Restore politics in societal debates on new genomic techniques.

End of April 2021, the European Commission published its study on New Genomic Techniques (NGTs). The study involved a consultation of Member States and stakeholders. This study reveals a split on whether current legislation should be maintained or adapted to take account of scientific progress and the risk level of NGT products. This split was predictable. New technological developments challenge both ethical viewpoints and regulatory institutions; and contribute to the growing divide between science and society that value 'technological innovations' differently. Such controversies are often characterized as 'unstructured' because of nearly unbridgeable positions on entangled scientific and value-laden issues. Initiatives for stakeholder involvement, such as consultation or participation, often focus on reaching a 'shared vision' without exploring the diverse societal concerns and values behind these positions. To resolve the EU stalemate in NGT regulation, we advocate to bring back politics in the EU decision-making process instead of hiding it under the veil of science, the need for regulatory change and public support. A more productive and justified use of genuine stakeholder participation is possible, if participants and deliberation design meet the criteria of what we call participation ethics. Drawing from our applied experience exploring the ethics of genetic modification, we believe that this approach can lead to more robust political decision-making and restore societal confidence in the governance of contested issues such as NGTs.

Coronavirus disease 2019 scenarios for a long-term strategy under fundamental uncertainty.

Early on, scientists have pointed out that coronavirus disease 2019 is most likely here to stay, although its course and development are uncertain. This requires a long-term strategy of living with the virus. However, the urgency of new waves of infection and the emergence of new variants have invoked an approach of acute crisis management over and over, hindering the design of a structural approach for the long term. Exploratory scenarios can provide scientific strategic guidance to policy processes to be better prepared in this situation of fundamental uncertainty. We have therefore developed five scenarios, which describe the possible long-term development of the pandemic from an epidemiological, virological, and broader societal perspective. These scenarios are based on four driving forces that are both important and uncertain: immunity, vaccination, mutations, and human behavior. The scenarios are (1) return to normal, (2) flu+, (3) external threat, (4) continuous struggle, and (5) worst case. Working with scenarios is crucial for appropriate public communication and provides guidance for anticipating the various conceivable possibilities for the further course of the pandemic.

Building biosecurity for synthetic biology.

The fast-paced field of synthetic biology is fundamentally changing the global biosecurity framework. Current biosecurity regulations and strategies are based on previous governance paradigms for pathogen-oriented security, recombinant DNA research, and broader concerns related to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Many scholarly discussions and biosecurity practitioners are therefore concerned that synthetic biology outpaces established biosafety and biosecurity measures to prevent deliberate and malicious or inadvertent and accidental misuse of synthetic biology's processes or products. This commentary proposes three strategies to improve biosecurity: Security must be treated as an investment in the future applicability of the technology; social scientists and policy makers should be engaged early in technology development and forecasting; and coordination among global stakeholders is necessary to ensure acceptable levels of risk.