“Alone, we can do little, so little, together we can do so much.”
This year's Human Practices supports not only project improvement, but also implementation, entrepreneurship and our understanding of scientific development. Stakeholder's critical view of our ideas and their feedback helped us to optimize our project plan and solution design into one that is effective, feasible, and likely to be successful in each sector. Integrating feedback, values, and needs of relevant stakeholders is important to avoid blindness of engineers.
To produce a saRNA-based plant vaccine product, one needs to go through many steps and long efforts, from research and development to production. It starts with the R&D phase followed by securing IP, preclinical and clinical tests, production, legislation, and marketing. To understand the complete process of implementation and to be able to integrate the requirements of every phase for the design of our plant vaccine, we have consulted many experts. Taking inspiration from Team TU-Eindhoven 2022, we divided the fields covered by the experts we consulted into six categories: the need, the science, implementation, safety & ethics, laws & regulations, and business. Each field contributes to the problem and our solution from a different perspective, thereby leading to distinctive requirements for both our project plan and our solution design. We, therefore, bring together all sectors to make an impact on society, while at the same time we are being responsible and good for the world. For more information on which tools we use, open the sections below about the AREA framework and the Gibbs reflection cycle.
Tools
AREA framework
AREA stands for Anticipate, Reflect, Engage and Act. This framework was designed to modify research and innovation in response to societal issues. The framework is both systematic and iterative to allow for continuously flexible decision making between stakeholders and innovators with a view on ethical acceptability, sustainability and social desirability. For our project, it was important to work fluidly with the framework depending on the purpose of meetings and the progression of the project.
Anticipate
This section describes how we can analyze the economic, social, and environmental impacts further by supporting possible impacts and implications with other experts. This section is focused on the next steps we as a team need to take to further analyze or validate what we found during the project.
Reflect
In this section, we reflect on the purposes, motivations, and potential implications of engaging a specific stakeholder. Here we introduce the stakeholder we engaged with, we explain our previous findings, and we define why we think the stakeholder is relevant in the respective phase of the project. Moreover, we elaborate on the associated assumptions, questions, or dilemmas the purposes and motivations may bring.
Engage
This section summarizes the engagement and discussion with the stakeholders. Here, the main contribution of the experts to our project are discussed and the lessons we learned are evaluated.
Act
This section elaborates on how our team implemented the feedback received from the stakeholders. It is explained how the lessons we learned influenced the direction and design of our project and the innovation process itself. In terms of integrated HP at iGEM, this can be considered the most important section of the AREA framework.
Reflection tool
The reflection tool used is based on the Gibbs Reflective Cycle and functions as a useful extension of the AREA frameworks. It has been found to help people think clearly and systematically about learning situations. It encourages people to get a better understanding of the experience and teaches them how to improve next time. We made use of it to reflect on all the feedback and information gathered from different stakeholders to prioritize requirements and make well-informed decisions. These decisions shaped our project. Therefore, they are considered milestones we achieved during the design process.
Closing the loop
To close the loop between what is designed and what is desired, we had multiple conversations with the same stakeholder to discuss whether we integrated their feedback in the right way. Moreover, we tried to involve multiple stakeholders from the same field to create a broader opinion on our project design and to validate the advice of single stakeholders. The combination of multiple meetings with similar experts and literature studies enabled us to critically reflect on our design at each moment of the design process.
Talking to the world
Highly aware of the limitation of our view and the importance of global perspective, we talked to people from inside and outside China, in the hope of hearing the voice of stakeholders and other iGEMers as well as making ourselves heard. We saw great cultural differences between China and the western world, which should not be ignored since our final goal is making the world as a whole a better place.
Special thanks to Morningside Cultural China Scholars Program for providing the oppotunity to meet prestigious people across the world.
Stakeholder Brainstorm
Stakeholders' critical perspectives on our ideas and feedback have helped us to optimise our project plans and solution designs to be effective, feasible. For an innovation project, it is important to connect with enough stakeholders and get their suggestions and feedback to reconsider and make improvements in the project. Only then is it possible to produce a human-centred design.
Therefore, we did a stakeholder brainstorm after we had decided on a topic. Before the brainstorming session, we prepared a document to introduce the concept of stakeholders, the concept and rules of the brainstorming session and the intended objectives of the brainstorming session to the team. Thorough preparation ensured that our three activities ran smoothly and successfully.
We have compiled and visualised the final results of the Stakeholder Map and Mendelow matrix value analysis.
We have decided to focus on contacting High-Interest&Power stakeholders. At the same time, we will decide how often, for what purpose and how we work with different stakeholders depending on where they are in the matrix.
Public Survey 2023-04-02
We launched a survey on crop diseases control and synthetic biology. The target group of our questionnaire is mainly the general public. We post our questionnaires on international platforms like slack and Instagram, hoping to hear from outside of China. We received 176 answers from people from 4 continents and 5 countries, including China, Afghanistan, France, Anguilla and Chile.
Click here to see the questionnaire and the results.
GDPR Principles
We strictly followed the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). When processing data, we adhere to seven protection and accountability principles listed below:
(1) Lawfulness, fairness and transparency: Processing must be lawful, fair, and transparent to the data subject.
(2) Purpose limitation: You must process data for the legitimate purposes specified explicitly to the data subject when you collected it.
(3) Data minimization: You should collect and process only as much data as absolutely necessary for the purposes specified.
(4) Accuracy: You must keep personal data accurate and up to date.
(5) Storage limitation: You may only store personally identifying data for as long as necessary for the specified purpose.
(6) Integrity and confidentiality: Processing must be done in such a way as to ensure appropriate security, integrity, and confidentiality (e.g. by using encryption).
(7) Accountability: The data controller is responsible for being able to demonstrate GDPR compliance with all of these principles.
Results
How much crop yield do you think is lost each year by crop disease and pests?
In the seventh question, we asked, "How much crop yield do you think is lost each year by crop pests and diseases?" Among those who work or study in agriculture and rural areas, 14.29% of the respondents chose "40%-50%". Only 3.23% of those who were not working or studying in a relevant field correctly answered the question.
Are you satisfied with the effectiveness of current conventional pesticides(such as dichlorvos, methamidophos, methylparathion, methylphos, insecticide, Carbovir, glyphosate, etc.) in controlling crop pests and diseases?
Among the people engaged in agricultural and rural related work or study, 57.14% of the respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the effect of traditional pesticides, and only 14.29% of the respondents were not clear. Among those who are not engaged in relevant work or study, only 34.84% are satisfied or very satisfied with the effect of traditional pesticides, and 35.48% of the respondents are not clear.
It can be seen that some people who do not engage in relevant work and study have less understanding of crop pests and diseases and lack basic common sense. So we're going to include crop pests and diseases in our education, in addition to synthetic biology.
What do you think are the problems with the current use of traditional pesticides?
Most respondents believe that traditional pesticides have problems with pesticide residues, environmental pollution and the risk of ingestion. In addition to the few options listed, there are people who pointed out the issue of pesticide resistance in pests or bacteria. It can be seen that people have an objective understanding of the problems of traditional pesticides, indicating that our products have better market prospects.
For new pesticides, do you think the following factors are important? (0 is not impoertant at all, 10 is very important)
In addition, from people's scores on the importance of different factors, it can be seen that people attach the most importance to the low toxicity or no toxicity of pesticides, followed by the insecticidal or bactericidal effect of pesticides. The other three factors are relatively less important. Environmental friendliness, specificity, generality and accessibility to less developed countries were also factors that appeared more frequently in the fill-in-the-blank questions. It can be seen that people still have certain concerns about the toxicity of pesticides, but also have a strong sense of environmental protection.
What concerns do you have about our project?
People expressed concerns about whether it would affect production, whether the price was too high, and the impact of engineered bacteria on the environment and human health. Therefore, we realize that before FloraSentinel enters the market, it must undergo strict and meticulous experimental verification, and at the same time promote product publicity and popular science education, otherwise it will not be able to get the trust of users.
Do you think there are any ethical issues with this project?
Only 6.82% of respondents believe that our project has ethical problems. Their concerns include genetic contamination, genetic modification, heredity and variation. This shows that our design and improvement do not present serious ethical problems, but we still need to work hard to strengthen the consensus and improve the public acceptance of synthetic biology.
Did you know anything about synthetic biology before?
How did you learn about synthetic biology?
What do you think is good ways for science popularization?
22.16% of the respondents said they had not heard of synthetic biology, 67.61% said they had heard of it, and 10.23% said they understood it very well. It can be seen that most of the respondents have some knowledge of synthetic biology, and a significant number of them are very knowledgeable about it. The Internet and classes or lectures are the main channels for people to learn about synthetic biology, accounting for 70.8% and 71.53% respectively. For their preference for popular science, most people like short videos and wechat public account tweets, accounting for 75.57% and 74.43%, respectively. Practice activities or games are also a good way, accounting for 51.14%.
We decided to promote the project through short videos and tweets on wechat public account, and to educate students about synthetic biology in the form of lectures and practical activities.
Evolutionary Timeline
Conclusion
The knowledge gained from thorough and open communication with interviewees informed an inclusive and progressive tone within the communication of our product . Shaping our human practices around the Gibbs Reflection tool as well as the AREA framework facilitated the creation of feedback loops which led to broad ranging design considerations , that covered all bases . We are so grateful to everyone involved in each stage of shaping our project design creation , progression and ultimately optimisation of our product .
Together, we can build the agriculture of tomorrow.