GES Scholar Nick Loschin and Executive Committee member Dr. Khara Grieger traveled to Norway and Denmark this summer to share research on emerging technologies, highlighting how global collaboration, cross-boundary dialogue, and responsible innovation are essential for navigating risk and resilience in an increasingly complex world.

Written by: NICK LOSCHIN, AgBioFEWS Fellow

*Note: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors as individuals and should not be taken as a reflection of the views of the whole of the Genetic Engineering and Society Center or NC State University.

Picturesque canals in Copenhagen, Denmark.

In the rapidly evolving world of emerging technologies, global collaboration is essential. This summer, I had the opportunity to travel with my PhD advisor, Dr. Khara Grieger, to Stavanger, Norway, and Copenhagen, Denmark. Together, we shared our work on genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and broader questions about how society navigates novel technologies, predominantly grounded in our work affiliated with the Genetic Engineering and Society Center (GES).

Society for Risk Analysis – Europe Annual Meeting

Our first stop was the Society for Risk Analysis – Europe (SRA-E) Annual Meeting, held June 15 – 19 alongside the European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL) at the University of Stavanger. The joint 2025 conference brought together an inspiring mix of scientists, engineers, policy experts, and industry leaders under the theme: “Advancing risk, safety and reliability sciences, with applications – from component, to system, to society.” It was a rich and thought-provoking gathering, with sessions spanning topics from technical reliability models to the geopolitics of risk governance. The conference emphasized the urgency of crossing disciplinary boundaries and thinking systemically in the face of increasingly complex global risks.

A particularly compelling panel focused on the role of risk science in national and global security. Presenters explored how issues traditionally considered outside the realm of national security, such as demographic shifts, climate change, and technological disruption, are increasingly seen through a security lens. Panelists noted how geopolitical instability, the privatization of critical infrastructure, and the rise of cognitive and hybrid warfare demand new tools and frameworks for assessing risk. There was a shared sense that the risk field must adapt to account for uncertainty, interconnectedness, and the blurring of boundaries between civil, private, and governmental actors.

Several sessions examined how trust functions as both a resource and a potential vulnerability in high-trust societies. Speakers challenged us to think about how trust can be “weaponized” in an era of hybrid threats. In societies like those in the Nordics, where public trust and institutional integrity are high, erosion of trust can be a critical vulnerability. Discussions raised an important question for risk science: How do we integrate societal-level trust into our assessments, and what kind of research agenda would support that?

Another key theme that emerged across sessions was the need to evolve our risk assessment techniques to meet the complexity of today’s world. Artificial intelligence (AI) was a hot topic, both for its disruptive potential and as a tool in risk assessment. Questions were raised about how far we should go in integrating AI into full risk assessment processes, especially in light of concerns about validation, transparency, and unintended security consequences (e.g., digital twins in automated systems). Calls were made for future research to develop risk assessment methodologies that are not only technically rigorous but contextually aware, practice-informed, and responsive to evolving societal and geopolitical challenges.

While the sessions were dominated by the imminent concerns surrounding AI and the geopolitics of risk governance, biotechnologies continue to be an integral part of these conferences. Both Dr. Grieger and I presented our latest work related to risk assessment, oversight, and perceptions of genetic engineering in food/agriculture contexts, with the opportunity to engage with varying worldviews and experiences outside of the U.S.

I shared findings from a manuscript currently under review, where I examined how environmental assessments are conducted for genetically engineered crops in the U.S. and how robust those assessments really are across different case studies (Loschin et al., In review). Presenting this work outside of a U.S. centric audience allowed me to gain further insights on how varying different risk paradigms consider what is important in the safety and assessment of novel biotechnologies such as genetically engineered crops.

Scholars engaged with the GES Center have discussed the importance of risk culture and how there is a global divergence as it relates to biotechnologies (Trump et al., 2023). As the European Union continues to discuss how it may begin to incorporate new gene editing techniques, U.S. scholars have the responsibility to engage with policymakers to help discuss opportunities and lessons learned with our experience in the assessment of these traditional and novel products.

Later in the week, Dr. Grieger presented insights from a USDA NIFA-funded project examining the perceived risks, benefits, and sustainability considerations of novel agrifood technologies. That work is now being developed into a publication by our research team.

What stood out most to me was the sense of shared responsibility. As the world becomes more volatile and interconnected, advancing risk science requires more than just technical expertise; it demands humility, creativity, and collaboration. I left the conference energized, full of ideas, and deeply motivated to keep building toward a more resilient and thoughtful future.

Nick Loschin at the University of Stavanger, Norway

Building Connections at the European Environment Agency and Denmark Technical University

After Stavanger, we made our way to Copenhagen, where we continued these conversations on a different stage. Thanks to Dr. Grieger’s long-standing connections from her time as a PhD student and postdoc at the Technical University of Denmark (DTU), we were able to meet with researchers and policymakers at both the European Environment Agency (EEA) and DTU.

At the EEA, we sat down with a diverse group of experts to exchange ideas and share our ongoing work related to emerging technologies, risk governance, and sustainability. One of the most rewarding parts of working in interdisciplinary fields is the opportunity, and the challenge, of engaging with people from entirely different domains. This visit was no exception.

During this visit, Dr. Grieger spoke about her work with the Science and Technologies for Phosphorus Sustainability (STEPS) Center, including aspects of engaging different types of stakeholders to co-create sustainability solutions. She then switched gears to discuss solar radiation management, how agencies are beginning to think about it, and how emerging risks can be addressed proactively.

After these technological-specific conversations, we switched gears to a systems-level thinking as it relates to emerging technology and how this is discussed at the EEA. We met with previous authors and team leads for the EEA’s reports on “late lessons and early warnings,” as it relates to the precautionary principle (EEA Report 1/2013; EEA Report 22/2001). The meeting was convened to discuss a third report in the same vein and centering around the precautionary principle.

Dr. Khara Grieger and Nick Loschin at the European Environment Agency in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Through all of these conversations, three themes clearly emerged:

• Global engagement enhances local impact. Sharing research internationally brought new perspectives and sharpened how we think about the relevance of our work at home.
• Cross-boundary collaboration is critical. Risk science cannot advance in isolation. Whether navigating national security challenges, stakeholder engagement, or emerging biotechnologies, collaboration across disciplines, sectors, and borders is essential. Meaningful progress in emerging technology governance requires the ability to speak across technical, policy, and societal domains.
• Responsible innovation is a collective effort. From stakeholder perspectives to policy development, shaping the future of novel technologies requires inclusive dialogue, shared learning, and a willingness to confront uncomfortable dilemmas.

This trip reinforced something I’ve come to deeply believe: staying globally connected helps us become better researchers, collaborators, and problem-solvers. I return with a renewed appreciation for how risk science can support more resilient, informed, and ethical decision-making in the complexities of an ever-evolving world.

Nick Loschin is a PhD candidate in the Department of Applied Ecology, under the supervision of Dr. Khara Grieger, as well as a member of the AgBioFEWS cohort 3