Authors: Max Kunze, Insa Heidenreich, Maya Leonie Lammertz, August 2024
1 Introduction
1.1 Historical developement of biotechnology
The first developments in the biotechnology sector took place thousands of years ago.1 If you look at the development of beer and other alcoholic beverages, there are plenty of examples of their use in the early stages of human civilization. Another example for the early use of biotechnology is the improvement of crops throughout history.2 Pasteur’s discoveries marked the beginning of a new phase in the utilisation of biotechnology. Pasteur was the first to specifically investigate and decipher the processes of fermentation. This made it possible to understand the processes involved. As a result, production processes were developed around fermentation. During the First World War, the use of glycerine led to an increase in the use of industrial fermentation processes. The discovery of antibiotics could be cited as a further step in the development of modern biotechnology.3 From around 1975, we can speak of modern biotechnology. In modern biotechnology, genes are used as a key differentiator from the earlier phases of biotechnology. Therefore, the necessary steps for the emergence of modern biotechnology were discoveries about the structure of DNA in 1953.
1.2 Definition and importance of the biotechnology sector
The OECD defines Biotechnology as follows:
“Biotechnology is the application of science and technology to living organisms as well as parts, products and models thereof, to alter living or non-living materials for the production of knowledge, goods and services.”(OECD, P.156)4
This Definition by the OECD is intended to be relatively broad. It is also one of the most frequently used.3 Therefore, they developed a list of seven not exhaustive definitions. These other definitions are used to categorize the different types of usage of biotechnology. The OECD mentions in their report that the broad definition should be used in combination with one of the definitions of the list. The list of the OECD distinguishes between DNA/RNA, protein and other molecules, cell and tissue culture and engineering, process biotechnology techniques, gene and RNA vectors, bioinformatics and nanobiotechnology.
There are then different types of labelling for the individual biotechnologies. One common option is to designate the different uses of biotechnologies with different colours. An alternative is to differentiate between the areas of application or sectors. The term Red Biotechnology is used here for medical applications.5 The term white biotechnology refers to biotechnology used in industrial applications. Grey biotechnology refers to biotechnology in the field of environmental protection and green biotechnology refers to applications in the agricultural sector.3
In addition to the division into colours, the division into economic sectors is also common. Biotechnology is particularly relevant in the medical field. This is also reflected in the turnover of the German biotechnology sector. Industrial biotechnology also accounts for a large proportion of sales. The agricultural sector plays an important role, but somewhat less so in Germany than in other areas of the world.
This article will focus on the areas of biotechnology that are particularly strong in terms of sales or could have a particularly large impact in terms of sustainability.
Politicians and scientists frequently emphasise the importance of biotechnology as a key technology.7 It is recognised as having a major role to play in future economic activity. The current importance of biotechnology can be recognised, among other things, by the company value. The 5 largest biotechnology companies each have a market capitalisation of over 300 billion.8 The largest group listed on a German stock exchange has a market capitalisation of around 215 billion.9
2 Sustainability impact and measurement
2.1 Positive and negative effects of the Individual Sectors
2.1.1 Plant Biotechnology
Although plant biotechnology is not the biotechnology sector with the largest inflow of funds, it is nevertheless one of the larger areas whose technologies are also widely used.6 Plant biotechnology is a part of green biotechnology, and it can be described as one of the most important advancements in the field of agriculture.10 The aim of this technology is to genetically modify plants so that they are more beneficial to humans or better able to cope with harmful environmental impacts. Humans have long tried to influence the genetic make-up of plants through breeding. In contrast to breeding, however, the use of plant biotechnology does not involve random changes to the genetic material, but rather the selective modification of specific areas.11 The technology has been the subject of controversial debate for years.12
The fight against world hunger is a major argument in favour of using plant biotechnology.13 Because the use of plant biotechnology can significantly increase plant yields.11 Genetically modified maize varieties were able to produce 120% higher yields under drought conditions than other varieties.14 This is in line with the goal of combating hunger and poverty. In addition to simply increasing yields, plants can be modified to improve their nutritional values. The best-known example of this is the so-called ‘golden rice’, in which two additional genes from maize and a bacterium were implanted into the genetics of a rice variety. These ensure that this variety contains beta carotene in the grains. This type of rice could potentially provide major health benefits in countries where rice is a staple food and there is a vitamin A deficiency.11 Around 1 million children die every year from such a deficiency.
Another exciting application is the use of biotechnology to produce plants that are resistant to insect attacs.15 Genetically modified crops have been able to drastically reduce the use of pesticides worldwide and thus cut costs for farmers.16 The use of genetically modified plants saved around 150 billion dollars in the period from 1996 to 2014.14 The main method of calculating these figures is to offset the costs of the technology against the savings from the reduced use of plant protection products and the possible increased yield of the plants.
Another advantage of genetically modified plants can be increased resistance to drought.16 This can be particularly relevant because the number of droughts is increasing because of climate change.17 Genetically modified maize varieties were able to produce 120% higher yields under drought conditions than other varieties.16 The lower water consumption of genetically adapted plants is also a desirable goal in itself in view of the high water consumption in agriculture.18
The effects of plant biotechnology on climate emissions are difficult to investigate, but there are certain methods for using plants specifically to reduce CO2. One possible influence on emissions that some see could be the possible reduced use of fertilisers.19
Apart from genetically modified plants, biotechnology can also be used for particularly targeted breeding, in which classical selection is used but the plants can be analysed more specifically.20
The potential benefits do not materialise in Germany because there are no commercial uses of genetically modified plants in Germany.21 The stakes in the European Union are also low. Non-authorised genetically modified plants may also not be imported into the EU. Because the separation is not easy, this can also lead to entire shiploads being sent back because a small proportion of genetically modified seeds were present.22 There are also regulations on genetically modified products in other regions.
In response to the increase of genetically modified crops, several countries, including the USA, have implemented the “substantial equivalence” principle to evaluate the safety of genetically engineered foods. Under this guideline, genetically modified foods must closely resemble their conventional counterparts in terms of composition. The levels of nutrients, anti-nutrients, and natural toxins must remain consistent, and animal-feeding trials should show no adverse effects on the animals’ development, health, or performance that would indicate any reduction in nutritional quality or an increase in toxicity or allergenicity of the genetically modified food.23
However, no commercial cultivation of genetically modified plants has taken place in Germany since 2012.
Arguments against the use of genetically modified plants are that they cannot fulfil the promise of reduced use of pesticides and can usually only be used in monocultures, which are detrimental to the soil.24 In addition, the harmful insects would often adapt to the modified plants, thereby cancelling out the benefits of the plants. Resistance to the plant’s pesticides also leads to increased pesticide consumption, which can damage biodiversity. 25 For farmers, it also plays a role that the seeds can no longer be used freely but that licence fees may be incurred.26 In this context, the possible dependence of small farmers on seed companies is also mentioned.
Further effects of genetic engineering in plants are mentioned in the field of environmental biotechnology.
2.1.2 Environmental Biotechnology
Environmental Biotechnology holds the key to a sustainable future, tackling issues from pollution clean-up to advanced agriculture. Environmental biotechnology is intended to mitigate the impact of human activities. As soil, water, and air are increasingly unable to absorb and process the waste produced by urban areas, industry, and agriculture, environmental biotechnology seeks to minimize these harmful effects through bioremediation and to prevent them by developing innovative technologies, consisting of Biotransformation, Bioenergy, Molecular ecology, Biomarker and Biosensor.23
Bioremediation is the process of utilizing microorganisms to degrade toxins that pose a threat to the environment and human health. Therefore, Biotechnology is a vehicle for better biogeochemical cycle manipulation, with bioremediation and biodegradation being utilized to restore the health of polluted soil, land, and water environments.23
The remaining innovations precede bioremediation and attempt to prevent the creation of
environmental problems instead of eliminating them. Biomarkers are used for environmental biological monitoring. Biomarkers are measurable parameters of biological processes that have prognostic or diagnostic significance. Environmental biomonitoring may use measurements of biomarker responses in vulnerable organisms (sentinel species) as an early warning of population-level modification with the aim of measuring environmental quality and assessing environmental changes.23 Biomarkers can therefore be used to assess environmental quality and function as an early warning system, alerting to changes that allow timely intervention to address these shifts and help preserve sustainability.
Biotransformation is a process in the metabolism of living organisms in which non-excretable substances are converted into excretable substances through chemical processes. Biotransformation can be applied to clean up polluted soil and water through two main methods: in situ and ex situ. In situ methods treat contamination at its original location, offering cost-effective and less disruptive remediation, though they may be slower and more challenging to manage. Ex situ methods involve removing the contaminated material for treatment, which can be quicker and more controlled but is generally more expensive and invasive. Both methods are used based on the nature of the contamination and the site conditions. Biotransformation is crucial for sustainability, because it detoxifies harmful substances, thereby reducing the environmental impact of pollutants. By transforming toxic chemicals into less harmful forms, biotransformation supports the cleanup of contaminated soil and water, helping to restore ecosystems and protect public health.
Bioenergy is a form of renewable energy generated from biological materials, collectively known as biomass, which captures and stores sunlight in the form of chemical energy. Biomass includes a wide range of organic materials such as wood, straw, manure, and various agricultural by-products. Sustainable development, which seeks to harmonize environmental, social, and economic objectives, is crucial for ensuring the well-being of current and future generations. Within this framework, biotechnology, particularly genetic engineering, has the potential to significantly advance bioenergy production by boosting biomass yields, enhancing the efficiency of crops for fuel, and converting biomass into biofuels.
Last but most important Molecular ecology provides the theoretical basis and molecular tools that help biotechnologists understand how microorganisms interact with their environment. It is therefore the basis of all the technologies mentioned above and guarantees their functionality. Molecular ecology knowledge is crucial when introducing recombinant organisms, which are genetically engineered for a specific tasks, into natural ecosystems. In these settings, the organisms must adapt, compete, and function within a complex and often unpredictable community of other organisms, which is a primary focus of molecular ecology. By applying molecular ecology principles, biotechnologists can better manage and optimize these interactions, ensuring that the organisms used in environmental applications are effective and sustainable.23 For example, understanding the genetic and molecular interactions within microbial communities can lead to improved strategies for pollutant degradation, bioenergy production, and ecosystem restoration. Thus, molecular ecology is essential for the successful application and development of environmental biotechnology, as it helps predict and control the behavior of organisms in natural, complex environments.
In addition, Environmental Biotechnology also includes advanced agriculture technologies. In order to bridge the gap between the supply and demand of the ever-increasing global population, it is indispensable to foster new breeds of stress-tolerant crops with traits conferring higher yields in spite of several environmental abiotic and biotic stresses.27Consequently, making crops more efficient producers of food and energy.23 Based on the description of plant biotechnology genetically modified crops can have traits for insect resistance and herbicide tolerance, which contribute to reduce agriculture’s environmental footprint, because fewer pesticides are needed. The adoption of genetically modified insect resistant and herbicide tolerant technology has reduced pesticide spraying by 775.4 million kg (8.3%), thereby lowering the environmental impact associated with herbicide and insecticide use. Furthermore, leading to fewer poisoning cases due to reduced applications and reduced levels of pesticide exposure.23
Genetic engineering also has many negative aspects and potentially harmful consequences. Firstly, genetically modified (GM) crops lead to a reduction in employment. GM species do not require as much care as conventional plants, which means that fewer workers are needed and therefore jobs are lost.
In contrast to conventional species, genetically modified species can overwinter and germinate the following year. This means that these species can spread and reproduce on their own without the need for reseeding. Consequently, once released into the environment, they are practically irrecoverable. Furthermore, genetic contamination of conventional crop is pre-programmed, when cultivating GM crops. For example, the current Genetic Engineering Act stipulates the distance between fields with and without genetically modified maize. This is 150 meters from conventionally farmed fields and 300 meters from organically farmed fields. Both 150 and 300 meters distance will regularly and permanently lead to contamination of normal maize, since maize pollen are shown to be able to travel a distance of up to 4.5 kilometers. Distances from seed production areas and protected areas are not even regulated by law.
Farmers who grow genetically modified plants can bypass the law by making private agreements with their neighbors, such as neglecting minimum distance requirements or failing to clean shared machinery, thereby circumventing measures to prevent genetic contamination.
The use of genetic engineering in agriculture causes additional costs. The more genetically modified plants are cultivated, the more difficult it becomes to strictly separate GMO-free and GMO plants. The effort and therefore the cost of avoiding contamination will increase, as it is possible for genetically modified plants to contaminate organic and conventional products everywhere. For example, in the seed, in the field, through the shared use of machinery during sowing and harvesting, during storage, transport and processing.
Genetically modified organisms (GMO) free farmers in particular will suffer losses if their harvests are contaminated. Contaminated products can no longer be marketed as ‘organic’, but have to be sold at a lower price than genetically contaminated products. In extreme cases, there is also the threat of losing organic certification.
Furthermore, the cultivation of genetically modified plants leads to a reduction in the value of the soil, because seeds remaining there prevent a conversion from GMO cultivation to GMO-free production over a longer period of time. This is because seeds from genetically modified plants that remain in the field or are lost during transport along roads or railway tracks can emerge as volunteer plants in the following vegetation period and therefore contaminate the soil.
Despite the negative effects of genetic engineering, environmental biotechnology continues to hold the advantages of the six intervention technologies (bioremediation, biomarkers, biotransformation, bioenergy and molecular ecology). Therefore, environmental biotechnology is a vehicle for better biogeochemical cycle manipulation, and is sustainable, because it has a wide capacity to lead to the reduction, identification, and remediation of environmental contamination and waste depletion. It does so by creating renewable processes and materials that are less toxic and have a lower impact on the environment than their predecessors. Furthermore, Environmental Biotechnology follows the following objectives according to the Agenda 21. Biotechnology aims to recycle biomass, recover energy, and minimize waste generation to implement production methods that allow optimum use of natural resources. It fosters the use of biotechnological methods with an emphasis on bioremediation of land and water, waste treatment, soil conservation, reforestation, afforestation, and land rehabilitation. And applies biotechnological processes and their products to preserve the quality of the ecosystem with a view to long-term environmental protection.
2.1.3 Industrial Biotechnology
Industrial biotechnology is of crucial importance as it uses modern biotechnological methods to produce chemicals, materials and fuels from renewable sources in a sustainable way.28 Alternative energy sources are an important topic for the future. As already mentioned in the Environmental Biotechnology section, Biomass is a decisive factor. In industrial biotechnology, biomass can replace crude oil and related products such as petrol, diesel and kerosene for use in vehicles or industrial turbines. Existing fuel sources can be replaced with the help of biofuels, which are derived from biomass.29The most commonly used liquid biofuels are bioethanol and biodiesel. Bioethanol, a type of alcohol, can be used directly in vehicles designed for ethanol or mixed with gasoline to help reduce pollution. Biodiesel, a synthetic alternative to traditional fuels, can be used on its own or blended with petroleum diesel. While much attention is given to biofuels for transportation, their use in cooking, especially in rural areas of developing countries, offers substantial potential to improve public health by reducing the harmful emissions associated with traditional solid-fuel cooking methods.23
Since bioenergy is a very complex field, it is not easy to make general statements about its sustainability effects. But research shows that climate change and emissions play a very important role in the further development of this technology. Bioenergy is considered by many countries to be a strategy for decarbonization.30 A study in which energy crops were grown on land unsuitable for agriculture found that replacing fossil fuels with bioenergy reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 29.49 million tons CO2-eq/yr.31 Another study found that in the majority of studies a significant net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions was observed when fossil energy was replaced by bioenergy.32 Due to the further development of bioenergy, professions in this field are also evolving. Studies on bioenergy projects in the UK have shown that many positive effects are being achieved, particularly in the area of jobs and skills.30 The development of bioenergy has greatly benefited local communities by creating a significant number of job opportunities in bioenergy-related industries, leading to a substantial increase in income.33
Bioplastics are a promising way of making consumption and production more sustainable. Plastic packaging is currently an integral part of the consumer world. They offer many advantages, as they are lightweight, impact-resistant, and water-impermeable, among other things.34 Bioplastics should therefore reduce the ecological footprint of plastic packaging and offer a sustainable alternative. The better-known biopolymers include poly lactic acid (PLA), polyhydroxyalkanoates, thermoplastic starch and plant-based materials.35 The extent to which these plastics are degradable and renewable depends, among other things, on their chemical structure. PLA, for example, is compostable and takes around 11 months to degrade.35 However, there are still problems with PLA when it comes to disposal, as it is considered a contaminant in standard PET recycling. The infrastructure with the necessary separation technologies is currently lacking for proper recycling or composting.34
Bio-based materials are used in industrial biotechnology to produce certain products for example in the categories Textiles, plastics, surfactants, insulation materials, hydraulic oils and lubricants, rubber, composite materials, paints and varnishes and floor coverings.36 In order to investigate the sustainability of these materials, they are often compared with conventionally produced materials. A study has shown that, in contrast to their conventional counterparts, bio-based materials save 55 ± 34 gigajoules of primary energy per ton of material and produce 3 ± 1 tons less CO2 equivalents. But it must be noted that the greenhouse gas emissions of indirect land use change were not taken into account. This is a factor that should not be neglected, as a study that examined biofuels and included land-use change found that greenhouse gases are actually increased.37
A process-oriented study looked at enzyme technology. Enzymes are proteins from living organisms that serve as catalysts for triggering reactions. It is possible to replace traditional production technologies with enzyme-assisted technologies. This is expected to be a fast method that can also save raw materials, energy, chemicals and water. This technology is used in a wide variety of areas such as food, animal feed, fine chemicals, technical industry and others. The study showed that enzymatic processes contribute less to global warming. There are also other positive effects in the areas of acidification, eutrophication, the ozone layer and energy consumption.38
As already mentioned, Biomass is a very important material for many biotechnological areas. Therefore, feedstock production makes a significant contribution to the environmental impact of bio-based materials.39 In the production nitrogen fertilizers are used to improve the soil quality. This can cause the nitrate pollution of rivers, lakes and other water bodies. Add to that, excess nutrient runoff into water bodies can lead to eutrophication.40 Eutrophication severely impacts aquatic ecosystems by reducing water quality, causing harmful algal blooms, and depleting oxygen levels. This leads to habitat destruction, loss of biodiversity, and disruption of food chains, affecting fish populations, coral reefs, and seagrass. The overall result is a decline in ecosystem health and economic loss. A comparison of bio-based material with conventional material showed that higher eutrophication potentials – up to 5 ± 7 kg phosphate equivalents per t – are to be expected.41
Biogenic feedstocks are required for many industrial biotechnology products. Typically, large-scale agriculture and forestry are needed to produce the feedstock. This includes, for example, sugar crops such as wheat, corn, sugar beets and sugar cane. A lot of agricultural land is therefore required. Land is a scarce commodity and demand is increasing for both food production and industrial biotechnology. This is leading to competition and land use change.42 In some cases, land that was previously used for food production is then used for the production of biomass. As a result, food prices are also rising and farmers are responding by clearing forests or converting grassland into arable land to replace the grain diverted to biofuels.37 Agriculture practiced for the production of biomass can have an enormous impact on biodiversity. The homogenization of the landscape creates monocultures. Agriculture also contributes to habitat degradation and loss, climate change and pollution. These are all factors that can threaten biodiversity.43 It must be said that not all cases of industrial biotechnology lead to increased land use. For example, there are second-generation biofuels whose source materials can be grown on land that is not suitable for food production.36 Third-generation biofuels are produced with the help of microalgae and therefore do not require any agricultural land at all.44
2.1.4 Health or Medicinal Biotechnology
Medicinal biotechnology is used all over the world and its impact on sustainability is as great as its economic influence. Medicinal biotechnology “facilitates the development of novel drugs, personalized medicine strategies and innovative treatments, offering hope for previously untreatable conditions” and offers a promising alternative to traditional medicine, which is connected to inefficiency, environmental concerns and limitations in production processes.45 However, the spread of biotechnology has far-reaching moral and socio-economic consequences that need to be carefully considered.46
To begin, a comparison will be made to illustrate the difference between traditional and biotechnological medicine. The pharmaceutical industry of the traditional medicine relies strongly on raw materials for drug production. One of the disadvantages to traditional medicine is the low efficiency, typically resulting from multi-step chemical syntheses that generate waste byproducts. Consequently, production expenses escalate, and environmental concerns arise regarding waste management. Furthermore, traditional medicine uses harsh chemicals and solvents in its processes, which pose serious environmental problems. In addition, traditional medicine doesn’t meet the demand for complex molecules for targeted therapies surges and struggled to produce the required purity and efficacy. Medicinal biotechnology, however, enables the production of complex molecules with high specificity, purity, scalability and less waste production by using techniques such as recombinant DNA technology, microbial fermentation, biocatalysis and cell culture technology. Through the production of highly pure materials, biotechnology diminishes the likelihood of side effects in contrast to traditional preparations which often contain impurities.
Moreover, traditional methods rely on finite natural resources, which on one hand, creates instability regarding the availability and affordability of pharmaceuticals. On the other hand, sourcing these raw materials from plants or animals, might consequent in extinction and raises ethical and sustainability concerns. Biotechnology on the other hand generates identical molecules in controlled environments.
Consequently, by levering natural processes and renewable resources, biotechnology presents a more environmentally conscious approach to manufacturing and thereby fostering a robust and sustainable supply chain for pharmaceutical raw materials. When discussing the sourcing of raw materials, medicinal plants often play a significant role. The conservation and sustainable use of these plants are crucial. In Europe alone, over 1,300 medicinal plants are utilized, with 80,000 species used globally. However, 15,000 species are at risk of extinction due to overharvesting and habitat destruction, and many endangered species have yet to be officially recognized as threatened. Despite this, the global demand for medicinal plants is rapidly increasing.47
Thus, as previously emphasized, the conservation and sustainable use of medicinal plants are vital. Two key methods for ensuring their sustainable use are the implementation of good agricultural practices (GAP) and adherence to general sustainable cultivation practices.47
The most well-known benefits of medicinal biotechnology are the medical achievements. There are many biotechnology innovations varying from gene therapy, personalized medicine, vaccines, as well as fortified foods to combat malnutrition. The types of medicinal biotechnology innovations differ in different countries, with regard to the given health system and existing needs.
In contrast to the positive influences, there are also numerous negative influences. Most of them can be categorized under ethics and privacy concerns.
Genetic engineering provokes ethical questions and data protection concerns, particularly when it involves altering individuals’ genetic makeup or collecting genetic data. These practices also raise issues related to social inequality and the potential loss of natural selection. Additionally, there are significant privacy concerns associated with accessing an individual’s personal DNA.
Advanced medical treatments and technologies, which are often costly, may contribute to increased health disparities on a global scale. Wealthier families could potentially gain genetic and economic advantages through genetic enhancements, further widening the social and economic divide over time, which is called the “genetic gap”.46
Social inequality occurs in all areas of medicinal biotechnology and is not limited to genetic engineering. Studies show that, “Genomics and biotechnology hold great potential to fight diseases that disproportionately affect the world’s poorest people. However, the benefits of biotechnology, driven by market incentives of the industrialized world, have accrued primarily to rich countries, with billions in the developing world largely excluded from these advances”.48
Another Phenomena in medicinal Biotechnology is called “Big Pharma”, which describes the fact that the production of the most important drugs is in the hands of a few large corporations. The corporations form monopolies, control policies and secure their dominance in the market by taking over small and medium-sized biotech companies. Consequently, controlling the spread of new technologies.46 By lobbying and supporting political campaigns, these companies could further secure their monopoly position and influence policy in their favor.46 The problem monopolies like Big Pharma introduce are targeted consumption promotion and risk concealment. Large pharmaceutical companies could conceal risks and mislead consumers about potential health risks in order to promote the spread of new biotechnological products. Through targeted marketing strategies, large pharmaceutical companies can convince consumers of the safety and efficacy of new technologies, which facilitates the introduction of these technologies as a consumer resource. Furthermore, pharmaceutical companies can also use indirect coercion to promote the use of certain products.46 This includes, for example, reducing the availability of conventional treatments.
Consequently, monopolies in medicinal biotechnology could be seen as the most critical sustainability impacts. Monopolies could exploit their position to increase their economic profit instead of using medical biotechnology to solve existing problems, drive innovation and strive for sustainability.
In addition to the previously mentioned influences, biotechnology carries several safety risks. One major concern is biosafety, as research involving pathogenic organisms poses risks related to accidental release or potential misuse. Furthermore, there are national security risks due to the threat of bioterrorism.
The accidental release of genetically modified organisms is a considerable risk, as it could result in unintended ecological impacts and disturbances to natural ecosystems. Furthermore, bio-manufacturing processes, which involve handling pathogens or hazardous materials, present potential risks of infection or exposure for workers. The waste generated during these processes also requires specialized treatment and disposal methods to mitigate environmental harm.45
Addressing the challenges in medicinal biotechnology involves, firstly, reducing costs and implementing price caps. The most pressing issue is to lower healthcare costs overall, removing financial barriers to access. Another approach is to introduce price caps or limits on how much medicine prices can increase. 46 Both strategies aim to ensure that medicines are accessible to everyone and that their distribution isn’t dominated by large pharmaceutical companies.
2.1.5 Animal Biotechnology
The intensification of animal trade and agriculture is a factor in the increased incidence of plant, animal and zoonotic diseases. Infectious diseases such as bird flu or African swine fever are being transmitted more frequently from livestock to humans. Farm animals are therefore treated with vaccines and antibiotics, which in turn can lead to resistance. These negative effects on human and animal health can be reduced with the help of biotechnology. New technologies such as gene editing or transgenic approaches are used for this purpose.49 Examples include transgenic cattle that produce an antimicrobial protein in their milk in order to be resistant to mastitis.50 Transgenic technologies and methods such as gene editing can therefore make a contribution to disease control in animal production and fewer medications need to be used in the animal industry.
Animal biotechnology also offers solutions for producing safer and healthier food for humans. Here too, transgenic technology has been applied to farm animals to produce food with better nutritional characteristics.49 For example, transgenic technology has been used to produce fish that are rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids. These are essential for human health and farmed fish do not contain enough of them.51 Another example of making food safer is a study carried out on dairy cattles. Here, a process was used that ensured that the microallergen ß-lactoglobulin (BLG) was significantly reduced in the milk. This shows that biotechnology can be used to change the composition and properties of milk and livestock.52 All in all, animal biotechnology can make food healthier and safer for humans.
Animal biotechnology can be used to improve the health and welfare of farm animals. Pigs are a good example of this. Domestication and breeding, for example, has led to pigs having larger litters. As a result, some of the piglets are not sufficiently nourished and have an increased mortality rate.53 By producing transgenic pigs, the milk production of the animals can be increased so that all piglets are sufficiently nourished and mortality is reduced.49 Animal biotechnology can therefore offer promising solutions to improve the welfare of farm animals. However, this ignores other aspects of animal welfare. For example, there are groups that reject the use of animals in biotechnology. These views are based on an ethical perspective that grants animals extended rights. For example, animals should not be used if they could be physically or psychologically harmed.54 Other negative effects are also possible, such as impacts on biodiversity, for example an imbalance in the ecosystem or genetic depletion of wild animals.41
2.2 Measurements
Measuring the impact of biotechnology on sustainability can be very complex. One method is environmental accounting, which can be used to analyze the impact of biotechnological processes on the environment. It is a tool that can be used to carry out a comprehensive assessment of the potential of biotechnology. Environmental aspects are identified and data on environmental impacts are collected and monitored (e.g. measurement of emissions and resource consumption). Finally, assessments are made from an ecological and economic perspective. Another part of the life cycle assessment is the comparison with alternatives, i.e. the extent to which the technology compares with traditional production methods in terms of sustainability aspects. Finally, strategic decisions can be made on this basis and the stakeholders informed. Environmental Accounting is therefore a measurement method that can also be used to identify important solutions at the same time. 55 However, there are also challenges with the method, such as a lack of data regarding emissions, bio-diversity effects and more. And the complexity when many environmental factors are taken into account is also high. 55
Products and processes of industrial biotechnology are usually compared with their conventional counterparts. There are various approaches in the literature. For example, there are simple methods where the study is limited to one or a few key figures. 56 Here, however, important other factors and aspects could be ignored, which could lead to a distorted result. 36Another method would be a detailed LCA. This in turn is very time-consuming and it is sometimes very difficult to obtain the necessary data. 56 Depending on the aim of the study, a few or comprehensive sustainability aspects must therefore be included.57 For the biotechnology sector, it is important which sustainability aspects are taken into account in the assessment. For example, there are special features such as the biogenic origin of the starting material. It is particularly difficult for small companies to provide the personnel and financial capacities.57
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) have published a recommendation on biotechnology on how the sustainability of bio-based products can be assessed, because tools like LCA would only consider environmental aspects. They recommend for the assessment to consider their environmental, economic and social impacts throughout the life cycle of bio-based products.58 The OECD lists a number of factors that play an important role: energy, greenhouse gas reduction, bio-based content, product life, use of water and solvent, impacts on biodiversity, land use, end of product life, economic efficiency of bio-based products and the human and environmental health.58
Social Life Cycle Assessments (SLCA) are common methods for measuring the impact on social sustainability.59 The SLCA offers similar advantages to the Environmental LCA. There are different approaches. For example, static social performance information can be collected along the life cycle in order to determine the social score. This allows the situation to be assessed. Another approach is to measure the social impact after something has been changed.60
3 Sustainability strategies and measures
3.1 Responsible Research and Innovation
With the help of biotechnology, many improvements in the area of the sustainable economy can be achieved. But there are also ethical and social concerns, for example regarding genetically modified organisms or compliance with public values.61 For this purpose, an approach called Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has been developed. The aim of RRI is to harmonize new technologies with social requirements.59 The European Commission for Directorate-General for Research and Innovation defines RRI as “a transparent, interactive process by which societal actors and innovators become mutually responsive to each other with a view on the (ethical) acceptability, sustainability and societal desirability of the innovation process and its market able products (in order to allow a proper embedding of scientific and technological advances in our society)” (p.9).62 Various measures can be taken in the area of IRR. For example, by conducting stakeholder dialogs in order to incorporate social needs and ethical considerations into the innovation process. In addition, evaluation criteria should be developed in order to be able to carry out technology evaluations at an early stage, for example. Processes must then be established to incorporate social needs into research and innovation. Finally, there must also be advisory bodies, such as councils, which advise and evaluate.63 RRI has four dimensions: anticipation, reflexivity, inclusion and responsiveness. Anticipation means that the possible risks and consequences are considered and addressed. Reflexivity means that all stakeholders are prepared to critically question their basic assumptions. Only in this way can different perspectives be brought together and compromises agreed. Inclusion is about considering a variety of people and perspectives in the development of new technologies, e.g. by incorporating the views of different stakeholders into the processes. The final dimension is responsiveness. This is an essential prerequisite for IRR because it means that innovators are prepared to change an innovation if it conflicts with the values of stakeholders.59
An example of the application of IRR is, for example, the Fraunhofer Institute for Industrial Engineering (IAO), which has set up a Center for Responsible Research and Innovation (CeRRI). The IAO aims to align research projects with societal needs and develop responsible and sustainable solutions. They therefore incorporate social perspectives into the process and promote the exchange of information between research and society. To this end, they work together with clients from the fields of politics, science and society.64 One of its areas of expertise is social trends and technology. The focus is on ensuring that innovations are developed taking technological, social and cultural change into account and are therefore socially accepted.65
3.2 Promotion of sustainable biomass production
The production of biomass is an essential component of Biotechnology. As already described in chapter 2, this leads to land use changes and competition because arable land is required. There are various approaches to increasing sustainability here.
In its Directive 2018/2001 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, the EU has defined sustainability criteria for the production of biofuels (Article 29). For example, no land may be used that was classified as primary forest, peat bog or wetland before 2008 or where there is evidence of biodiversity.66 There are certification systems to prove and document compliance with these criteria. These are able to improve sustainability at the production sites. There are several of them. “Roundtable for Sustainable Biomaterials” and “International Sustainability & Carbon Certification” are two examples of certification systems that are very ambitious and comprehensive.36 But there is also criticism that there is a lack of harmonization between the certifications, as there are different approaches, definitions and methods. In addition, certifications probably do not yet take sufficient account of indirect effects, as food safety, food availability and indirect land use changes also play a role.67
Another approach to increasing the sustainability of biomass is the use of waste and residual materials. Cascade and coupled use can be used for this purpose. This is a strategy in which the biomass is used in successive steps for as long, as often and as efficiently as possible. The first step is material utilization, followed by energy recovery at the end of the product’s life. Cascade utilization can be used primarily in the areas of wood, paper, bio-based plastics and textiles, thus helping to reduce the use of fossil resources and contribute to climate and environmental protection.68 Cascade utilization is not yet frequently used in practice. Cascade utilization is not yet frequently used in practice and the data situation is still inadequate. However, there are already significant biogenic material flows, particularly in the wood and paper sectors.68There is a need to catch up with regard to measuring the effects of cascading use and the data situation. One example of a measurement is the cascade factor, which was developed by Mantau. The factor indicates the ratio of total wood resources to the proportion of fresh wood. For wood products in Europe, the cascade factor is 1.57, which means that fresh wood is used one and a half times as a resource.69
Another strategy concerns the land needed to grow biomass. On the one hand, the approach could be to use land that was previously unused. On the other hand, the area of increasing yields in agriculture could also be further expanded. In this way, the growing demand for food can be met and at the same time.36
3.3 Bioeconomy
The bioeconomy is based on natural material cycles and promotes the transition from an economy based on fossil resources to an economy based more on renewable resources. The field of biotechnology is ascribed particular importance in this context. Biotechnology is also considered the key technology and basis of bioeconomy. It enables the use of bio-based raw materials and the development of environmentally friendly production processes. Industrial biotechnology also has a high market and value creation potential.70 Bioeconomy establishes a link between biotechnology and the economy, as well as science, industry and society. Bioeconomy policy strategies have already been developed in many countries around the world71, for example, there is the National Policy Strategy Bioeconomy in Germany.70 There are also numerous initiatives at EU level, such as the Circular Bio-based Europe Joint Undertaking, which funds projects to promote competitive bio-based circular industries.72 The 2018 EU strategy focuses on a number of areas with high potential. For example, the creation of jobs in the bioeconomy. Up to one million new jobs could be created in bio-based industries by 2030. The bioeconomy can also reduce emissions and dependence on fossil resources, for example by using algae as a renewable source of biomass. The establishment of an investment platform for the circular economy with a budget of 100 million euros is mentioned as one measure to achieve this. There has been enormous progress and developments in biotechnology that are also promising for the future, including in the areas of Bioprocess and biosystems engineering, Gene editing, Molecular medicine and Transition of fossil-based chemical processes to resource-efficient bioprocesses.71
4 Drivers and barriers
4.1 Drivers
Interdisciplinary research can be a driver of the sustainable use of biotechnology. 73 The integration of interdisciplinary research can give biotechnology a boost. For example, artificial intelligence can be used to determine DNA sequences. There is also evidence that interdisciplinary research increases the likelihood of obtaining patents. Furthermore, interdisciplinary research not only increases the number of patents generated but also increases the technological impact.74 In recent decades, interdisciplinary research has experienced considerable growth. The rise is essentially based on the expectation that more innovative breakthroughs can be expected. Particularly when companies are involved in research, technical developments arise from scientific work.75 A high level of diversity in the research groups was also more of a positive factor.76
Sustainable biotechnology is a decisive factor for the future of our society and environment. It offers solutions for a range of challenges, from medical research to the production of food and energy. However, long-term investment is essential to fully realise this potential. Short-term funding, as is currently prevalent, is often focused on quick results and profit, which does not do justice to the nature of lengthy biotechnological research and development processes. Long-term investments, on the other hand, enable researchers and companies to conduct fundamental research, develop sustainable technologies and bring them to market. It has been shown that when returns are channeled into further research and development, returns become more sustainable.77
For specific technologies, the use of biotechnology has a strong cost advantage over traditional methods. In these cases, the demand for products produced in this way is significantly higher due to the cost advantage. This can be seen in parts of plant biotechnology and in areas of industrial biotechnology.28 The greater the cost advantage, the faster a new technology can establish itself. Social and political pressure can also increase the demand for products that have been produced using biotechnology and are therefore more environmentally friendly.
One driver can be project financing by government agencies. There are numerous research projects in industrialized countries that finance research into biotechnology projects.78 For example, the Ministry of Economic Affairs of the Federal Republic of Germany is supporting the scaling of bio-manufactured products.79 There are also projects in the field of plant breeding that aim to make plants more resistant to the consequences of climate change.20
This funding goes mainly to socially accepted projects such as the use of biofuel. Government funding is often necessary to bring a technology to the point where it can be profitable.
Apart from financing initiatives, legal regulations can also be a driver of sustainable biotechnology if, for example, they mandate the use of certain products.
4.2 Barriers
Open perception is a problem with some biotechnologies.3 Reputation can be a decisive competitive factor and industries can also have a reputation as such.80
A negative attitude among the population can lead to problems for biotechnology. A poor reputation can have a negative impact on regulations and investments. In some areas of biotechnology, negative reporting predominates and companies are therefore under particular pressure not to make any mistakes. The use of biotechnology in the agricultural sector is predominantly reported negatively in the press, which is a factor in the negative perception of the technology.81 In addition to the predominantly negative reporting, there is a lack of information in the area of genetic modification.3 62% of Europeans describe their knowledge of biotechnology as rather poor. One consequence of this could be that the companies expect the destruction of fields in which genetically modified plants grow.21
Products manufactured with the aid of biotechnology are often subject to stricter rules than products developed without biotechnology. For example, biotechnologically produced medicines, including those produced through bioproduction, are subject to strict regulations and lengthy authorisation procedures compared to traditionally produced medicines.
The strict regulation of biotechnology in some sectors is probably one of the biggest barriers to the implementation of biotechnologies and their potential positive impact. The European Union in particular has relatively tough laws regarding the use of specific biotechnology.22
It has also been shown that the level of cash inflows is very dependent on the economic conditions. For example, very high inflows of funds were recognised during the coronavirus pandemic. This was a time characterised by low interest rates and a high money supply and high government investment, such as a high demand for biotechnology.6 At the same time, we are not seeing any major inflows of funds in times when the financial situation looks much more difficult.77 One example of this is the 2008 financial crisis, after which the biotech industry saw a significant drop in funding. A certain decline in fund inflows was also evident following the peak periods during the coronavirus pandemic.
Biotechnology has a high demand for venture capital and this is often lacking. This is particularly true for European countries.82 In the USA, there is a much greater amount of venture capital.83
References
1 Ulber, R. & Soyez, K. 5000 Jahre Biotechnologie: Vom Wein zum Penicillin. Chemie in unserer Zeit 38, 172-180 (2004). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/ciuz.200400295
2 Goldhammer, A. The Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnology: An Industrial Perspective. Food and Drug Law Journal 48, 501-510 (1993).
3 Schüler, J. in Die Biotechnologie-Industrie: Ein Einführungs-, Übersichts- und Nachschlagewerk (ed Julia Schüler) 143-309 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2016).
4 OECD. OECD Factbook 2013. 156 (2018).
5 Rustidge, M. The Colors of Biotechnology; What do they mean?, <https://www.azolifesciences.com/article/The-Colors-of-Biotechnology3b-What-do-they-mean.aspx> (
6 Daten & Fakten zur Biotech-Branche 2022, <https://biotechnologie.de/statistics_articles/37-daten-fakten-zur-biotech-branche-2022> (
7 Treffenfeldt, W. Empfehlungen zum Aufbau einer wettbewerbsfähigen und nachhaltigen Bioökonomie – Beitrag der industriellen Biotechnologie zum wirtschaftlichen Wandel in Deutschland. 34 (Forschungs- und Technologierat Bioökonomie, 2010).
8 Marktkapitalisierung der führenden Biotech-Unternehmen weltweit im Jahr 2024, <https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/624875/umfrage/wertvollste-biotech-unternehmen-weltweit/> (2024).
9 Statista. Marktkapitalisierung der DAX-Unternehmen 2024.
10 Rustidge, M. The Colors of Biotechnology; What do they mean?, <https://www.azolifesciences.com/article/The-Colors-of-Biotechnology3b-What-do-they-mean.aspx> (2021).
11 Klatt, A. Pflanzenbiotechnologie: Potenziale, Perspektiven und Hemmnisse, <https://www.bpb.de/themen/umwelt/bioethik/33753/pflanzenbiotechnologie-potenziale-perspektiven-und-hemmnisse/> (2008).
12 Karger, C. Dem Expertenurteil auf den Zahn gefühlt. Ökologisches Wirtschaften – Fachzeitschrift 18 (2003). https://doi.org/10.14512/oew.v18i6.289
13 Donato, K. et al. Unleashing the potential of biotechnology for sustainable development. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 27, 100-113 (2023). https://doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202312_34694
14 Brookes, G. & Barfoot, P. Global income and production impacts of using GM crop technology 1996-2014. GM Crops Food 7, 38-77 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2016.1176817
15 Klümper, W. & Qaim, M. A Meta-Analysis of the Impacts of Genetically Modified Crops. PLOS ONE 9, e111629 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111629
16 Paul, M. J., Nuccio, M. L. & Basu, S. S. Are GM Crops for Yield and Resilience Possible? Trends in Plant Science 23, 10-16 (2018). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2017.09.007
17 Schneider, R. Welternährung sichern im Klimawandel. Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit 4, 39-43 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00003-009-0429-x
18 Woźniak-Gientka, E. & Tyczewska, A. Genome editing in plants as a key technology in sustainable bioeconomy. EFB Bioeconomy Journal 3, 100057 (2023). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioeco.2023.100057
19 Lambrecht, O. Wie berechtigt ist die Sorge vor Gentechnik?, <https://www.tagesschau.de/wissen/forschung/gentechnik-pflanzenzucht-101.html> (2022).
20 Offenberger, M. Plant 2030 – Highlights der Angewandten Pflanzenforschung. 68 (2018).
21 Deutschland, B.-B. f. N. u. U. i. Kommerzieller Anbau und Freisetzung gentechnisch veränderter Pflanzen in Deutschland, <https://www.bund.net/themen/landwirtschaft/gentechnik/kommerzieller-anbau-und-freisetzung/deutschland/> (
22 Davison, J. GM plants: Science, politics and EC regulations. Plant Science 178, 94-98 (2010). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2009.12.005
23 Sudipti Arora, A. K., Shinjiro Ogita, Yuan- Yeu Yau. Innovations in Environmental Biotechnology. (Springer, 2022).
24 Mertens, M. Gentechnisch veränderte Pflanzen & mehr Pestizide, <https://www.boell.de/de/2022/01/12/gentechnisch-veraenderte-pflanzen-mehr-pestizide> (2022).
25 Argumente gegen Agro-Gentechnik, <https://www.meine-landwirtschaft.de/schwerpunkte/gentechnik/argumente-gegen-agro-gentechnik/> (
26 Mäntele, W. in Elektrosmog und Ökoboom: Ein naturwissenschaftlicher Blick auf populäres Halbwissen (ed Werner Mäntele) 137-160 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2021).
27 Agata Tyczewska, T. T., Ewa Woźniak-Gientka. Agricultural biotechnology for sustainable food security. Trends in Biotechnology (2023).
28 Tang, W. L. & Zhao, H. Industrial biotechnology: Tools and applications. Biotechnology Journal 4, 1725-1739 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.200900127
29 Burritt, R. L. & Schaltegger, S. Measuring the (un-)sustainability of industrial biomass production and use. Sustainability accounting, management and policy journal (Print) 3, 109-133 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1108/20408021211282377
30 Welfle, A. J. et al. Sustainability of bioenergy – Mapping the risks & benefits to inform future bioenergy systems. Biomass & bioenergy177, 106919 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2023.106919
31 Liu, T. et al. Bioenergy production on marginal land in Canada: Potential, economic feasibility, and greenhouse gas emissions impacts. Applied energy 205, 477-485 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.07.126
32 Cherubini, F. & Strømman, A. H. Life cycle assessment of bioenergy systems: state of the art and future challenges. Bioresource technology 102, 437-451 (2011).
33 Wang, J., Yang, Y., Bentley, Y., Geng, X. & Liu, X. Sustainability Assessment of Bioenergy from a Global Perspective: A Review. Sustainability 10, 2739 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082739
34 Tolinski, M. & Carlin, C. P. in Plastics and Sustainability 127-158 (United States: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated, 2021).
35 Thakur, S. et al. Sustainability of bioplastics: Opportunities and challenges. Current opinion in green and sustainable chemistry 13, 68-75 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2018.04.013
36 Aichinger, H., Hüsing, B. & Wydra, S. Weiße Biotechnologie – Innovationsanalyse Teil I. Stand und Perspektiven der industriellen Biotechnologie: Verfahren, Anwendungen, ökonomische Perspektiven. (2016).
37 Searchinger, T. et al. Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change. Science319, 1238-1240 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1151861
38 Jegannathan, K. R. & Nielsen, P. H. Environmental assessment of enzyme use in industrial production – a literature review. Journal of cleaner production 42, 228-240 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.11.005
39 Broeren, M. L. M. et al. Environmental assessment of bio‐based chemicals in early‐stage development: a review of methods and indicators. Biofuels, bioproducts and biorefining 11, 701-718 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1772
40 Venkatesh, A. et al. in Sustainability and Life Cycle Assessment in Industrial Biotechnology 77-119 (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020).
41 Kaiser, M. Assessing ethics and animal welfare in animal biotechnology for farm production. Rev Sci Tech 24, 75-87 (2005). https://doi.org/10.20506/rst.24.1.1552
42 Lindner, J. P., Beck, T., Bos, U. & Albrecht, S. 233-254 (Cham: Springer International Publishing).
43 Lindner, J. P., Beck, T., Bos, U. & Albrecht, S. Assessing land use and biodiversity impacts of industrial biotechnology. Sustainability and Life Cycle Assessment in Industrial Biotechnology, 233-254 (2020).
44 Rösch, C. & Maga, D. Indicators for Assessing the Sustainability of Microalgae Production. TATuP – Zeitschrift für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Theorie und Praxis 21, 63-71 (2012). https://doi.org/10.14512/tatup.21.1.63
45 Marzieh Shokoohi, T. A. Biomanufacturing for a Sustainable Future: Unleashing the Potential of
Biotechnology in Pharmaceutical Raw Material Production. Journal of New Findings in Health and Educational Sciences (IJHES) (2023).
46 Albert Xie, C. H. The Socioeconomic Impacts of Emergent
Biotechnology on the Next Human Age. Journal of Student Research (2022).
47 Shi‑Lin Chen, H. Y., Hong‑Mei Luo, Qiong Wu, Chun‑Fang Li, André Steinmetz. Conservation and sustainable use of medicinal plants: problems, progress, and prospects. (2016).
48 Abdallah S Daar, K. B., Deepa L Persad, Peter A Singer. How can developing countries harness biotechnology to improve health? BMC Public Health (2007).
49 Tizard, M. et al. Strategies to enable the adoption of animal biotechnology to sustainably improve global food safety and security. Transgenic Res 25, 575-595 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-016-9965-1
50 Wall, R. J. et al. Genetically enhanced cows resist intramammary Staphylococcus aureus infection. Nat Biotechnol 23, 445-451 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1078
51 Pang, S.-C. et al. Double Transgenesis of Humanized fat1 and fat2 Genes Promotes Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Synthesis in a Zebrafish Model. Mar Biotechnol (NY) 16, 580-593 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10126-014-9577-9
52 Jabed, A., Wagner, S., McCracken, J., Wells, D. N. & Laible, G. Targeted microRNA expression in dairy cattle directs production of β-lactoglobulin-free, high-casein milk. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109, 16811-16816 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1210057109
53 Kirkden, R. D., Broom, D. M. & Andersen, I. L. INVITED REVIEW: Piglet mortality: Management solutions. J Anim Sci 91, 3361-3389 (2013). https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2012-5637
54 Létourneau, L. 189-209 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2017).
55 Popov, A. Development of environmental accounting as a tool for assessing the economic potential of biotechnologies. E3S web of conferences 451, 1013 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202345101013
56 Tufvesson, L. M., Tufvesson, P., Woodley, J. M. & Börjesson, P. Life cycle assessment in green chemistry: overview of key parameters and methodological concerns. The international journal of life cycle assessment 18, 431-444 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0500-1
57 Fröhling, M. & Hiete, M. in Sustainability and Life Cycle Assessment in Industrial Biotechnology 3-9 (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020).
58 OECD. Recommendation of the Council on Assessing the Sustainability of Bio-Based Products. OECD/LEGAL/0395 (2012).
59 Asveld, L., Osseweijer, P. & Posada, J. A. in Sustainability and Life Cycle Assessment in Industrial Biotechnology (eds Magnus Fröhling & Michael Hiete) 121-141 (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020).
60 Macombe, C. in Sustainability and Life Cycle Assessment in Industrial Biotechnology (eds Magnus Fröhling & Michael Hiete) 205-230 (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020).
61 Smith, R. D., Bernstein, M. J., O’Donovan, C. & Cuttica, F. Capabilities to support responsible research & innovation in European biotechnology. (2022).
62 European Commission: Directorate-General for Research and Innovation & Schomberg, R. Towards responsible research and innovation in the information and communication technologies and security technologies fields. Available at SSRN 2436399 (2011). https://doi.org/https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/58723
63 European Commission Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Options for strengthening responsible research and innovation – Report of the Expert Group on the State of Art in Europe on Responsible Research and Innovation. (Publications Office, 2013).
64 Fraunhofer-Institut für Arbeitswirtschaft und Organisation IAO. Responsible Research and Innovation, <https://www.iao.fraunhofer.de/de/forschung/forschungsbereiche/responsible-research-and-innovation.html> (n.d.).
65 Fraunhofer IAO Center for Responsible Research and Innovation. Gesellschaftliche Trends & Technologie, <https://www.cerri.iao.fraunhofer.de/de/leistungsspektrum/bedarfsorientierte-forschungsplanung.html> (n.d.).
66 DIRECTIVE (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. (2018).
67 Scarlat, N. & Dallemand, J.-F. Recent developments of biofuels/bioenergy sustainability certification: A global overview. Energy policy39, 1630-1646 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.12.039
68 Fehrenbach, H. et al. Biomassekaskaden: mehr Ressourceneffizienz durch Kaskadennutzung von Biomasse; von der Theorie zur Praxis. (2017).
69 Mantau, U. Wood flows in Europe (EU27). Project report. Celle 24 (2012).
70 Bundesministerium für Ernährung und Landwirtschaft (BMEL). Nationale Politikstrategie Bioökonomie – Nachwachsende Ressourcen und biotechnologische Verfahren als Basis für Ernährung, Industrie und Energie. (Berlin, 2014).
71 Aguilar, A., Twardowski, T. & Wohlgemuth, R. Bioeconomy for Sustainable Development. Biotechnol J 14, e1800638-n/a (2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/biot.201800638
72 Circular Bio-based Europe Joint Undertaking (CBE JU). The organisation, <https://www.cbe.europa.eu/organisation> (n.d.).
73 Saw, P. E. & Jiang, S. The Significance of Interdisciplinary Integration in Academic Research and Application. BIO Integration 1, 1-4 (2020). https://doi.org/10.15212/bioi-2020-0005
74 Ke, Q. Interdisciplinary research and technological impact: evidence from biomedicine. Scientometrics 128, 2035-2077 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04662-0
75 Li, B., Chen, S. & Larivière, V. Interdisciplinarity affects the technological impact of scientific research. Scientometrics 128, 6527-6559 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04846-8
76 Specht, A. & Crowston, K. Interdisciplinary collaboration from diverse science teams can produce significant outcomes. PLOS ONE 17, e0278043 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278043
77 Lazonick, W. & Tulum, Ö. US biopharmaceutical finance and the sustainability of the biotech business model. Research Policy 40, 1170-1187 (2011). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.05.021
78 Röbig, B. Innovation durch Biotechnologie. (Bundesministerium
für Bildung und Forschung).
79 Biotechnologie und Bioökonomie, <https://www.bmwk.de/Redaktion/DE/Artikel/Technologie/biotechnologie.html> (
80 Einwiller, S. in Handbuch Unternehmenskommunikation: Strategie – Management – Wertschöpfung (eds Ansgar Zerfaß, Manfred Piwinger, & Ulrike Röttger) 371-392 (Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 2022).
81 Deutsch, M., Otte, L. & Otter, V. Digital first? Auswirkungen der digitalisierung auf vertriebsstrukturen im deutschen agrarhandel. (2019). https://doi.org/10.15203/oega_29.4
82 Huss, R. in Wege zum neuen Gesundheitssystem – “Change by Design” oder “Change by Disaster”? Transformationsprozesse nachhaltig gestalten (eds Manfred Cassens & Thomas Städter) 61-69 (Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 2023).
83 Scale-up financing gap, <https://www.eif.org/etci/scale-up-financing-gap/index.htm> (