TY - JOUR
T1 - Understanding the U.S. bioeconomy
T2 - A new definition and landscape
AU - Frisvold, George B.
AU - Moss, Steven M.
AU - Hodgson, Andrea
AU - Maxon, Mary E.
N1 - Funding Information:
transportation fuels, reduce CO2 emissions by 450 million tons and support 1.1 mil‐ lion direct U.S. jobs by 2030 [50,51]. In 2016, DOE established the Agile BioFoundry—the first open, public biofoundry— to address precompetitive research challenges identified by industry [52]. In 2016, the National Science Foundation (NSF) launched its Big Idea initiative, in‐ cluding the Rules of Life Program [53]. In 2017 the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its Update to the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology, which was aimed at increasing transparency, streamlining regulatory processes while still ensuring safety, and accelerating the pace at which bio‐inventions were brought to market [54]. In 2017, USDA released an interagency task force report to the President. It outlined the importance of increasing public acceptance of biotechnology products, modern‐ izing and streamlining the federal regulatory system for such products, and expedit‐ ing their commercialization [55]. In 2018, the biotechnology start‐up LanzaTech partnered with Pacific Northwest Na‐ tional Laboratory and Virgin Atlantic airlines to develop and test new bio‐based jet fuel [56]. In 2019, the Biomass Research and Development Board of USDA and DOE issued The Bioeconomy Initiative: Implementation Framework [57]. In 2019, the Engineering Biology Research Consortium (EBRC), a non‐profit, public‐ private partnership, released Engineering Biology: A Research Roadmap for the Next‐Generation Bioeconomy. The report outlined technical themes, applications, and key sectors for engineering biology [58]. In 2019, the White House displayed renewed interest in the U.S. bioeconomy. In Au‐ gust, the Administration’s FY2021 Research and Development Priorities budget memorandum identified the U.S. bioeconomy as a key area for federal R&D invest‐ ment [59]. In September 2019, the OSTP released a public Request for Information seeking input regarding what steps the federal government might take to promote and protect the U.S. bioeconomy [60]. In October 2019, it held a White House Summit on America’s Bioeconomy to discuss U.S. bioeconomy leadership, challenges, and opportunities [61]. In 2019, H.R. 4373 Engineering Biology Research and Development Act of 2019 was passed in the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill would direct OSTP to implement a National Engineering Biology Research and Development Initiative, designate an in‐ teragency committee to coordinate the initiative, establish an advisory committee on engineering biology R&D; direct the NSF to partner with the NASEM to conduct a review and make recommendations regarding ethical, legal, environmental, and other societal issues related to engineering biology R&D, and with other federal agen‐ cies including the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to con‐ duct research as part of the initiative [62]. In May 2020, S.3734, the Bioeconomy Research and Development Act of 2020, which closely mirrors H.R. 4373, was introduced in the U.S. Senate [63]. In addition to the New Biology for the 21st Century report [44], other, recent NASEM reports have elaborated specific sectors of biotechnology. These include:
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
PY - 2021/2/2
Y1 - 2021/2/2
N2 - This article provides an overview of the U.S. bioeconomy, discussing how its definition has evolved and been formalized over time. The first attempts to conceptualize and define the U.S. bioeconomy began in the early 1990s. This was followed by a series of government and private efforts to develop methods to understand and evaluate it and to develop programs to promote it. These efforts culminated in the 2020 release of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), Safeguarding the Bioeconomy report. The report recommended a formal definition of the U.S. bioeconomy, providing the rationale for that particular definition in the U.S. con-text. Formally adopting a comprehensive definition of the U.S. bioeconomy would enable the U.S. government to better assess the bioeconomy’s current state, to develop strategies to support its growth, and to promote strategies to safeguard it. Along with this recommendation, the NASEM Safeguarding report also discussed defining the “bioeconomy landscape,” which involves more pre-cise determination and quantification of which economic activities are part of and external to the U.S. economy. Defining this landscape could guide metric development and data collection needed to track the bioeconomy’s growth, conduct economic assessments, and enable policy makers to keep abreast of advances that could potentially pose new national or economic security challenges. The report also includes an analysis of the broad range national bioeconomy strategies, identification of the four drivers of the U.S. bioeconomy, and the first of its kind, comprehensive estimate of the size and scope of the U.S. bioeconomy of USD 959B (valued in 2016 constant USD ).
AB - This article provides an overview of the U.S. bioeconomy, discussing how its definition has evolved and been formalized over time. The first attempts to conceptualize and define the U.S. bioeconomy began in the early 1990s. This was followed by a series of government and private efforts to develop methods to understand and evaluate it and to develop programs to promote it. These efforts culminated in the 2020 release of the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), Safeguarding the Bioeconomy report. The report recommended a formal definition of the U.S. bioeconomy, providing the rationale for that particular definition in the U.S. con-text. Formally adopting a comprehensive definition of the U.S. bioeconomy would enable the U.S. government to better assess the bioeconomy’s current state, to develop strategies to support its growth, and to promote strategies to safeguard it. Along with this recommendation, the NASEM Safeguarding report also discussed defining the “bioeconomy landscape,” which involves more pre-cise determination and quantification of which economic activities are part of and external to the U.S. economy. Defining this landscape could guide metric development and data collection needed to track the bioeconomy’s growth, conduct economic assessments, and enable policy makers to keep abreast of advances that could potentially pose new national or economic security challenges. The report also includes an analysis of the broad range national bioeconomy strategies, identification of the four drivers of the U.S. bioeconomy, and the first of its kind, comprehensive estimate of the size and scope of the U.S. bioeconomy of USD 959B (valued in 2016 constant USD ).
KW - Bioeconomy
KW - Biological resources
KW - Biotechnology
KW - Innovation
KW - Life science
KW - R&D
KW - Science policy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85100632644&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85100632644&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/su13041627
DO - 10.3390/su13041627
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85100632644
SN - 2071-1050
VL - 13
SP - 1
EP - 24
JO - Sustainability (Switzerland)
JF - Sustainability (Switzerland)
IS - 4
M1 - 1627
ER -