociotechnical projects and emerging scientific fields (Galanos 2018;Schyfter and Calvert 2015;Van Lente, Spitters, and Peine 2013), and Yachay is not the exception. Some crucial challenges to consider in such complex projects to navigate them more robustly are: acknowledging uncertainty and the risk involved for a variety of actors; developing coherent relations of accountability and developing practices that take into account the gap between expectations and performanceall these while remaining open and adaptable to the dynamic forces of breakdown/repair.…”

“…In Science and Technology Studies (STS), anticipation has been studied with the practice-oriented approach that characterizes the discipline (for future as practice in STS, see Alvial-Palavicino 2016) through a variety of case-studies analyzing the dynamics of expectations (Borup, Brown, and Konrad 2006;van Lente 2012), predictions within promissory work Williams 2010b, 2015), and sociotechnical imaginaries (Jasanoff 2015;Jasanoff and Kim 2009). For instance, the use of predictions in the shaping of technological and service markets by industry analysts and technological forecasters Williams 2010b, 2015); analyzing their use in the shaping of synthetic biology by a variety of actors and institutions (Schyfter and Calvert 2015); their influence in the interactions and applications of academic practices and knowledge in the business sector and in the realms of law (Juhl and Buch 2018; Pickersgill 2011); mapping a variety of possible futures promised and contested in different waves of scientific and technological development in fields such as artificial intelligence (Galanos 2018); in the neurosciences, particularly around future neuroimaging and neuromodulation capabilities (Rusconi and Mitchener-Nissen 2014); and in sustainability transitions based on the development and expansion of renewable energy projects and hydrogen storage technologies in the US and China Meeus 2011, 2012;Korsnes 2016). Interestingly, anticipation and expectations have also been explored as powerful tools around which scholars and social movements can rethink and rework meaningful relations with both futures and presents as political nodes (Adams, Murphy, and Clarke 2009;Esguerra 2019).…”

3D bioprint me: a socioethical view of bioprinting human organs and tissues

“…Obviously, and because of its interdisciplinary nature, bioprinting requires the building of bridges on different levels. 51 How are current and projected developments redrawing those disciplinary boundaries, in the lab between scientists with different backgrounds, and in terms of policy and funding? For example, in the British context, bioprinting research involves collaborations between different funding sources, cutting across the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), Medical Research Council (MRC) and National Centre for the Replacement Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs).…”

Anticipating governance challenges in synthetic biology: Insights from biosynthetic menthol

“…Despite being lauded as an application-driven platform, there has been limited work to date on the implications of synthetic biology across its broad range of uses, motivating calls for an application-oriented turn in the social studies of the field and a focus on its real-world dimension (Marris and Rose, 2012; Schyfter and Calvert, 2015). This paper aims to contribute to this line of social enquiry by offering a focused prospective analysis of a specific application in the field of synthetic biology.…”