The 2025 IUCN World Conservation Congress: A Crucial Debate on Synthetic Biology
The 2025 IUCN World Conservation Congress is currently taking place in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, and is set to host one of the most significant discussions in recent years within the global conservation community. This event has been meticulously prepared for, with a focus on two pivotal motions that are expected to shape the future of conservation strategies.
At the core of the debate are Motion 087, which outlines IUCN’s Policy on Synthetic Biology in conservation, and Motion 133, which calls for caution by advocating for a halt or moratorium on genetic interventions in natural ecosystems. These motions have drawn attention from leaders across government, business, science, and civil society, as they seek to determine whether synthetic biology should be embraced as a tool to address biodiversity loss or restricted through a moratorium.
Setting the Stage: Global Debates on Synthetic Biology
Synthetic biology, which utilizes advanced genetic techniques to tackle ecologically related challenges, presents both opportunities and dilemmas. Over the past two years, IUCN has facilitated an inclusive consultation process on these two motions. Motion 087 was developed through a two-year consultation, while Motion 133 was proposed by a select group of proponents this year.
The deliberations at the Congress underscore the tension between innovation and precaution, highlighting ethical, ecological, and governance concerns. To inform discussions on the issue, a team of eight global experts was assembled to examine governance frameworks, risk assessment practices, and the ethical and societal implications of synthetic biology in conservation at two separate Webinars.
These Webinars were held on the 8th and 15th of September, 2025, and were organized by IUCN’s Conservation Genetics Specialist Group, Island Conservation, IUCN’s Invasive Alien Species Specialist Group, Rewild, IUCN’s Amphibians Specialist Group, and the European Bureau for Conservation and Development.
Some Excerpts of the Deliberations
Prof. Dorington Ogoyi, a lecturer at the Department of Biological and Life Sciences at the Technical University of Kenya, emphasized the fragmented nature of global governance, noting that no single treaty fully regulates the entirety of synthetic biology. He highlighted the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) as a key forum for integrating existing treaties, ensuring that innovations are accessible while safeguarding ecosystems.
Dr. Martin Lehmer, an adjunct professor at the National University of Kiln School of Biotechnology in Argentina, detailed how national regulatory systems can manage synthetic biology applications. He explained that by using case-by-case risk assessments, regulators evaluate environmental, biodiversity, and human health risks while considering socioeconomic impacts.
Tim Harvey Samuel, a senior scientist at the University of Hawaii, shared examples of how genetic interventions can directly support conservation. He cited ongoing laboratory work in Hawaii on gene drive technologies for the control of avian malaria threatening endangered native birds.
Dr. Patrick Rudelsheim, a general partner at Perseus 3BV, highlighted the importance of clear objectives in monitoring synthetic biology applications. He noted that biological systems cross political boundaries, making regional collaboration essential.
Dr. Willy Tonui, chairman and executive director of the African Genetic Biocontrol Consortium, highlighted the promise and complexity of synthetic biology across Africa. He observed that despite these moves, gaps still remain in public engagement, regulatory capacity, and harmonization with international standards.
Dr. Aditi Mankad, an official at Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), explored the ethical dimensions of synthetic biology, including moral boundaries, dual-use dilemmas, and potential ecosystem impacts. She noted that when benefits are clearly communicated, communities are open to synthetic biology as a tool for conservation.
A Unified Message: Balance, Caution, and Opportunity
Across both webinars, there was a strong convergence among experts that while the global biodiversity crisis demands bold, transformative actions, synthetic biology should not be seen as a replacement for existing conservation efforts. It should rather be seen as a complementary tool that can enhance and accelerate biodiversity protection.
The experts emphasize the need for responsible, well-governed deployment of these technologies: guided by robust risk assessment, continuous monitoring, regional and international coordination, ethical frameworks, transparent public engagement, and policies that are adaptive and informed by science.
There was unanimous agreement that integrating scientific innovation with social, ethical, and ecological considerations offers the most promising pathway to halt or reverse biodiversity loss.
Meanwhile, over 230 experts and 28 organizations have already signed an open letter urging IUCN members not to close the door on innovation, while opinion pieces such as that by Piero Genovesi of the Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA) also advocates for a science-based, case-by-case approach.
Looking Ahead: Congress Decisions to Shape the Future
As the IUCN 2025 Congress continues, the dialogue around synthetic biology is likely to shape global approaches to biodiversity protection for years to come. By Wednesday, 15th October, the last day of the Congress, the world would know the outcome of the crucial vote on the motions, determining whether or not synthetic biology can be responsibly deployed in nature conservation.
The outcome will influence global conservation strategies and shape humanity’s relationship with nature for decades.
