Building a biological revolution that benefits all, not just the privileged few
Picture this: It's 2040, and you wake up in a world where your shirt is spun from spider silk proteins brewed by microbes, your morning fuel comes from engineered algae rather than fossil wells, and the medicine that keeps you healthy was produced in local labs using open-source genetic blueprints. This isn't science fiction—it's the promising future of the bioeconomy, the sector of our economy that uses living organisms and biological processes to create the products we need.
The answers to these questions are taking shape right now in laboratories and policy offices around the world—and the United States has a pivotal role to play. The next president will inherit both the promise and the responsibility of ensuring America's bioeconomic transition leaves no one behind.
Using biological processes to replace fossil fuels
Developing new materials and medicines
Ensuring benefits are distributed fairly
If you've eaten today, taken medicine, fueled your car, or done laundry, you've already participated in the bioeconomy. Broadly defined, it encompasses "all economic sectors that are involved in the production, processing, and use of biological resources (plants, animals, microorganisms) for the production of food and feed, the provision of biomass as resources, the production of bio-based chemicals and materials, and bioenergy" 1 .
But beneath this simple definition lies a complex landscape of competing visions. Researchers have identified three distinct approaches countries take when developing their bioeconomic strategies 4 :
| Vision Type | Primary Focus | Typical Goals | Dominant Geography |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bioresource | Efficient production and use of biomass | New crops, value chains, waste processing, rural development | Globally dominant approach |
| Biotechnology | Technological innovation and commercialization | Economic growth, genetic engineering, life sciences applications | Common in developed economies |
| Bioecology | Sustainable use of natural resources | Biodiversity, circular economy, social participation, ecosystem conservation | Less common globally |
A comprehensive analysis of 78 policy documents from 50 countries reveals that most government strategies prioritize economic growth above environmental and social considerations 4 . The bioresource vision emerges as the globally dominant perspective, while the more holistic bioecology vision receives significantly less attention in policy documents.
This imbalance matters because the vision guiding our bioeconomic development determines whether we merely replace fossil resources with biological ones while maintaining the same extractive economic models, or whether we fundamentally redesign our systems to be more regenerative and equitable.
The bioeconomy presents tremendous opportunities: reducing waste, creating new markets for farmers, generating jobs, and decreasing our reliance on fossil fuels 3 . The applied work happening at institutions like the University of Illinois shows that we're "not just talking about the bioeconomy, we're building it" 3 .
However, this transformation also carries significant risks that could exacerbate existing inequalities if left unchecked:
The same biological resources (land, crops) may be pulled in conflicting directions—food versus bioenergy versus biomaterials—potentially driving up food prices and displacing vulnerable communities 1 .
Advanced biotechnologies often require significant infrastructure, specialized expertise, and capital investment, creating barriers to entry for smaller players and developing regions 1 .
The "on-shoring of supply chains" 3 primarily benefits regions with existing research infrastructure and agricultural capacity, potentially leaving others behind.
While many institutions focus on the technical aspects of the bioeconomy, one research group is tackling the equity question directly through innovative approaches to how science is conducted and shared.
The Open Bioeconomy Lab operates on a radical premise: that the tools of biological innovation should be accessible to everyone, regardless of resources or geography 5 . Their work focuses on "developing biomanufacturing tools and technologies that are sustainable by design and deployable in low-resource contexts" 5 .
Rather than a single experiment with a defined beginning and end, their approach constitutes what social scientists call an "action research" framework—designing, testing, and refining solutions while simultaneously studying the process of implementation itself.
The Lab's work encompasses several interconnected initiatives:
Developing freely available designs for laboratory equipment that can be built and repaired locally, such as parametric magnetic tube racks and low-cost oxygen sensors for bioreactors 2 .
Creating and distributing essential enzymes that are "workhorses of molecular biology" and crucial for research and diagnostics 2 .
Establishing partnerships with labs in developing and emerging economies, such as their work with MboaLab in Cameroon, to support local innovation ecosystems 2 .
Researching and promoting practices that make academic research more accessible, including exploring opportunities for "open hardware" adoption by technology transfer offices 2 .
The Lab's approach represents a fundamentally different metric of success—one that prioritizes accessibility and empowerment alongside scientific advancement:
| Impact Category | Traditional Approach | Open Bioeconomy Lab Approach | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge Access | Proprietary, patent-protected | Open source, freely shared | Prevents knowledge hoarding and enables distributed innovation |
| Tool Accessibility | High-cost commercial equipment | Low-cost, locally repairable alternatives | Democratizes research capabilities |
| Geographical Reach | Concentrated in innovation hubs | Distributed global networks | Supports context-specific solutions |
| Reagent Availability | Global supply chain dependent | Regional manufacturing capability | Increases resilience to shortages |
Their work during the COVID-19 pandemic particularly demonstrated the practical importance of this approach, when they helped address reagent shortages that were hampering testing and research efforts worldwide 2 .
Perhaps most importantly, their research provides evidence that alternative models of bioeconomic development are possible. As they note in their mission statement, they "build technologies for an open, globally inclusive and equitable bioeconomy" 5 —proving that these aren't just aspirational ideals but practicable design principles.
The Open Bioeconomy Lab's work highlights a crucial insight: the pathway to equity begins with access to the fundamental building blocks of biological research. Here are some key research reagent solutions that exemplify this approach:
| Reagent/Tool | Function | Open Bioeconomy Applications |
|---|---|---|
| Open Enzymes | Molecular scissors that cut, paste, and modify DNA | Essential for diagnostics and genetic engineering; open collections reduce dependency on single suppliers |
| Cell-Free Systems | DNA-to-protein production without living cells | Enable just-in-time manufacturing of reagents in low-resource settings |
| Low-Cost Sensors | Monitor bioreactor conditions (oxygen, pH, temperature) | Make precision fermentation accessible outside well-funded institutions |
| Open Source Hardware | Laboratory equipment with freely available designs | Enable local fabrication and repair of essential tools |
| Research Chemicals | Leucyl-glutamine | Bench Chemicals |
| Research Chemicals | Sydonic acid | Bench Chemicals |
| Research Chemicals | Bacitracin Zinc | Bench Chemicals |
| Research Chemicals | AT 7519 mesylate | Bench Chemicals |
| Research Chemicals | Albuterol adipate | Bench Chemicals |
These tools collectively lower the barriers to entry for bioinnovation, allowing more diverse participants to contribute to and benefit from the growing bioeconomy. The Open Bioeconomy Lab's "Open Enzyme Collection," for instance, consists of "essential enzymes that are workhorses of molecular biology and are commonly used in research and diagnostics" 2 —precisely the types of foundational tools that should be available to innovators everywhere.
Building an equitable bioeconomy requires intentional policy design, not just technological optimism. Based on the emerging evidence from research institutions and global policy analysis, here are five strategic priorities for presidential leadership:
Require that technologies and biological tools developed with federal funds be made available under open-source licenses, following the model of the Open Bioeconomy Lab. This would ensure that taxpayer-funded innovations benefit the broad public, not just commercial interests.
Support initiatives specifically designed to broaden participation in the bioeconomy, such as grant programs for minority-serving institutions, funding for agricultural communities transitioning to sustainable biomass production, and resources for regions affected by the decline of fossil fuel industries.
Develop standards and regulations that prevent the bioeconomy from repeating the mistakes of previous economic transitions—including protecting against land grabs, bio-piracy (the appropriation of genetic resources without benefit-sharing), and the concentration of market power.
Coordinate the currently fragmented efforts across agencies and departments to ensure equity considerations are embedded in all bioeconomic research, development, and deployment.
Use diplomatic channels to promote equitable bioeconomy frameworks globally, supporting technology transfer, capacity building, and fair benefit-sharing arrangements—especially with biodiversity-rich developing countries.
The bioeconomy is coming—not as a distant possibility, but as an emerging reality being built today in laboratories, pilot plants, and policy forums. The critical question isn't whether we'll have a bioeconomy, but what kind of bioeconomy we'll have.
Will it be one that replicates the inequalities of our current economic system, merely swapping fossil carbon for biological feedstocks while maintaining the same concentration of power and wealth? Or will it be one that embodies our highest ideals of democracy, equity, and shared prosperity?
The answer depends on the choices we make now, at the foundation-laying stage. It requires recognizing, as the Open Bioeconomy Lab does, that technology is not neutral—it is shaped by our values, priorities, and design choices 5 .
The president has an unprecedented opportunity to set this transition on the right course—to ensure that the bioeconomy doesn't just produce innovative products, but also produces a more innovative form of economic inclusion. The mandate is clear: we must build a bioeconomy where opportunity is as renewable as our resources.