The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) rejects the moratorium request and approves a resolution recognizing the risks and benefits of SynBio techniques, calling for case-by-case evaluations

The IUCN Congress, which concluded last week in the United Arab Emirates, was an event marked by huge numbers. This organization—best known for compiling the red list of endangered species—has more than 1,400 members from 160 countries, including governments, non-governmental organizations, and representatives of indigenous peoples. At the Abu Dhabi meeting, in particular, ten thousand participants took part in over a thousand events, approving 148 resolutions that will (non-bindingly) influence conservation strategies for the coming decades.

But this year’s conference will be remembered above all for the vote rejecting an attempt by dozens of NGOs to impose a moratorium on the application of “synthetic biology” (SynBio) in natural ecosystems and in agricultural or industrial contexts that might pose environmental risks. Instead, a cautiously open-minded motion was approved—one that aims to develop the potential of genetic solutions without abandoning prudence.

The basic definition used is the same as that adopted by the Convention on Biological Diversity, which describes synthetic biology as “a further development and new dimension of modern biotechnology that combines science, technology and engineering to facilitate and accelerate the understanding, design, redesign, manufacture and/or modification of genetic materials, living organisms and biological systems.”

Projects that fall under this umbrella include de-extinction efforts, such as the controversial dire wolves that have sparked much debate. Other examples can be drawn from the open letter signed by many scientists opposing the moratorium. One already existing SynBio application contributing to species protection involves the development of a synthetic alternative to horseshoe crab blood, as these prehistoric-looking creatures produce a pigment useful for testing drugs and vaccines.

Other SynBio applications still in early research stages include: genetically engineered bacteria to combat coral bleaching by increasing pathogen resistance or restoring microbial balance in stressed reefs; genetically modified rodents designed to control invasive alien species on islands; gene editing to make amphibians more resistant to deadly fungal infections; and engineered or synthetic microbial communities designed to enhance plant resilience to climate change.

Conventional solutions alone are not enough to confront the biodiversity crisis, the anti-moratorium scientists write: “With nature declining at an unprecedented pace, this is not a time to retreat from bold solutions, but to advance them responsibly and collaboratively.” They add: “We strongly support the precautionary approach, but precaution must not be equated with inaction.”

An opposing document, signed by researchers critical of “genetic biotechnologies,” had called for halting research with “unpredictable consequences.”

It is worth noting that in the past—specifically in 2016 and 2018—a particular SynBio application was also the target of two moratorium requests, both rejected at the summits of the Convention on Biological Diversity. These were the gene drives, self-replicating genetic mechanisms designed to bring about the deliberate extinction (or at least drastic reduction) of harmful species such as malaria-carrying mosquitoes.

The decision-making process followed by the IUCN is also noteworthy. As explained in the official press release, it began with the Union’s first-ever citizens’ assembly, composed of representatives from different geographic regions who underwent intensive training followed by a week of discussions. The recommendations produced were then passed to a dedicated working group, whose conclusions went through two rounds of internal peer review within the IUCN, receiving hundreds of comments. In the end, the Union’s General Assembly approved the more open motion and rejected the prohibition proposal.