CHIPS and Science Highlights: Bioeconomy
Congress had a lot more on its agenda than semiconductors when compiling the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022. The bill–law as of yesterday–puts forward an expansive framework to advance U.S. innovation broadly, including in areas that feed into a critical sector: the bioeconomy.
The U.S. bioeconomy–the part of the economy driven by the life sciences and biotech, and enabled by engineering, computing, and information science–has already produced many breakthroughs, such as mRNA vaccines that help counter the devastating impacts of COVID-19, or genetically engineered microbes that provide nutrients to crops without the pollution associated with traditional fertilizers. Valued at over $950 billion, the U.S. bioeconomy accounts for more than five percent of the U.S. gross domestic product–more than the contribution from the construction industry, and on par with the contribution of the information sector.
However, without sufficient support from and coordination of federal resources, the U.S. bioeconomy risks ceding ground to competitors that are implementing cohesive strategies to advance their bioeconomies. For example, China aims to dominate the 21st century bioeconomy and has prioritized growth of its bioeconomy in its five-year plans. From 2016 to July 2021, the market value of publicly listed biopharmaceutical innovators from China increased approximately 127-fold across several major stock exchanges, to more than $380 billion, with biotechnology companies accounting for more than 47 percent of that valuation.
To improve the likelihood that the U.S. advances its leadership of the bioeconomy and continues to reap the bulk of the bioeconomy’s economic, national security, and societal benefits, key provisions in the new law are intended to ensure a strong U.S. bio-workforce and the execution of leading-edge bioinnovation in America.
Select highlights
There’s quite a list of provisions in the CHIPS and Science Act relevant to promoting the U.S. bioeconomy. Some of the substantial ones that jumped off the page are presented below.
Opportunities to take action to shape the new bioeconomy policy landscape
Now that the CHIPS and Science Act is law, how might the community with a stake in the bioeconomy continue to work to shape the policy landscape?
For one, while the new law mandates actions to support the bioeconomy, the appropriation of funding to support the agencies in fiscal year 2023 has stalled so far. Congress should finish the job and provide funding, and further advocacy before Congress to press for the appropriations process to be completed may be warranted.
Furthermore, the interagency committee that will coordinate much of this work will be composed of many federal agencies, and it will be important for all the right voices to be at the table. That should include agency personnel who work to support fundamental research, experimental development, commercialization, and equity, ethical, legal, environmental, safety, security, and social issues. In addition, the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) will select a co-chairperson from among the members of the interagency committee. This all presents an opportunity for the community to connect with OSTP to encourage the right agencies to serve on the committee, and to serve as co-chair.
An office established by the President will serve as the point of contact on federal activities related to the bioeconomy for government organizations, academia, industry, professional societies, State governments, interested citizen groups, and others to exchange technical and programmatic information. Once up and running, this office will be the place to go to discuss R&D, commercialization, social issues, and more. Notably, while this office will, in part, support the interagency committee and oversee the coordination of much of this work, the CHIPS and Science Act does not specify where the office should be housed within the federal government, providing another opportunity for the community to engage with policymakers to press for the most effective positioning of the office.
There will also be opportunities to engage with the National Academies, which were charged, under National Science Foundation contract, to “conduct a review, and make recommendations with respect to, the ethical, legal, environmental, safety, security, and other appropriate societal issues related to” R&D in areas that undergird the bioeconomy. This might involve making comments during study committee meetings’ open sessions, submitting written comments in response to requests, or communicating with the members who are selected to make up the committee. The National Academies report is due to Congress within two years, and is also likely to be influential with officials in the executive branch.
A call to action–we want to hear from you!
Provisions relevant to the bioeconomy are written throughout the CHIPS and Science Act. If you are interested in what else is included, you can review some summary materials or read pages 625-650 of the bill itself (Title IV–Bioeconomy Research and Development), and do some keyword searching on terms like “biomanufacturing,” “genomics,” “biological,” “microbial,” and so on to find other related provisions. And if you’d like, let us know what stands out to you, or how you might take action to impact the new policy landscape, by submitting your thoughts via this form. We would be happy to connect with you if there are opportunities to develop your ideas and engage with policymakers.
Now is a moment of significant opportunity to engage with federal officials implementing the new federal bioeconomy strategy, and we should seize it.
Opportunities to take action to shape the new bioeconomy policy landscape
Now that the CHIPS and Science Act is law, how might the community with a stake in the bioeconomy continue to work to shape the policy landscape?
For one, while the new law mandates actions to support the bioeconomy, the appropriation of funding to support the agencies in fiscal year 2023 has stalled so far. Congress should finish the job and provide funding, and further advocacy before Congress to press for the appropriations process to be completed may be warranted.
Furthermore, the interagency committee that will coordinate much of this work will be composed of many federal agencies, and it will be important for all the right voices to be at the table. That should include agency personnel who work to support fundamental research, experimental development, commercialization, and equity, ethical, legal, environmental, safety, security, and social issues. In addition, the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) will select a co-chairperson from among the members of the interagency committee. This all presents an opportunity for the community to connect with OSTP to encourage the right agencies to serve on the committee, and to serve as co-chair.
An office established by the President will serve as the point of contact on federal activities related to the bioeconomy for government organizations, academia, industry, professional societies, State governments, interested citizen groups, and others to exchange technical and programmatic information. Once up and running, this office will be the place to go to discuss R&D, commercialization, social issues, and more. Notably, while this office will, in part, support the interagency committee and oversee the coordination of much of this work, the CHIPS and Science Act does not specify where the office should be housed within the federal government, providing another opportunity for the community to engage with policymakers to press for the most effective positioning of the office.
There will also be opportunities to engage with the National Academies, which were charged, under National Science Foundation contract, to “conduct a review, and make recommendations with respect to, the ethical, legal, environmental, safety, security, and other appropriate societal issues related to” R&D in areas that undergird the bioeconomy. This might involve making comments during study committee meetings’ open sessions, submitting written comments in response to requests, or communicating with the members who are selected to make up the committee. The National Academies report is due to Congress within two years, and is also likely to be influential with officials in the executive branch.
A call to action–we want to hear from you!
Provisions relevant to the bioeconomy are written throughout the CHIPS and Science Act. If you are interested in what else is included, you can review some summary materials or read pages 625-650 of the bill itself (Title IV–Bioeconomy Research and Development), and do some keyword searching on terms like “biomanufacturing,” “genomics,” “biological,” “microbial,” and so on to find other related provisions. And if you’d like, let us know what stands out to you, or how you might take action to impact the new policy landscape, by submitting your thoughts via this form. We would be happy to connect with you if there are opportunities to develop your ideas and engage with policymakers.
Now is a moment of significant opportunity to engage with federal officials implementing the new federal bioeconomy strategy, and we should seize it.
The widespread adoption of conservation agricultural practices to protect soils is key to ensuring food security and water quality for current and future generations in the United States.
Multiple bioeconomy-related programs were authorized through the bipartisan CHIPS & Science legislation but have yet to receive anywhere near their funding targets.
Through the broad uptake and implementation of the Heat Action Planning framework by key agencies and offices, the federal government will enable a more heat-prepared nation.
Global episodes of extreme heat intensify water shortages caused by extended drought and overpumping. Creating actionable solutions to the challenges of a warming planet requires cooperation across all water consumers.