ABSTRACT The deliberate release of genetically engineered microorganisms for environmental applications has remained largely blocked since the early days of recombinant DNA technology, when limited ecological knowledge, lack of success stories and public apprehension shaped a culture of caution and restrictive regulation. Despite profound advances in microbial ecology, synthetic biology and genetic design, current frameworks still rely on outdated assumptions and legacy regulations that equate engineered microbes with inherent danger and demand unrealistic forms of absolute containment. This review examines how laboratory‐trained microorganisms exist on a continuum with naturally evolved life, and that their risks are neither categorically different nor greater. Rather than pursuing unachievable containment, governance should shift towards traceability, stewardship and long‐term monitoring through genomic barcodes, digital twins and transparent oversight. The vision moves from domination and control to care and partnership recognizing engineered microbes as live amendments capable of restoring degraded ecosystems. Achieving this transformation requires new terminology, phased field‐trial frameworks, improved scaling methods, and the integration of epistemological perspectives that emphasize reciprocity and coexistence with nature. Reframing biotechnology in this way could finally unlock the capacity of engineered microorganisms to contribute responsibly and effectively to planetary repair in an era of escalating environmental crises.
Practitioners and policymakers now speak freely of reasoning “from first principles” in bioscience and biotechnology. The phrase promises that beneath the disorderly surface of laboratory life lies a small set of foundational propositions from which the rest could be derived. This article finds that promise unfulfilled...
Kao-Cheng Huang· London journal of research i...· 0 citations
Rapid advances in gene editing, synthetic biology and related biotechnologies have significantly expanded the range of biological interventions available for medical research and clinical practice. These innovations have contributed to major improvements in disease diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis worldwide. However...
Geoffrey Mutale, Sandra Matinyi, Amadile Lawrence et al.· American Journal of Medicine...· 0 citations
A unified theoretical framework formalised by the conceptual equation A + B = 1, where A represents human biological inheritance and B represents dynamic cultural systems is introduced, which establishes a rigorous guardrail against both biological determinism and radical cultural blank-slate models.
R. Khongsdier· International Journal for Sc...· 1 citation
The antibiotic pipeline is in crisis, even though microbial natural products, account for most approved antibacterial drugs and retain vast, untapped biosynthetic potential. Genuinely new scaffolds are rare because discovery remains constrained to a narrow set of cultivable taxa and expressed biosynthetic gene clusters...
Ahmed A. Hamed, Zeinab G. Khalil· Biotechnology Advances· 0 citations
The rapid convergence of synthetic biology and artificial intelligence is reshaping the biosecurity landscape, yet governance approaches have not kept pace with the realities of digitally mediated biological research, particularly in African contexts. Existing global discourse has largely centred on high-level framewor...
Keletso Masisi, M. Amougou, Ilodia Amilcar Zacarias et al.· Frontiers in Bioengineering...· 0 citations
A risk-proportional framework for the responsible deployment of microbial inoculants grounded in release-based stewardship is proposed, providing a scalable and scientifically grounded pathway to balance innovation and safety, enabling microbial technologies to contribute to soil restoration and climate-resilient agric...
Anna Edlund, Gwyn A. Beattie, Joana Falcao Salles et al.· Sustainable Microbiology· 2 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.