At ISBR 2025, scientists and regulators grappled with gene editing, governance, and the path toward responsible innovation.

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 photo of Ghent, Belgium

Ghent, Belgium: A Cradle of Plant Biotechnology

Ghent, Belgium, holds a unique place in the history of biotechnology. Although the city’s scientific legacy isn’t immediately visible, Ghent University became a cradle of plant genetic engineering in the late 1970s. There, Dr. Marc Van Montagu and Dr. Jeff Schell discovered the Ti plasmid, enabling the use of Agrobacterium tumefaciens to transfer genes into plants. This breakthrough paved the way for genetically modified crops and reshaped modern agriculture.

What began as a laboratory discovery quickly became a cornerstone of global biotechnology. The ability to transfer genes across species boundaries led to the development of pest-resistant and herbicide-tolerant crops, fundamentally transforming farming systems. Returning to Ghent for a major biosafety symposium felt like revisiting one of the origin points of a story that continues to grow more complex.

The 17th International Society for Biosafety Research (ISBR) Symposium

More than fifty years after those early breakthroughs, over 350 delegates gathered in Ghent for the 17th International Society for Biosafety Research (ISBR) Symposium to reflect on the past and reimagine the future of biotechnology.

Dr. Van Montagu opened the meeting with a sweeping history of plant biotechnology and a reminder of ISBR’s mission: to promote scientifically sound, sustainable bio-innovation through communication and collaboration among scientists, regulators, and policymakers. “Nature is not good or bad,” he noted. “Nature is.” His remarks framed science as a tool for understanding—an important lens as the field expands into new frontiers such as soil microbial innovations.

With participants from more than forty countries, discussions ranged from public acceptance of genetic engineering to new breeding techniques like gene editing. One theme repeatedly surfaced: the absence of shared definitions. Terms such as “gene editing,” “genome editing,” and “precision breeding” were used interchangeably, highlighting persistent confusion and a lack of global alignment. This ambiguity carries real regulatory and public-perception consequences, and many delegates expressed a desire to differentiate modern methods from the controversies surrounding earlier GMOs.

Even as ISBR’s scope broadens, its roots in plant biotechnology remain clear. Yet the conversation is shifting. “Somebody has to eat your crops,” joked Dr. Alison Van Eenennaam as she introduced genetically engineered animals into the discussion. Dr. Clint Nesbitt followed with a gene-edited pig resistant to the PRRS virus. Regulators, too, described how emerging technologies—engineered microbes, microbial consortia, and plant-microbe interactions—are blurring traditional oversight boundaries. It became clear that biotechnology is no longer a matter of single genes or species but complex ecological systems requiring new governance approaches.

Industry perspectives added another layer, emphasizing the challenges of navigating fragmented, inconsistent regulatory frameworks. While many speakers called for harmonization, one participant offered a nuanced alternative during a coffee break: perhaps the goal should be global cooperation rather than strict harmonization. This distinction points toward a more flexible, inclusive model that balances contextual diversity with shared principles.

Participants at the 17th ISBR Symposium gathered together (Photo credit: ISBR)

Where the Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Center Fits

As a former AgBioFEWS Fellow at NC State’s Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Center, I was eager to attend an international, industry-focused conference and observe these governance challenges firsthand. I presented my recently published paper, Environmental assessment and regulatory oversight of genetically engineered crops in the United States (Loschin et al., 2025; PDF, Graphic, Podcast)—a piece that calls for strengthening elements of oversight, even in a room where many advocate reducing it.

To my surprise, the conversations that followed were open and constructive. Delegates from across regions asked thoughtful questions about what aspects of the U.S. oversight system function well and where improvements might be needed. These discussions highlighted the deeply contextual nature of biotechnology governance. Frameworks may travel across borders, but their implementation is shaped by local institutions, values, histories, and public attitudes.

Drawing on my interdisciplinary training in science, technology, and society, I recognized familiar patterns: the interplay of public perception, political will, and institutional inertia. ISBR underscored just how globally interconnected agricultural biotechnology has become—and how important it is to bridge technical expertise with societal understanding.

In workshops and hallway conversations, I shared insights from the GES community on anticipatory governance, inclusive dialogue, and the social dimensions of emerging technologies. These exchanges reinforced the importance of integrating social inquiry into agricultural biotechnology, especially as innovations increasingly intersect with complex ecological and societal systems.

Nick Loschin presenting his poster at the ISBR Symposium in Ghent, Belgium

Looking Ahead: Beyond Harmonization

Leaving Ghent, I was reminded that biotechnology’s story is not only one of scientific ingenuity—it is also one of negotiation among innovation, ethics, and governance. The call for “global cooperation” lingers as both a challenge and an invitation. For me, these discussions reaffirmed the focus of my research on environmental governance and the complexities embedded in this often convoluted system. ISBR brings together a community of dedicated people working to strengthen global cooperation by sharing insights and building relationships that span borders.

If the 1970s marked the molecular dawn of plant biotechnology, today we stand at the beginning of a social and regulatory renaissance—one that requires scientists, policymakers, and the public to collaborate in shaping responsible innovation. Institutions like the GES Center, and meetings like ISBR, remind us that the future of biotechnology will depend not only on what we can engineer, but on how we choose to govern, communicate, and cooperate across boundaries.

About the Author
Nick Loschin is a PhD candidate in the Department of Applied Ecology under the supervision of Dr. Khara Grieger and a member of AgBioFEWS cohort 3.