• Overview

  • Integrated Human Practices

  • Entrepreneur

  • Education


We had a chance to visit Synthetic Biology Research Center of KRIBB and introduce our project idea to Dr. Dahee Lee. After presentation of our team, he commented to our project, pointing some flaws of our genetic circuit design. However he also encouraged us to keep elaborating our idea in the same time. One of his comments related to human practices is that Korean legistration system practically does not allow GMO functioning outside of lab. However, as he also has done so far, he said that we should not stop our development in open system.

Likewise, we realized during the iGEM competition schedule that limitations on imagination due to the political and legal issues were one of the biggest reason hindering not only frequent advent of bio-industrial startups, but also commmercialization of a new product from major companies. Therefore, we felt the need to examine all human-related issues before taking further steps to turn the prototype into a product. We found out absurdities of current circumstances and upcoming reform movement by governments. As this reformation needs constant public attention for itself to solve problems with less side-effects, we decided to inform this on our wiki.

The New Era of Korean Biotechnology

Recently, South Korea took into account the 120 fields previously selected as "Key Technologies" in the previous science and technology policy, the "4th Basic Plan for Science and Technology”, and newly selected 50 specific technologies in 12 fields as "National Strategic Technologies.” The '5th Basic Plan for Science and Technology' was established to foster the relevant technology for five years from 2023 to 2027.

Among them, synthetic biology was also selected as a specific technology within the field of biotechnology, along with infectious disease vaccine and treatment technology, gene and cell therapy technology, and digital health data analysis and utilization technology. These technologies represent South Korea's strategic efforts to gain leadership in various aspects, including trade, security, and industrial development.

This new policy exhibits distinctive characteristic compared to before.

National Strategic Technologies
(5th Basic Plan)
Key Technologies
(4th Basic Plan)
Current Policy
Concept Technologies critical for South Korea's leadership: Supply chain & and trade (economic security), national security (diplomacy and defense), and emerging industries (future innovation) Technologies that require national-level prioritized investment and nurturing due to their high economic growth potential, job creation, and potential to enhance the quality of life, thus contributing to both economic and social value Consideration of external factors alongside internal ones
Selection Assessment by industry and research experts based on strategic importance, potential for competitiveness, and urgency of government support, followed by inter-agency policy discussions and coordination Basing the selection of candidate technologies on the previous 3rd basic plan's 120 national strategic technologies while incorporating the latest technological trends and developments Incorporating experts' opinions within the field more actively and responding promptly to technological trends
Technology Approximately 10 technologies to focus and protect from the perspective of global technological hegemony 120 Key Technologies (11 Major Categories, 43 Subcategories) Selection and Focus

In this regard, in order for the development of synthetic biology in South Korea, both external factors and expert opinions must be considered. In addition, it should reflect and address the shortcomings of the previous biotechnology development policies.

Therefore, the iGEM UIncheon HP team aims to present improvements in biotechnology・industry from a comprehensive perspective for the development of synthetic biology in Korea.

Simultaneously, we intend to explain the value of our biocontainment system and how it can have a positive impact on synthetic biology in Korea through a public perception survey.

Acknowledgement of Korean Government

In 2017, the Ministry of Science and ICT announced a plan to innovate the overall bio-economy through the "3rd Basic Plan for Biotechnology Promotion: Science and Technology-Based Bioeconomic Innovation Strategy 2025" in order to respond to aging, infectious diseases, food security, climate change, and in anticipation of the large job creation performance compared to investment in the small scale of the domestic bio-industry. In this report, the need for the development of synthetic biology was mentioned for the first time, citing the establishment of a bio innovation platform as one of the key initiatives, and expected to strengthen research capabilities through this. However, because the scope of policy support at the time was too broad and synthetic biology was recognized as the underlying technology field of biotechnology, development was delayed due to being pushed back from the priority list.

This government attitude appears in the "Preliminary Feasibility Study Report for the 2021 BioFoundry Construction and Utilization Technology Development Project." The investigation report affirmed the promotion of efficient research in synthetic biology through the introduction of bio-foundry facilities, its national strategic importance, and the urgency of the issue due to external factors, but it was not directly related to or had a low contribution to solving the problem of the long-term and high-cost structure of biotechnology development. As a result, it was concluded that the project would not be implemented as it was judged to be insufficient in terms of scientific, technological, policy, and economic feasibility. In particular, in the case of the rapid development of the COVID-19 vaccine presented as a necessity for business promotion, the contribution of synthetic biology through bio-foundry was interpreted as downplayed, and the U.S. FDA's emergency use approval was analyzed as a major reason for success.

However, this callous perception was overturned in the 2022 Synthetic Biology Technology Evaluation Report prepared by the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Evaluation and Planning. The report acknowledged the contribution of synthetic biology to the development of mRNA vaccines and noted its technological, economic, and social impacts and ripple effects. The report cited cases of COVID-19 vaccine development, the high possibility of achieving leading country status in the field, and public concerns about the creation of artificial life as reasons for writing the report. The benefits that the government hopes for through synthetic biology are as follows:

Industrial structure transformation. Expectations to improve the existing bio industry's price competitiveness, speed, scale, etc.
Economic benefits throughout the R&D process, along with the final product.
Promote new industries by realizing high-speed, high-volume, and low-cost bioresearch, thereby expecting to create high-income and high-quality jobs.
By fostering the biochemistry industry, resilience can be secured in the supply chain of petrochemical-based raw materials and basic materials.
Strengthening national competitiveness. By building K-Biofoundry by converging world-class BT·IT technology and ICT·manufacturing capabilities, the influx of excellent research personnel will enable innovation in bio-manufacturing and fostering research institutes and companies with advanced technology.
Increasing social acceptance. The public's positive perception leads to increased consumption of synthetic biology products, serving as a foundation for rapid growth of related industries and positively accepting the government's policy to promote the synthetic biology industry.
Advancements in biosecurity technology. As interest in dual use and biosecurity grows, synthetic biology technology used in countermeasures technology develops.

In addition to the benefits brought about by the technology itself, external factors have also been considered as significant reasons for government support. Since the late 2010s, amid increasing geopolitical conflicts aimed at asserting leadership in international politics, countries possessing key technologies for strategic materials like semiconductors have been exerting influence in the global supply chain. They have been forming technology alliances not only to gain a competitive edge in trade but also to achieve political objectives closely related to security, leading to the rise of exclusive protectionism and economic blocs.

While the initial development of synthetic biology was driven by substantial budget investments in relevant institutions of major countries, there has been a shift in policy toward fostering companies that can exercise leadership in this field. This transition has accelerated during the pandemic period. As a result, the technology has matured to the point where companies can generate profits through synthetic biology. However, concerns have arisen about market monopolies by a few companies, prompting vigilance regarding the technological sovereignty of synthetic biology.

Nevertheless, despite their substantial initial investments, major countries are still engaging in discussions for the establishment of international industry standards and norms rather than emphasizing monopolistic positions.

Standardization regulations status
Global standards
ISO/TR 3985:2021 Data Publication — Preliminary consideration and concepts
ISO 5058-1:2021 Genome editing
ISO 20395:2019 Requirements for evaluating the performance of quantification methods for nucleic acid target sequences — qPCR and dPCR
ISO 20397-1:2022 Massively parallel sequencing — Part 1: Nucleic acid and library preparation
ISO 20397-2:2021 Massively parallel sequencing — Part 2: Quality evaluation of sequencing data
ISO 20691:2022 Requirements for data formatting and description in the life sciences
National standardization USA Standardization of mAb reference material (The NISTmAb) from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, standardization of measurement methods for genetically minimal cell models, and the design of RNA circuits for operating cells as bio-computers.
UK BSI (British Standards Institution) released PAS 246:2015, titled "Use of standards for digital biological information in the design, construction and description of a synthetic biological system guide." Additionally, the UK Centre for Engineering Biology and Metrology Standards was established in 2018.
Cross-border standardization collaboration. GBA(Global Biofoundry Alliance) Enhancing collaboration and communication among biofoundries to collectively address technical, operational, and other challenges.
SBOL(Synthetic Biology Open Language) Proposal of data standards for sharing and distributing genetic circuit designs among software platforms.

Due to these external factors, the South Korean government has started investing in synthetic biology to counter the dominance of foreign leading companies in technology. This proactive approach aims to create a favorable environment for emerging companies in international norms, standardization, and patent rights competition.

Current BioIndustry Ecosystem in Korea

We conducted a comprehensive analysis of the bio-industry ecosystem in the Republic of Korea, encompassing industries, markets, technological advancements, policies, and regulations. Additionally, in recognition of the importance of public understanding and support for transitioning to a better industrial structure, we also conducted a survey on public perception of GMOs. Through these efforts, we aim to identify areas for improvement in the current industrial structure in South Korea and introduce the government's corresponding development strategies. Furthermore, we will present our team's recommendations for industrial advancement through synthetic biology.

S. Korea Bio-industry

  • R&D investment scale & Technology level
  • (100 million ₩) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
    State Investment 34,946 35,494 36,717 41,253 47,766
    Private Investment 27,165 30,907 39,545 47,909 55,988
    % Private 44% 47% 52% 54% 54%
    National Research and Development Program Investigation and Analysis Report (Ministry of Science and ICT/KISTEP)

    Private investment in the field of biotechnology has seen a sharp increase since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, surpassing government investment. As of 2021, out of the national R&D budget of 25.1 trillion won, the biotech budget accounted for 4.77 trillion won (19%), making it the second-highest in terms of proportion after the IT sector, which had 4.9 trillion won (19.5%).

    (2020) Comparison with a leader Comparison with a leader
    Technology domain Level(%) Gap year Technology domain Level(%) Gap year
    Identification of Disease Causes Using Genomic Information 70 3 Development of Biocompatible Materials 81 2.5
    Gene Therapy 80 3 Disease Diagnosis Biochips 80 2.5
    Stem Cell Function Regulation 70 4 Bio and Biomedical Engineering-based Artificial Organs 80 3
    Utilization of Stem Cells 85 2 Analysis and Application of Systems Biology and Synthetic Biology 75 3
    Personalized Drug Development 70 6 Identification and Treatment/Prevention of Brain-Neurological Disorders 75 2.5
    Optimization of Intelligent drug delivery 85 2.5 Observation and Regulation of Brain Signals 70 4
    Biomarkers 80 4 Development of Resistant and High-Functionality Varieties 80 5
    Overcoming Infertility and Sterility 85 3 Useful Gene and Genetic Resource Development 80 4.3
    Response to New and Variant Infectious Diseases 80 3 Control of Animal Diseases 80 4
    Efficacy and Mechanisms of Traditional Korean Medicine 81 3 Creation of Food Value 80 3
    Integration of Medical Imaging 67.5 4.3 Bio and Biomass Energy Conversion 78 4
    2020 Technology Assessment -KISTEP

    When comparing the technology assessment in 2020 to that of 2018, it was observed that the technological gap between leading nations has been steadily decreasing. However, it is now evaluated that a strategic transformation is needed for leading countries in technology rather than merely catching up. In fact, there has been a tendency for technology development to lag in leading sectors compared to the previous technology assessment. As another example, South Korea's ranking in SCIE paper publications in the field of biotechnology has remained in the top 10, and the number of U.S. patents registered has decreased from 5th place in 2019 to 6th place in 2021.

  • Manpower statistics in Korean bio-industry
  • bio-industry manpower in 2022
    Shortage Number of people Shortage Percentage
    Total 521 6.3
    Office management 155 6.5
    Research development 190 6.3
    Tech / Production 170 6.8
    Etc. 6 2

    There are concerns about the quantitative and qualitative shortages in cultivating master's and doctoral-level talents in the bio-industry. According to the "Biotech and Health Talent Development Plan" released by the Korea Health Industry Development Institute, it is estimated that by 2027, an additional workforce of approximately 108,700 will be needed. However, during this period, the expected workforce entering the industry is only around 34,000, highlighting a significant gap.

    Furthermore, according to the survey on the "Quantitative and Qualitative Mismatch of Human Resources in the Bio-pharmaceutical Field" conducted by the Chemical and Bio-industry Human Resources Development Committee, "failure to hire due to a lack of job competency" is identified as the most serious cause, accounting for 40.1% of the shortage of bio-industry personnel. This underscores the need to address issues such as a lack of competency in cutting-edge technologies like digital biotechnology and the disconnect between educational programs and industry demands.

  • Current circumstance of bio-industrial market
  • In 2021, biotechnology production reached 48 trillion won, reflecting an average annual growth rate of 10% from 2017 to 2021. However, in terms of size compared to the global market, it accounted for only 1.9%, indicating a relatively small share. Furthermore, it's essential to diversify the industry, especially given that pharmaceuticals and medical devices dominate, making up approximately 80% of the sector. Additionally, there is a need to reduce the high dependency on foreign sources for raw pharmaceutical materials.

    On the other hand, mid-sized pharmaceutical companies in South Korea have been diversifying their new drug development pipelines. Their global market share in the early-stage pipeline, which was 2% in 2015, increased significantly to 5.4% in 2020, marking a 2.7-fold growth. Furthermore, large corporations are increasingly entering the biotechnology sector. The approval of clinical trial plans has been on the rise, with 714 approvals in 2019, 799 in 2020, and 842 in 2021, indicating continuous growth in the field of bio-services, including contract manufacturing experiments and other related activities.

  • Venture capital & Technology export
  • Pharm Diagnostic Devices Agriculture Food Chemicals Environment Energy Support Services Other
    Corporate 613 280 248 557 418 105 15 339 206
    IPO 79 26 5 13 15 1 1 44 21
    Time to IPO 9.1 10.3 10.6 13.4 7.6 7 4 10.7 10.9
    Average Revenue 88.1 69.1 50.4 73.5 63.6 58.5 48.7 49.8 56
    Net Profit/Sales(%) -37.8 -5.5 -4.9 -0.1 -1.3 -15.1 16.0 -41.6 -22.1

    In 2021, biotechnology production reached 48 trillion won, reflecting an average annual growth rate of 10% from 2017 to 2021. However, in terms of size compared to the global market, it accounted for only 1.9%, indicating a relatively small share. Furthermore, it's essential to diversify the industry, especially given that pharmaceuticals and medical devices dominate, making up approximately 80% of the sector. Additionally, there is a need to reduce the high dependency on foreign sources for raw pharmaceutical materials.

    On the other hand, mid-sized pharmaceutical companies in South Korea have been diversifying their new drug development pipelines. Their global market share in the early-stage pipeline, which was 2% in 2015, increased significantly to 5.4% in 2020, marking a 2.7-fold growth. Furthermore, large corporations are increasingly entering the biotechnology sector. The approval of clinical trial plans has been on the rise, with 714 approvals in 2019, 799 in 2020, and 842 in 2021, indicating continuous growth in the field of bio-services, including contract manufacturing experiments and other related activities.

    As of 2021, technology exports in the field of biotechnology (including life sciences, agriculture, forestry, fisheries, and healthcare) were at approximately 1.05 billion dollars. This marks an increase of more than double when compared to technology exports in 2017, which were at 400 million dollars.

    Concerning these statistical data, a problem can be defined that even though the level of competition is sufficiently elaborated, It can be seen that the difficulty of survival for startups during the Death Valley period is very high, hindering the emergence of new companies. Therefore, for new companies to be derived, as well as financial and policy support, the government needs to support reproductivity and in silico estimation by public biological resources or data that can shorten the research and development period.

GM Circumstances in S.Korea

  • Interview with a domestic GMO company
  • Trends in Genetically Modified Organisms in Korea
  • We investigated whether Korea has commercialized using genetically modified organisms or imported or exported them from other countries, or whether we have voluntarily cultivated or raised organisms using genetically modified organisms and exported them to other countries.
    Except for Korea and Japan, commercial cultivation is being carried out and exports are also actively carried out to other countries.[8] In the case of Japan, it was not commercially grown or exported unless there was demand.
    In Korea, commercial cultivation or export is prohibited due to awareness and laws regarding LMOs.[8]

    Approval Culture Income Export
    Korea Total 483 cases doesn't exist Total 165.2 ton doesn't exist
    U.S. Total 170 cases 72.45 million ha cultivated Total 1.56 million ton Total 47.3 billion exports
    Europe MON810Bt Corn Approved 67,000 ha cultivated 61 million ton doesn't exist
    Argentina Total 67 cases 26 million ha cultivated some food imports 40% of total volume exported
    Canada Total 71 cases 11.28 million ha cultivated some food imports 90% of canola is exported
    Japan Total 190 cases doesn't exist some food imports doesn't exist
    China Total 60 cases 3.18 million ha 100 million ton corn exports
    figure 7. Number of cases of LMO import and export or cultivation and approval in each country
  • International Trends in Genetically Modified Organisms
  • While looking into trends in the use of genetically modified organisms in Korea, we learned that Korea imports from other countries but does not cultivate or export them for commercial purposes.
    To find out, we investigated trends in the use of genetically modified organisms in overseas countries.
    The United States, Canada, Argentina, Japan, and China all grow GM foods, and Japan does not make or export GM crops for commercial purposes.[8]

    Research includes GM corn with pest resistance and anti-oxidizing properties, GM microorganisms, and pharmaceutical production.
    Although the number of GM crops tested has decreased since the beginning, various GM crops are still tested.
    Commercially, the USDA APHIS (United States Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service) approved 170 GM crops, and the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approved GM salmon and GM pigs for food or medical use (organ transplant using GM pigs).
    The United States grows GM crops such as corn, soybeans, cotton, canola, and alfalfa, with total exports worth $14 billion.

    In Canada, research is being conducted on canola and corn, and recently, research on barley borage, camelina, poplar, soybeans, sataum, and white mustard.
    For commerce, plants and foods with new characteristics are approved. The Food Inspection Agency approved 12 cases for environmental release, 14 cases for feed, and the Ministry of Health approved 14 cases for food safety.
    Canada is experimentally cultivating canola, soybeans, corn, and sugar beets, and exports them to the United States, China, Japan, and the EU.

    Argentina is the only country that has received approval for cultivation of GM wheat, and is currently conducting research on wheat, soybeans, and corn using the sunflower-derived HB4 gene introduced into wheat.
    As of September 2022, 67 have been approved for commercial import, and GM corn is being exported to over 50 countries.

    Although test cultivation is taking place in the EU, it is difficult to commercialize GM crops in a short period of time.
    GM crops approved in the EU include MON810 Bt corn, and cotton, soybeans, rapeseed, sugarcane, and microorganisms have also been approved. MON810 Bt corn is grown in Spain and Portugal.

    (Unit: 1000ha) Total : 2018 Total : 2019 Total : 2020 Total : 2021 Total : 2022
    GM soybeans 2105 1861 1642 1718 1720
    GM sugar beet 19 17 17 18 18
    GM corn 1303 1346 1280 1276 1317
    GM crops sown area 12198 11367 10928 11577 11281
    GM canola 8771 8143 7990 8565 8226
    total 24396 22734 21857 23154 22562
    figure7-2. This table shows the GM food test cultivation area in Europe by year.

    Japan is actively conducting GM research with the introduction of gene scissors, but is not pursuing commercialization. As of December 2022, the total number of approvals for importing GM crops is 198.
    Except for GM roses and GM Phalaenopsis orchids, Japan imports other crops and does not export any crops.

    China is conducting research and development with securing food security as its top priority.
    As of December 2022, there are a total of 60 GM crops. China grows corn but imports some.

  • LMO Legal system
  • LMO law and system (Korean vs U.S.)

    We compared LMO-related systems in the United States, which actually test-cultivate and export for commercial purposes, to understand why LMOs or GMOs cannot be commercially produced or exported due to negative perceptions or laws and must rely only on imports.
    The United States' LMO law is handled only by each ministry, and the approval process is also simple.[8] However, in the case of Korea, the approval process is carried out through the central government and then to each ministry, so many problems arise due to the central government's insufficient response and the process is also complicated.[8] In order to solve these problems, the process must first proceed with each expert or each ministry, rather than with the central government.

    Comparison US Korea
    State The size of GMO test cultivation in the United States is approximately 72.45 million hectares, making it the largest grower of GM crops in the world. Korea is amending and amending laws with the goal of preventing harm to the human body and the environment caused by genetically modified organisms, improving people's lives, and promoting international cooperation by establishing and implementing an effective safety management plan.
    Problem The United States approved GM rapeseed with plant resistance for commercial use and conducted tests to use it in North Dakota, but an incident occurred in which a large amount of it was leaked into the North Dakota environment. The zucchini pumpkin incident occurred on April 14, 2023, as documents related to LMO and GMO were passed through the central administrative agency and then delivered.
    Laws Each U.S. department, USDA, FDA, and EPA, has guidelines and laws, and they are implemented based on these laws. Korea's LMO or GMO-related laws are implemented based on the Act on Transnational Movement of Genetically Modified Organisms, etc. A fine will be imposed if this law is violated.
    System This is a system in which documents are submitted to each ministry in charge of the use of a specific LMO or GMO and approval is obtained after going through a separate approval process with that ministry. When documents related to GMO or LMO import or export are submitted, they are first submitted to the central administrative agency and the contents are then delivered to each expert and ministry.
    figure 8. This table compares the differences in GMO laws and systems between the United States and Korea.
  • GMO Awareness
  • GMO Awareness and Attitudes (Korean)

    A survey was conducted in September 2023, targeting 182 Korean individuals for the purpose of recognizing Local Market Opportunities (LMO) within the country. The sample was divided based on their major fields of study as follows: 39 from the humanities and social sciences, 40 from the natural sciences, 86 from engineering, 14 from fine arts and physical education, and 3 from other disciplines. Among these, 17 individuals were found to be in professions related to the life sciences.

    figure 9-1. When conducting a survey, the occupation and major of the person surveyed
    figure 9-2. Survey on LMO perceptions

    Regarding awareness of LMO, 26% of respondents answered that they do not know, 45% responded that they have some knowledge and 29% responded that they are knowledgeable about LMO.

    Among the associated keywords related to genetically modified organisms (GMOs), 78 individuals (43%) responded with "food" as the most frequent term. Following that, "GMO" and "LMO" were mentioned by 37 individuals (20%), while 22 individuals (12%) expressed negative perceptions. Additionally, 22 individuals (12%) mentioned "innovative technology," 14 individuals (8%) mentioned "genetically modified animals," 2 individuals (1%) provided other opinions, and 7 individuals (4%) responded with "no opinion"

    figure 9-3. Survey of LMO Thoughts
    figure 9-4. Survey of LMO Importance

    In addition, the results of a survey on the necessity of LMO revealed that 114 individuals (63%) responded affirmatively, 8 individuals (4%) responded negatively, and 60 individuals (33%) expressed uncertainty. This suggests that there is a prevailing perception of the necessity of GMOs, but it is also evident that there is a lack of awareness and understanding about LMO.

    Among the 129 respondents who indicated that LMO are necessary, 93 individuals (72%) mentioned White Biotechnology as the area where LMO are most needed, while 23 individuals (18%) mentioned Red Biotechnology, and 13 individuals (10%) mentioned Green Biotechnology. This indicates that the response favoring the necessity of White Biotechnology is predominant at 72%. As a result, when it comes to essential fields of use for LMOs, White Biotechnology received the highest proportion of responses. However, in areas associated with genetically modified organisms, Green Biotechnology received the highest percentage of responses.

    figure 9-5. Survey of Essential bio fields
    figure 9-6.Survey of LMO concerns

    In the survey on concerns, 65% of the 182 respondents expressed safety as their primary concern, accounting for 118 individuals. Following that, 29 individuals (16%) indicated concerns about the potential for dual use (Dual Use), and 23 individuals (13%) mentioned worries about mutations.Among those who cited safety as a concern, 31% had awareness of LMOs, while among those concerned about dual use, 38% were aware of LMOs.

    GMO Awareness and Attitudes (Korean vs U.S.)

    Our HP team investigated the extent of awareness of LMOs in Korea and the awareness in the United States, where LMOs are open and a lot of research is being conducted, and what the differences were.
    When comparing American and Korean perceptions of GMOs, Korean and American citizens generally have a negative perception of GMOs due to safety and environmental concerns[9][12][13]. However, both the United States and Korea view the need for GMOs positively for reasons such as solving food problems, contributing to society, and profit.[9][12][13]

    Comparison US Korea
    Recognization Only 12% said they had seen about GMOs, and 45% said they had heard of them a little or at all. The number of people who are aware of LMO is decreasing as 2022 approaches.
    Understanding "In terms of their level of knowledge, 55% said they knew very little, 22% said they did not know at all, and the remaining 23% said they knew a little or well." Most people know a little bit, and only 1% know it in detail.
    Attitude American life science students are positive about GMO foods (63%), but 51% of American citizens are negative about GMOs. In Korea, GMO foods are viewed negatively in terms of food safety, and although they do not appear to be a major environmental problem, there is general concern about food problems using LMOs.
    Necessity A total of 136 U.S. citizens think positively about food supply and cheap GMO food, and a total of 110 people think it will cause side effects or environmental problems. Korean people view GMO foods positively because they can contribute to society and solve food problems.
    figure 10. Differences in perception between the United States and Korea

Nourish plan of Korean government and Our suggestion

Through analysis of Korean Biotechnolgy field, we found some characteristic problems to improve this study. First, uncertainty in R&D needs to be solved by improving the level of in silico prediction and standardization of each bioparts. Besides, the GMO legistration needs to be polished with more flexbilities, but securing sufficient biosafety level.

According to South Korea's 4th Biotechnology Promotion Basic Plan, main strategies and actions of each ministry are:

Main Strategies:

Expansion of Research and Development: Expanding research and development in the field of biotechnology, exploring new opportunities through innovative technologies in addition to existing areas.

Enhancement of Global Competitiveness: Strengthening the international competitiveness of domestic biotechnology companies and enhancing their presence in global markets.

Ethics and Safety Management Enhancement: Ensuring the ethical and safe use of biotechnology, improving relevant laws and regulations to increase safety.

Enhancement of Inter-Industry Collaboration: Promoting collaboration between the biotechnology sector and other industries to foster mutually beneficial partnerships.

Actions by Each Ministry:

Ministry of Science and ICT (MSIT): Supports research and development in the biotechnology field and expands the industry's infrastructure.

Ministry of Health and Welfare (MOH): Develops healthcare and medical policies related to biotechnology and strengthens the safety of bio-pharmaceuticals.

Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA): Applies biotechnology to agriculture and livestock sectors and supports the production and distribution of bio-agricultural products.

Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy (MOTIE): Enhances the global competitiveness of the biotechnology industry and develops policies to support bio-industry-related companies.

Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT): Improves biotechnology-related infrastructure in the areas of roads, transportation, and the environment, and promotes bio-energy and environmental projects.

Through these strategies and actions, South Korea aims to stimulate growth and innovation in the biotechnology field and secure its competitiveness in the global market.

  • [1] Asia Pacific Synthetic Biology Market: Industry analysis and forecast (2022-2029). (2019, July 22). MAXIMIZE MARKET RESEARCH; Maximize Market Research Pvt Ltd.
  • [2] Research, & Markets ltd. (n.d.). China synthetic biology market 2019-2025. Retrieved October 8, 2023, from
  • [3] May. (n.d.). The rapid growth of synthetic biology in China - SynBioBeta. Retrieved October 8, 2023, from
  • [4] Research. (2023, July 10). Global Synthetic Biology market estimated to hit $77.5 billion by 2030: Synergy of AI and Synthetic Biology creates lucrative growth prospects. Research and Markets.
  • [5] Research, & Markets ltd. (n.d.). Synthetic biology - global strategic business report. Retrieved October 8, 2023, from
  • [6] 미-중 바이오 패권 경쟁, 중국이 앞서간다...합성생물학 압도. (2023, March 8). 핀포인트뉴스.
  • [7] 바이오패권 경쟁, 미국보다 중국이 우위? (2023, March 10). 청년의사.
  • [8] [KBCH브리핑] 제4차 유전자변형생물체 안전관리계획(2023~2027) 수립 시행(2023-15). (n.d.). Retrieved October 8, 2023, from
  • [9] 전효은.(2023, April 18).생명연,「2022년 유전자변형생물체 주요 통계」 발표. KRISS.
  • [10] 국가법령정보센터. (n.d.). Retrieved October 8, 2023, from
  • [11] Kennedy, B. (2020, November 11). Many publics around world doubt safety of genetically modified foods. Pew Research Center.
  • [12] Rathod, D., & Hedaoo, R. P. (2022). Assessment of knowledge and attitudes on genetically modified foods among students studying life sciences. Cureus, 14(12).
  • [13] Funk, C. (2020, March 18). About half of U.S. adults are wary of health effects of genetically modified foods, but many also see advantages. Pew Research Center.
  • [14] Sohn, S.-I., Pandian, S., Oh, Y.-J., Kang, H.-J., Ryu, T.-H., Cho, W.-S., Shin, E.-K., & Shin, K.-S. (2021). A review of the unintentional release of feral genetically modified rapeseed into the environment. Biology, 10(12), 1264.
  • [15] Hallman, W. K., Hebden, W. C., Aquino, H. L., Cuite, C. L., Lang, J. T., Hallman, W. K., Hebden, W. C., Aquino, H. L., Cuite, C. L., & Lang, J. T. (2003). Public perceptions of genetically modified foods: A national study of American knowledge and opinion. In The research reports. Unknown.