SOCIOLOGIES OF SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY PROGRAMME Dr Susan Molyneux-Hodgson, University of Sheffield, UK

OVERVIEW

• Sociological analysis of the development and implications

of synthetic biology began in 2007.

• An ongoing programme of work includes a wide range of

activities (summer projects, PhDs. & research projects)

• Synbio confronts social researchers with socio-technical

issues that are multi-layered and multi-disciplinary

• The need for theoretically-informed, empirical sociological

research is pressing.

SUMMARY OF FUNDED PROJECTS

Microbial Applications for Tissue Engineering (2008-2011)

A Network in Synthetic Biology (£135,000 BBSRC)

Deploying Synthetic Biology for the Water Industry (2009-

2011) (£200,000 EPSRC)

Synthesising communities in Europe (2012–15) part of the

cross-department Synthetic Biology for Human Health

programme (£250,000 University of Sheffield)

The meanings and implications of ‘translation' in Synthetic

Biology (2012–15) part of the Rethinking the social production,

locus and impact of biosciences project (£175,000 ESRC)

(De)signing Synthetic Biologists (2009-13) part of the

Engaging Young People in Science programme (£180,000

White Rose Universities Consortium & National Science

Learning Centre)

Crossing Biological Membranes-Net (2014-2019)

Developing SB and other approaches to industrial

biotechnology (£540,000 BBSRC)

THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES

Existing frameworks that are used in our research include:-

• Actor Network Theory – recognising the human and non-

human in accomplishing action and generating knowledge

• Epistemic Communities – describing ways of knowing and

the scientific practices needed to achieve goals

• Co-production – taking science and state; local and global;

persons and fields, as mutually constitutive

RESEARCH APPROACH

We aim to:-

• advance sociological understanding of the development of

emerging scientific fields and their attendant implications

• impact on techno-scientific approaches to the field

• create a community of researchers – regardless of

disciplinary background – capable of engaging with future

research agendas relating science in society.

We do this by:-

• Using close collaborative relations with scientists &

engineers to understand, explain and intervene across a

range of topics

• Analysing data that includes:- ethnographic studies of

laboratories and other field sites; interviews with policy

actors, scientists and engineers; discourses of official

literature and of media; studies with various publics.

• Engaging in joint activity across disciplines e.g. co-

supervision of technical and social science doctoral

students; sociologists teaching on engineering

programmes; iGEM participation; employing scientists on

sociology projects; conference buddy scheme; joint

writing, bidding & workshops.

HIGHLIGHTS

Detailed findings are available in publications. Insights include understanding

how:-

Synthetic biology exemplifies the development of a potentially new form of

knowledge production, one that preferences the commercial aspects of field

development and which we have labelled econoscience

Stabilisation of the field is not guaranteed, even as funding and

infrastructure to support it grows

Biological complexity and (lack of) reproducibility are used to justify more

basic research and explain a lack of venture capital & translation

Barriers to innovation are performed by stakeholders in the process

Radical technical solutions to social problems cannot intervene easily within

existing sets of socio-technical relations

The mathematisation of biology has epistemological consequences

Databases act as obligatory passage points yet remain localised facilities

Community making is an interplay of movements (the orientation and

enrolment of people, stories, disciplines & policies) and of stickiness (the

objects & glues that begin to bind the various constitutive elements of

community)

Community making devices (e.g. conferences and events, journals, success

stories etc.) are central to creation of a sense of the global collective & form

a central identity around which new members can be recruited & orient

SELECTED PUBLICATIONS

• Meyer & Molyneux-Hodgson (2014) Placing a new science: exploring spatial and temporal configurations of synthetic biology. In Merz & Sormani (eds.) Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook. Dortrecht: Springer

• Molyneux-Hodgson & Balmer (2014) Synthetic biology, water industry and the performance of an innovation barrier. Science and Public Policy 41 (4): 507-519

• Bulpin & Molyneux-Hodgson (2013) The disciplining of scientific communities. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews. 38(2): 91 – 105

• Balmer & Molyneux-Hodgson (2013) Bacterial Cultures: ontologies of bacteria and engineering expertise at the nexus of synthetic biology & water services. Engineering Studies 5 (1): 59-73

• Meyer & Molyneux-Hodgson (2010) ‘Communautés épistémiques’: une notion utile pour théoriser les collectifs en sciences. Terrains et Travaux 18: 141 - 154

• Molyneux-Hodgson and Meyer (2009). Tales of emergence: synthetic biology as a scientific community in the making. BioSocieties , vol. 4, no. 2/3: 129-145

CONTACT:- Dr Susan Molyneux-Hodgson (PI): s.hodgson@sheffield.ac.uk

Kate Bulpin (PhD student, Building scientists & communities): sop09kjb@sheffield.ac.uk

Rob Meckin (PhD student, Meanings of translation): r.meckin@sheffield.ac.uk

Celso Gomes (PhD student, Making biofuels and big science): c.gomes@shef.ac.uk

Andrew Balmer (collaborator, SB and water industry): a.balmer@manchester.ac.uk

Morgan Meyer (collaborator, emergence in France): morgan.meyer@agroparistech.fr