Human-Practices
Info
On this page you can learn how project SublimeStone came to life, our inspirations, ethical concerns, decision making process, conducted interviews and held lectures.
A Local Problem
The project SublimeStone has been brought to life with a special consideration of the area in which our members study and live - Maastricht. Â Our city's culture and heritage was the initial inspiration for the project.
It has been brought to our attention that with current problems of climate change, nature is not the only thing that needs saving. Important buildings and monuments are affected by problems interconnected with these changes. We have chosen to put focus on limestone as it is a major component of a multitude of cultural and historical landmarks, especially in Maastricht.
Info
Limestone buildings are threatened by physical and chemical weathering, getting worse due to constantly raising pollution and acid rains.
For instance, a study was conducted to show a comparison of costs needed to preserve limestone facades in Kraków, Poland. The comparison specifically included adjustments needed due to air pollution and weathering. The results have concluded that air pollutants significantly impact the weathering rates, therefore are interconnected to the amount of money that needs to be spent in order to preserve limestones facades (Grøntoft, 2017).[1] Moreover, weathering makes the limestone vulnerable to forming cracks in the rock, negatively influencing the structures and menacing their stability. Furthermore, it is crucial to highlight that it is not only a local problem, as climate change can be currently seen in almost every place in the world. There are many limestone monuments, some of which are undeniably an inherent part of cultural heritage, for instance the Sphinx in Egypt, the Pantheon in Italy or the Acropolis in Greece. The main motivation behind our project was to contribute to the  preservation of these precious landmarks.
Our initial idea
Initially our project was to combine fixing cracks in limestone while removing black crust that forms on the surface of buildings. Unfortunately, after extensive research on this topic, it was decided to keep the original plan - fixing the microcracks and black crust removal turned out to be far more complicated process than we had expected.
Our approach to human practices
Human practices refer to the set of activities and considerations that encompass the societal, ethical, legal, and environmental aspects of synthetic biology projects. It involves engaging with various stakeholders, including the public, policymakers, and experts, to ensure that the development and application of synthetic biology technologies are responsible, safe, and aligned with societal values.
Our approach to human practices throughout our iGEM project has been rooted in a comprehensive and thoughtful analysis of ethical, social, safety and legal aspects.
Social
Who is affected?
From the young to the elderly, cultural preservation caters to a diverse range of communities. Firstly, regarding the citizens of Maastricht where we plan to first implement our bacteria, this project holds the potential to restore and rejuvenate the many limestone buildings, allowing future generations to inherit the cultural and architectural heritage of the city.
Additionally, preserving our cultural heritage will also help the city economically, bringing tourist from all the world, boosting small businesses and increasing employment opportunities. The preservation efforts aligns with the city’s identity as a student city and center of learning, making and ideal place to show the intersection of science and heritage. This project aims to foster international recognition and collaborations. The state of a city affects us all, making our project a collective effort with no specific negative impact on the local community.
Furthermore, regarding the global community, our technology is highly transferable to other limestone buildings. This engineered bacteria could be employed in many worldwide sites facing the same issues such as the Pyramid of Giza or the Parthenon, impacting the communities of diverse countries. Moreover, in regions affected by conflict or war, monuments require preservation but access to on-site workers is limited, our technology could tremendously help in providing assistance in the reconstruction process.
Not only that, we aim to introduce our technology to the restoration community, while creating a conversation and allowing for advancements in this field. For instance, our partners at Stichting Restauratie Atelier Limburg (SRAL), have indicated that they could use our bacteria for their restoration orders, making their work efficient and reducing the significant manual labour, as well as the use of hazardous chemicals. The project will decrease the costs of conservation, increase the workers quality of life while offering an environmentally friendly solution to the conservation community.
Current restoration techniques
They often can involve heavy use of resin based fillings, which alter the apperance of the artwork in restoration.
Science Fair
Location:
Date:
Our iGEM team seized a valuable educational opportunity by participating in the Maastricht Science Program Science Fair. This event, organized by the Faculty of Science and Engineering, serves as a hallmark introduction for incoming students to explore the diverse offerings within the faculty. Our presence at this event  provided us with the opportunity to explain what the iGEM competition entails, while concurrently showcasing our own project.
Our exhibit attracted substantial attention and interest among the students. We were elated to engage in in-depth discussions with the students, responding to their inquiries and sharing insights into the captivating field of synthetic biology.
These conversations were both enlightening and enriching, as we imparted knowledge about the principles, applications, and ethical considerations of this rapidly evolving field.
Notably, the students exhibited remarkable enthusiasm towards our project and its potential impact, demonstrating a keen interest in understanding how we address safety concerns inherent to our work.
Accross multiple brainstorming sessions within our team and by receiving input by fellow students, we found adapations to our project.
Beyond limestone restoration, our technology can be adapted for bio-cement production or regenerative medicine applications, such as bone regeneration, opening doors to advancements in healthcare and construction. For this reason we've reached out to a variety of companies for funding form biotechnology entreprises such as Tilibit, Pathofinder or Arcadis, to international organisation like the International centre for study of the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of cultural property (ICCROM) or the World Monument fund.
Tips
Applying synthetic biology to solve practical issues requires careful interaction and engagement with the outside world. The necessary interactions include fundraising, conducting interviews, holding lectures, reflection on ethics and many more. These aspects are all parts of Human Practices.
Ethics
Regarding Sublimestone, we wanted to ensure a balance between innovation and responsibility. As we started a project in which genetic modifications in E.coli were made to preserve limestone structures, the main concern was the impact of releasing this organisms in the environment. The bacteria could interact with other organisms in unpredictable ways, leading to ecological disruptions.
While we acknowledge the risks associated with GMOs, we've incorporated a kill switch mechanism to mitigate any unintended consequences.
This ties with the next ethical concern, which is safety. When they spread beyond their intended environment, they could pose a risk to human health and the environment. Â In addition, when using engineered organisms into public areas, comes the ethical questions about obtaining informed consent from the individuals who would be in this area. Furthermore, there is equity principle, who benefits from the technology and who bears the potential risks and costs. Ensuring equitable access and benefits is an important ethical consideration.
The ethics of Art Conservation
When working with art and historical buildings, comes many ethical concerns. When modifying artwork some unspoken rules must be respected. Starting with the minimal intervention principal, stating that while achieving the conservation goals, as little as possible should be modified. Then, the compatibility principle which says that ensuring that the materials used in conservation should be similar to the original material. Other principles such as cultural sensitivity, authenticity and historical context should also be considered. These rules guide the conservators work, therefore were very strongly considered.
In order to ensure that our project was ethically admissible, we conducted a thorough analysis of the issue at hand with a session of brainstorming, making sure that our synthetic biology endeavor was grounded in a real-world problem. When addressing technical matters, we left no stone unturned, dedicating extensive research to understand the implications of our technology. Our approach was to first contact worker in the conservation field, such as SRAL, that would give us valuable insights and help us determine the primary areas of focus. We also attended a lecture on biotechnology given by Zoë Robaey at the Dutch meet-up conference, which strengthened our understanding of ethical implications in synthetic biology, specifically in the scope of the competition. Finally, we incorporated a kill switch to mitigate the effects of the bacteria being release in the environment.
Kill Switch
Check out our Kill-Switch Design here.
What does philosophy have to say about Synthetic Biology?
Additionally, many members of our team attended classes on the « Philosophy of Technology ». It delved into the main philosophical currents that started reflecting on the new developing technologies. Some of the currents explored:
In the context of Synthetic Biology:
Instrumentalists would see it as a means to an end, emphasizing how synthetic biology is employed to solve practical problems, improve human life, or achieve specific goals. This perspective tends to focus on the agency of individuals and society in shaping and utilizing technology.
In the context of Synthetic Biology:
In the context of synthetic biology, determinists might argue that once certain technologies are developed, they will inevitably have certain social, economic, or ethical consequences. This perspective can raise concerns about the potential loss of control over technology and its impact on society.
In the context of Synthetic Biology:
Essentialists might focus on the inherent properties and implications of manipulating biological systems, emphasizing the ethical, environmental, and philosophical implications arising from these essential qualities.
In the context of Synthetic Biology:
Marxist analysis might explore questions of ownership, control, and the potential for technology to serve or undermine the interests of certain classes or groups in society. It often critiques the capitalist system's influence on technological development and its distribution of benefits and burdens.
Legal
We assessed the legal landscape pertaining to GMOs and examined local conservation initiatives to ensure that our project adhered to all applicable regulations.
Regarding GMO’s regulations the Netherlands follows the European Union (EU) legislation ad well as the commission on genetic modifications (COGEM). The Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate (ILT), Bureau GGO and the National Institute for Public health and the environment (RIVM) allow for these regulations.
In the EU, many directives and new laws have been put in place in order to ensure safe and responsible use of GMO’s. Some examples are the 2001/18/EC directive establishing a legal framework for the release of these organisms in the environment. It sets out requirements for risk assessments, monitoring, labeling and public information regarding the release. The No 1829/2003 and 1830/2003 regulations authorize the use of GMOs for food and establish traceability requirements. The 2009/41/Ec directive relates to the contained use of the engineered bacteria while also tightening the measures of safety in laboratory research, as well as in industrial applications. The Cartagena Protocol (2003) on Biosafety, in which the Netherlands was a crucial part, is a international agreement from the United Nations (UN) focusing on the transboundary movement of GMO’s and intentional release of these in the environment (European Commission, 2011).[2]
In the Bureau GGO in the Netherlands which operates under the National Institute for Public Health and Environment (RIVM) and Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, plays a crucial role in regulating and overseeing activities involving GMO’s. Some of it’s main roles is conducting risk assessment, developing and implementing policies related to biotechnology and provides information to stakeholders. It serves as a link between policy/regulation and organizations related to GMO’s. They are also the ones issuing the permits related to GMO use. In addition, RIVM is a national research institute providing scientific expertise and assessing the impacts of GMO’s.
Subsequently, COGEM is an independent advisory body who’s primary role is to provide expert advice to the authority on issues related to genetic modifications and biosafety. It also conducts risk assessments, ensure transparency on all the conclusions made. On the other hand, ILT is a government agency responsible for overseeing and enforcing regulations related to environment, transport and infrastructure including those pertaining to GMOs. They enforce regulatory compliance, conduct inspections and audits, as well as collaborate with other regulatory bodies such as COGEM.
After examining the laws and bodies responsible for GMO’s in our country. We looked at the steps to follow in order to release our engineered bacteria in the environment. The process begins by preparing an application to the Bureau GGO which includes detailed information in the characteristics of our bacteria, the location and purpose of the release. Then, the bureau GGO reviews the application, conducts a risk assessment and ensures biosafety is met. Before reaching a conclusion, experts are consulted such as COGEM or even a public consultation is conducted. Then, the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water management makes a decision regarding the release. If the application is approved, a permit is issued outlining the terms and conditions for the release. Finally, we could release our technology, with constant monitoring and regular reports.
In the Netherlands, most national and EU rules for GMOs are set down in the:
Genetically Modified Organisms (Environmental Management) Decree (Besluit genetisch gemodificeerde organismen Milieubeheer)
Genetically Modified Organisms Order (Regeling genetisch gemodificeerde organismen)
(Ministerie van Economische Zaken, Landbouw en Innovatie, 2023)[3]
For now, all the participants from the team acquired a GMO permit (GGO- vergunning).The permit obtained was of contained use, for laboratories but in the future could be expanded to a introduction into the environment permit.https://business.gov.nl/regulation/applying-for-gmo-permit/. For now, our bacteria are in accordance with the regulatory framework of the Netherlands and we know what steps to follow in order to release them into the environment.
Reflection throughout our project
The inception and enduring essence of project SublimeStone are rooted in the objective of preserving cultural heritage. The focus was put specifically on limestone, material prevalent in the region of Limburg, where our university is located. Nevertheless, it has not eluded out attention that there are many more limestone-based monuments and structures, outside of Limburg, confronting degradation processes induced by climate change.
Consequently, the aim of this project has been to develop a system that could support conservators and allied industries engaged in the preservation of these irreplaceable landmarks. Following an interview with Kate Seymour, a distinguished senior paintings conservator at SRAL, it has been ascertained that our project could profoundly impact the conservation industry, as the prevailing restoration methods are often inadequate, in terms of time efficiency or preserving structural integrity. Furthermore, valuable insight was given to us through an interview with an Assistant Professor in Philosophy of Technology - Massimiliano Simons. During this discussion, substantial ethical concerns were explored, enriching our team’s understanding of life applications of the developed product.
In light of these interviews, it is evident that the Sublime Stone project possesses the capacity of positively influencing the world and conservation industries. It is imperative, that the ethical concerns are addressed to the parties implementing the system. Moreover, prior to applying the final product onto the actual monument, safety issues will be addressed, regarding a potential disruption of already existing micro environment within the limestone cracks.
Regarding the practical application of the final product, the team has been extensively exploring various options and techniques that could be used. At this stage of development the most feasible way to do that appears to be the utilisation of a hydrogel. This entails capturing calcite producing bacteria with the DNA lattice, alongside a source of calcium (likely calcium chloride) in the hydrogel. This approach is deemed the most promising for applying the product on the structures. Nevertheless, there is still a crucial need for further experimentations before proceeding to the next phase of the project.
SRAL interview
Location: SRAL - Maastricht
Date: 29 of June 2023
Interviewee: Kate Seymour
Introduction
Our IGEM team SublimeStone has an ongoing collaboration with a conservation institute located in Maastricht named Stichting Restauratie Atelier Limburg (SRAL). We had the opportunity to conduct an interview with the head of the institute Kate Seymour.
We believe engaging in meaningful discussions with experts in the field is of utmost importance. These interactions serve as a vital source of knowledge and guidance, helping to define and shape our project's objectives. It ensures that the idea remains relevant and aligned with practical requirements as well as real world applicability in the conservation sector. Moreover, they bring in-depth knowledge, technical expertise, and a broader perspective, helping to identify potential challenges that our bacteria could solve.
Info
By consulting experts, our iGEM project aims to enhance its effectiveness, and potential for long-term success, ultimately contributing to the advancement of synthetic biology and its positive impact on society.
Background on Kate
Kate Seymour is a british art historian that dedicated her life to conservation. She earned her Masters of Arts in the Conservation of Easel Paintings from the University of Northumbria in 1999. During that time she became fascinated with physics, chemistry and mechanisms and explored the interdisciplinary aspects of art conservation.
Following that, she moved to the Netherlands to work at SRAL, located in the town named Maastricht. She started out as a painting conservator and moved her way up to currently being the Head of Education at this institution. Her position entails supervising the projects undertaken at SRAL, teaching workshops and making sure everything is running smoothly.
Additionally, she supervises the research work carried out by postgraduate students from the University of Amsterdam programme for the Conservation and Restoration of Cultural Heritage. Her areas of expertise include the structural treatment of both canvas and panel paintings, polychromed surfaces, filling, retouching systems and varnishing painted surfaces.
Outside of SRAL
Other than her work at SRAL, Kate Seymour currently serves as Chair on the Directory Board of the International Council of Museums- Committee for Conservation (ICOM-CC), an organization focusing on the conservation and restoration of cultural heritage artifacts. Her involvement demonstrates her prominent standing in the conservation community.
Characterising the uniqueness of limestone
What are the unique characteristics of limestone ?
Limestone is a geological composition primarily consisting of calcium carbonate that exhibits a variety of characteristics. In Maastricht, quarries of Mergel stone prevail, while sturdier blue limestone from Belgium underscores the variance. These stones demonstrate a range of traits, from heightened porosity and friability to enhanced durability. Consequently, conserving limestone poses a multifaceted challenge, necessitating tailor-made restoration approaches.
Common issues in limestone restoration
What are the problems that you face when restoring limestone ?
Restoring limestone presents a range of common challenges that require careful consideration. A crucial initial step is understanding the intended purpose and location of the artifact, as the restoration approach differs significantly for instance between indoor sculptures and outdoor structures. Limestone in the Maastricht quarry; while it may not initially possess optimal properties, a calcification reaction post-quarry is necessary to eliminate moisture and enhance its strength and stability.The material's water content also plays a role, affecting its ease of carving scultpures. Conservation efforts parallel this, whereas dealing with a powdery surface entails distinct techniques from those used on a smooth, solid one. Kate reinforces that « Limestone is just an umbrella term ». This stone can vary a lot texture, color and chemical properties, affecting the approach taken to restore it.
Current solutions
What are the current techniques used to restore limestone ?
Modern technologies for limestone restoration primarily address cleaning and consolidation. Cleaning involves ethically delicate removal of non-original materials, especially challenging when a crust has grown onto the original surface, creating an indistinct interface. When deposits such as coatings exist, a clearer interface can be targeted. In consolidation, an adhesive must penetrate and solidify crumbly stone. Here, considerations include material type, flow properties, and bonding capabilities of the consolidant. Contemporary cleaning methods range from mechanical means, such as scalpels, to laser techniques that ablate material, particularly effective for dark surfaces; though, caution is needed as thermal impacts can yellow surfaces, an issue more important in white limestone than yellow sandstone.
Not only that, Kate reinforces that “The contextual aspect is very important “. For instance, commonly, a fluid-to-solid glue is injected, solidifying the bond between both sides. However, it's important to note that the adhesive's properties often differ from those of the stones and in certain cases, excessive strength can prove detrimental. For adhesives, a controlled breakage ability is preferred over matching the original strength. Furthermore, considering the exposure of the stone pieces is vital. This becomes especially evident in sculptures, where the forces exerted on the top pieces vary from those on the bottom ones.
Legal factors can also impact conservation strategies, especially concerning outdoor monuments due to stringent regulations preventing airborne particle dispersion. To address this, innovative solutions like gel plasters are employed for material compression. Adapting restoration approaches to account for these challenges and advancements ensures effective preservation and restoration of limestone artifacts.
Consequently, a quest for novel techniques persists. Kate mentions that there should be a focus on « What science can give to art rather than what art needs from science » .
The place of synthetic biology in cultural restoration
Could you envision synthetic biology playing a role in restoring cultural buildings ?
Synthetic biology, while a novel field in conservation, holds very promising results. It could introduce a new dimension by creating adaptable materials that seamlessly integrate with cultural artifacts. Unlike unwanted organic materials like algae or mold, synthetic biological components could serve specific purposes in conservation.
The allure of this project lies in its capacity to offer multifunctional solutions, extending beyond the realm of art. It opens up avenues for materials that possess diverse capabilities and applications. Kate says « This is why this project is fascinating, because you are designing something that has multiple functions and possibilities, not just in one field ».
A local significance
What is the significance of limestone in Maastricht? "Limestone and Maastricht go hand in hand."
Having resided in the Netherlands for a decade, Kate has observed a distinct contrast in building techniques between Maastricht and the northern regions. While clay stones and red bricks are common up north, Maastricht's architectural landscape is characterized by the prevalent use of limestone sourced from quarries in Belgium and transported to the Limburg province via the river. Notably, the City Hall showcases two distinct limestone varieties but also many of the Limburg houses. Limestone quarries stand as significant tourist attractions, deeply ingrained in the local fabric. As Kate summarized it “Limestone and Maastricht go hand in hand".
What we learned from this interview and how we integrated it in our project
Kate highlighted some of the pressing challenges in limestone conservation bringing awareness on what issued we should prioritize when preserving this type of stone. We learned about the importance of creating a scaffold that is mechanically strong yet not rigid, as excessive rigidity can potentially lead to further breaks and damage. This insight guided us in developing a suitable DNA origami lattice that can effectively support the mineralization process without compromising the structural integrity of the stone. It helped us decide on the octahedral shape that is mechanically and thermodynamically stable, as well as choosing a suitable distance between these shapes that allows for flexibility while maintaining the desired structure.
Moreover, the interview shed light on the potential of our engineered bacteria in wood conservation, showcasing the broader applicability of our project's outcomes. This perspective has inspired us to explore future possibilities and expand our project's scope to address other conservation challenges beyond limestone.
Additionally, the interview emphasized the importance of education and collaboration with stakeholders. Conservation efforts impact us all, and by involving various stakeholders, including conservation institutes, experts, and the general public, we can collectively work towards preserving our cultural heritage and environmental treasures. It reinforced our belief that successful conservation solutions require collaborative efforts and interdisciplinary approaches, where the worlds of science and cultural heritage converge to create lasting positive change. As our collaboration with SRAL deepens, we are grateful for the insights and support we received from an expert in the field. Kate's interest in our project's approach and potential contribution has further motivated us to strive for excellence and ensure our work aligns with the actual needs of conservation experts and the wider art community.
Interview with Massimiliano Simons
Location: Faculty of Science and Engineering - Maastricht
Date: 5th October 2023
Interviewee: Massimiliano Simons
Introduction
Our project SublimeStone involves the application of a module containing genetically modified organisms onto architectural monuments, therefore we have encountered numerous ethical considerations. Consequently, we arranged an interview with an expert in the field, Massimiliano Simons, an Assistant Professor in Philosophy of Technology, to engage in an interview, exploring both the ethical aspects of our project and the broader ethical landscape within the domain of synthetic biology.
This interaction has provided us with valuable insights into the integration of ethical frameworks within our project. We strongly believe, that discussing such topics with experts can greatly influence the development of the project.
Background on Massimiliano Simons:
Massimiliano Simons holds the position of Assistant Professor specialising in Philosophy of Technology in Maastricht University. His academic research primarily revolves around the philosophical examination of synthetic biology delving into inquiries such as “How is synthetic biology an example for changing science practices". He also explores questions concerning the role of a scientists or biologists within the social framework. Massimiliano’s current research involves not only synthetic biology, but also nanotechnologies, robotics or AI and how do they all relate to each other. He emphasises his interest on evolving paradigms within the field of science and exploration of new methodologies.
Ethical Concerns
What ethical concerns are arising in the field in synthetic biology and genetic engineering?
Ethical concerns in synthetic biology are especially prevalent in aspects such as biosafety and biosecurity. It is imperative to consistently acknowledge or consider potential mishaps, whether intentional or inadvertent, as Massimiliano states. In certain instances the consequences of not properly addressing these concerns can be severe. Nonetheless, the ethical dimension of synthetic biology extends beyond biosafety and biosecurity.
Yet another aspect that was emphasised by the interviewee was fairness, particularly in the context of the societal impact of synthetic biology and the equitable access to emerging technologies. More specifically, who would have the availability to those products and how the utilisation of them will change or influence already existing inequalities. Moreover, there is a fine line, as stated by numerous philosophers, also mentioned by Massimiliano, between genetic engineering or synthetic biology research and the ethical notion of “playing God". Nonetheless, this aspect is often dismissed due to religious reasoning, which is not always objective.
However, as the interviewee explained, it is noteworthy that this perspective still maintains its influence, which was determined by several surveys and analysed by statistic experts. Massimiliano considers that argument as counter-factual, as belief in a divine entity would be a prerequisite for its validity. The reason for this paradigm being so prevalent might be that synthetic biology and genetic engineering often deal with the distinguishing the fundamentals of life (nature vs technology).
In the field of current philosophy of technology it is still not clear how to make certain distinctions between objects and alive things. The general public might worry whether the scientists are making the right choices. Another aspect that certainly plays a role is subjectivity. He states that the general distress regarding those aspects comes from looking at the bigger picture. Massimiliano’s answer to those concerns is that synthetic biology and genetic engineering, more commonly do not change distinctions in the fundamentals of life, as they’re working on the smaller scales.
Shifting the perspective
How would this shift of conditions statements influence the science and the world?
Massimiliano is convinced that the change and the specific impact of switching the perspective would still be fully dependent on the product. He speculates about a future within which it would be possible to own personal biotechnologies or customised genetic engineering modules in one’s own home.
However, he continues, certain inquiries would arise about how life would change if there was a greater accessibility to those technologies. Â Nonetheless, he underscores that the transformative potential of this accessibility remains significantly contingent upon the attributes of the specific technology at hand.
Strength and Weaknesses
Based the explanation of our project, what do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of implementing it?
One of the main strengths of the project is its specificity and localisation. In other words, the topic and the problem the team is working on resolving is clearly specified, and not too broad. As Massimiliano states, in comparison to some of other previous or competing teams, our objective is clear, therefore making it more feasible.
In consideration of the weaknesses of the project, interviewee bring up the kill-switch. As he mentions, it is imperative to consider what would happen to the bacteria after utilisation and in case of unintentional proliferation.
It was also suggested to take a closer look on the financial side of this endeavour. It is crucial to determine whether there are existing cost-effective, yet still viable techniques before incorporating genetically modified organisms into artistic structures. He emphasises this point as certain projects encounter termination as a consequence of low engagement or interest from the stakeholders, due to affordability in comparison to different methodologies.
As a collective team our foremost concern revolved around potential reactions of church authorities, who oversee religious structures, to the introduction of genetically modified organisms onto these buildings. Fortunately, Massimiliano relived our worries, raising the salient point that religious perception on synthetic biology can vary between different types of religions. Consequently, their stance might not necessarily be sceptical about the final product, which had a real life background as the interactions we had so far were not negative. Moreover, as Massimiliano states, our project does not change the natural environments. This approach is likely to garner greater support, as it preserves the existing surroundings.
Another pressing issue we deliberated upon related to moral considerations and the necessity to explore the ethics associated with such solutions. Along with out interviewee we discussed the potential consequences a successful restoration of limestone monuments would have on societal perception of these artistic structures. Prospectively, the monuments could loose on their societal value or even respect. The perception on the structures themselves might drastically change after putting on them genetically modified organisms.
Moreover, before applying the final product it would be imperative to hire or collaborate with a person whose expertise revolves around art or building restoration due to specific differences between various types of monuments.
Lastly, Massimiliano mentions the artistic importance of the cracks in buildings. He speculates about their role in the overall aesthetic of the structures. In some cases the cracks may be emphasising the character of the monuments. What would happen if the cracks were to be fixed? It might change both the actual looks and the perception on them.
Nonetheless after little consideration interviewee comes up with a solution. He suggests that bacteria ought to be put into the deeper cracks, leaving the smaller cracks on the outside. This approach addresses both structural concerns and the preservation of artistic aesthetic. However this solution would still require much consideration and possible changes in the module.
The perception of the public
What reactions the public might have for using DNA as a building material?
There might be little concern of the process itself. Typically, the public's response is dependent on the influence of social media and advertising campaigns. Resistance against GMO’s is not unprecedented, particularly in the context of emerging synthetic biology technologies in the conservation field.
Nonetheless, our interviewee emphasises the difference our module holds in comparison to ones integrating genetically modified organisms into natural environments. These types of projects often face stronger resistance from the general public. Therefore, people could be even more inclined to support our endeavour, potentially expressing interest in its integration within their own homes.
Following this discussion, ways for possible development were brought up. Massimiliano speculated about various possibilities for our project to be implemented. He suggested considering a way to integrate out module in the building stage of the structures, therefore creating a self-reconstructing structure.
Summarizing this part of the discussion, Massimiliano reiterates the possibility of protest from certain quarters. However, in our specific case, he perceives this likelihood as relatively small.
Contribution to art and science industries
What do you think our project contribute to art and science industries?
Massimiliano answers that specific fields like biological design and biologically inspired arts might be influenced. Our project would certainly have an impact on further merging these industries.
Nevertheless, it is imperative to acknowledge that our concept is not entirely novel, and thus, our efforts alone are not a sole reason for a radicalisation in the field, as the convergence of these areas has already been in motion. Â He states that our current times are the point in history when art and science get together.
Additionally, he adds, our endeavour could play a role in demystifying genetically modified organisms to the general public, and possibly in getting people accustomed to GMOs applied in daily situations.
Possible adapations and improvements
As an expert, what would you change about our project’s approach?
In this context, Massimiliano advocates for increased engagement with ethics specialists, recognizing the importance of ethical considerations in the context of our project.
Furthermore, he also mentions the expansion of human practices aspect, possibly by organising meeting with stakeholders to introduce and advertise our project in the industry.
Before making last remarks on this topic, he praises the idea of the project, mentioning the specificity of addressed problem and the influence it will have on the local communities (in Maastricht).
Thus, he proposes to provide more information on the significance of limestone in culture, specifically emphasising its role in Maastricht, Limburg and presenting it to the public for greater understanding of the problem. In summary, Massimiliano advises an expanded outreach to engage with the broader public.
Last remarks
Do you have any last remarks that you would like to mention?
Massimiliano emphasises the importance of the relation between society and technology. He suggests considering already existing norms and views the public has on monuments. He places particular emphasis on the potential of our technology in reshaping and altering people's perceptions in this context.
Summary
In essence, our commitment to human practices has been integral to the success and development of our iGEM project, ensuring ethical, social, and legal integrity troughout our project.
In our iGEM journey, informing and engaging with the general public has been of the upmost importance. By conducted human practices, we were able to deeply reflect on the different dimensions of the project, as well as educating the population, allowing for responsible synthetic biology research. We did not stop at the laboratory door; we took our knowledge to schools, where we shared our project's significance and sparked curiosity in the younger generations. Hosting conferences in Maastricht University allowed us to disseminate our findings to students and professors in various scientific fields, fostering critical discussions. Furthermore, we wrote several blogs for the biotechnologie.nl website, reaching a broader audience and making the technology behind our project accessible. We also used social media as a tool for human practices, sharing informative and accessible content about our project but also synthetic biology. To effectively reach diverse social groups, we tailored our communication, using appropriate language and context for each audience, ensuring that our message resonated with all.
Grøntoft, T. (2017). Conservation-restoration costs for limestone façades due to air pollution in Krakow, Poland, meeting European target values and expected climate change. Sustainable Cities and Society. 29. 169-177. 10.1016/j.scs.2016.12.007. ↩︎
European Commission. (2011). GMO legislation. Food Safety. https://food.ec.europa.eu/plants/genetically-modified-organisms/gmo-legislation_en ↩︎
Ministerie van Economische Zaken, Landbouw en Innovatie. (2023). Laws and rules for biotechnology. Biotechnology | Government.nl. https://www.government.nl/topics/biotechnology/rules-on-the-use-of-genetically-modified-crops ↩︎