Breaching the Department of Defense's Biotech Bottleneck
Abstract
The global biotechnology revolution offers a profusion of promising innovations for the US Department of Defense (DoD). As with other emerging technologies, the commercial market, rather than defense, is driving the evolution of biotechnology products, and the ability to harness biotechnology for defense benefits has been hampered by strategic confusion in DoD. Here we describe a set of high-level challenges and a set of potential solutions that could bring innovative biotechnology closer to reality for the warfighter and DoD writ large.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1. DiEuliis D. Biotechnology for the battlefield: in need of a strategy. War on the Rocks, Texas National Security Review November 27, 2018. https://warontherocks.com/2018/11/biotechnology-for-the-battlefield-in-need-of-a-strategy/. Accessed March 17, 2020.
2. DiEuliis D. Key national security questions for the future of synthetic biology. Global transformations: a century since the Great War. Fletcher Forum of World Affairs 2019;43:1. https://www.fletcherforum.org/archives/2019/2/4/431-winter-2019. Accessed March 17, 2020.
3. Department of Defense. Modernization priorities. https://www.cto.mil/modernization-priorities/. Accessed March 17, 2020.
4. Cumbers J. “With great power comes great responsibility”—Meet Alexander Titus the Department of Defense's head of biotechnology. Forbes September 24, 2019. https://www.forbes.com/sites/johncumbers/2019/09/24/with-great-power-comes-great-responsibility--meet-alexander-titus-the-department-of-defenses-head-of-biotechnology/#21b4f6b95781. Accessed March 17, 2020.
5. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Summary of the 2019 White House Summit on America's Bioeconomy. October 7, 2019. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Summary-of-White-House-Summit-on-Americas-Bioeconomy-October-2019.pdf. Accessed March 17, 2020.
6. Request for information on the bioeconomy. Federal Register September 10, 2019. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/09/10/2019-19470/request-for-information-on-the-bioeconomy. Accessed March 17, 2020.
7. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Division on Earth and Life Studies; Policy and Global Affairs; Health and Medicine Division; Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences; Board on Life Sciences; Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources; Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy; Board on Health Sciences Policy; Forum on Cyber Resilience; Committee on Safeguarding the Bioeconomy: Finding Strategies for Understanding, Evaluating, and Protecting the Bioeconomy While Sustaining Innovation and Growth. Safeguarding the Bioeconomy. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2020. http://nas-sites.org/dels/studies/bioeconomy/. Accessed March 17, 2020.
8. H.R. 7171—Engineering Biology Research and Development Act of 2019. 115th Congress (2017-2018). https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/7171. Accessed March 17, 2020.
9. Carter S, DiEuliis D. Mapping the synthetic biology industry: implications for biosecurity. Health Secur 2019;17(5):403-406.
10. McCormick R, Hunter AP, Sanders G. Measuring the Impact of Sequestration and the Drawdown on the Defense Industrial Base. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies; 2018. https://csis-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/180111_McCormick_ImpactOfSequestration_Web.pdf?A10C65W9Qkx07VaJqYcJguCH.7EL3O7W. Accessed March 17, 2020.
11. The White House. National Security Strategy of the United States of America. Washington, DC: The White House; 2017. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf. Accessed March 17, 2020.
12. Presidential Executive Order 13806, Assessing and Strengthening the Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base and Supply Chain Resiliency of the United States. July 21, 2017. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-executive-order-assessing-strengthening-manufacturing-defense-industrial-base-supply-chain-resiliency-united-states/. Accessed March 17, 2020.
13. Interagency Task Force in Fulfillment of Executive Order 13806. Assessing and Strengthening the Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base and Supply Chain Resiliency of the United States. September 2018. https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.militarytimes.com/assets/eo-13806-report-final.pdf. Accessed March 17, 2020.
14. Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Manufacturing and Industrial Base Policy. Fiscal Year 2017 Annual Industrial Capabilities. March 2018. https://www.businessdefense.gov/Portals/51/Documents/Resources/2017%20AIC%20RTC%2005-17-2018%20-%20Public%20Release.pdf?ver=2018-05-17-224631-340. Accessed March 17, 2020.
15. H.R. 4373—Engineering Biology Research and Development Act of 2019, 116th Congress (2019-2020). https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/4373/text. Accessed March 17, 2020.
16. Delvigne F, Noorman H. Scale-up/scale-down of microbial bioprocesses: a modern light on an old issue. Microb Biotechnol 2017;10(4):685-587.
17. Request for Information for Specific Synthetic Biology Manufacturing Focus Areas Suitable for a Manufacturing Innovation Institute, Department of the Air Force; Air Force Materiel Command. https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=06b622ed4203b2fdc1d9ff737c5ccff4&tab=core&_cview=0.
18. Bock E. NIH investigates foreign influence at U.S. grantee institutions. NIH Record October 4, 2019;LXXI(20). https://nihrecord.nih.gov/2019/10/04/nih-investigates-foreign-influence-us-grantee-institutions. Accessed March 17, 2020.
19. Eftimiades N. Uncovering Chinese espionage in the US. Diplomat November 28, 2018. https://thediplomat.com/2018/11/uncovering-chinese-espionage-in-the-us/. Accessed March 17, 2020.
20. Department of Defense. Defense acquisition life cycle compliance baseline (pre-tailoring). http://acqnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Interactive-Lifecycle-Wall-Chart-Jan-18.pdf. Accessed March 17, 2020.
21. Roos J, Chue C, DiEuliis D, Emanuel P. The Department of Defense Chemical and Biological Defense Program: an enabler of the third offset strategy. Health Secur 2017;15(2):207-214.
22. US Army Open Campus Initiative. https://www.arl.army.mil/opencampus/. Accessed March 17, 2020.
23. Lockheed Martin is reprogramming cells to bioproduce new materials [press release]. Synbiobeta January 19, 2020. https://synbiobeta.com/lockheed-martin-is-reprogramming-cells-to-bioproduce-new-materials/. Accessed March 17, 2020.
24. Cornillie C. A closer look at the Pentagon's $2 billion a year OTA pipeline. Federal News Network January 22, 2019. https://federalnewsnetwork.com/fiscal-2019-federal-contracting-playbook/2019/01/a-closer-look-at-the-pentagons-2-billion-a-year-ota-pipeline-2/. Accessed March 17, 2020.
25. Schmidt C, Costa K. These 37 synthetic biology companies raised $1.2B this quarter. July 17, 2019. https://synbiobeta.com/these-37-synthetic-biology-companies-raised-1-2b-this-quarter/. Accessed March 17, 2020.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
Copyright 2020, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers.
History
Published online: 17 April 2020
Published in print: March/April 2020
Accepted: 17 February 2020
Revision received: 5 February 2020
Received: 28 November 2019
Topics
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Export Citation
Export citation
Select the format you want to export the citations of this publication.
View Options
Access content
To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.⚠ Society Access
If you are a member of a society that has access to this content please log in via your society website and then return to this publication.