ReviewSynthetic biology (Oxford, England)2023
Synthetic biology regulation in Europe: containment, release and beyond.
Review in Synthetic biology (Oxford, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Environmental Release of Genetically Intervened Microorganisms: Towards a New Narrative.Microbial biotechnology · 2026Review
- Review
- Microbial and molecular approaches for PFAS transformation in soils: prospects and limitations.RSC advances · 2026Review
- A roadmap to understanding and anticipating microbial gene transfer in soil communities.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2025Review
- Engineering a Novel Probiotic Toolkit inACS synthetic biology · 2024Article
- The whack-a-mole governance challenge for AI-enabled synthetic biology: literature review and emerging frameworks.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While synthetic biology is hoped to hold promise and potential to address pressing global challenges, the issue of regulation is an under-appreciated challenge. Particularly in Europe, the regulatory frameworks involved are rooted in historical concepts based on containment and release. Through a series of case studies including a field-use biosensor intended to detect arsenic in well water in Nepal and Bangladesh, and insects engineered for sterility, we explore the implications that this regulatory and conceptual divide has had on the deployment of synthetic biology projects in different national contexts. We then consider some of the broader impacts that regulation can have on the development of synthetic biology as a field, not only in Europe but also globally, with a particular emphasis on low- and middle-income countries. We propose that future regulatory adaptability would be increased by moving away from a containment and release dichotomy and toward a more comprehensive assessment that accounts for the possibility of varying degrees of 'contained release'.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.