GES Center Publications

Faculty Publications

Some of our most recent faculty publications. See the full, searchable database of GES-related faculty publications here.

SHARE YOUR RESEARCH: GES-affiliated faculty and graduate students may submit publications to include on the website here.

Full CitationArticle (Click +/- beside the title to show/hide full citation and additional details)Affiliate(s)AbstractSignificanceKeywordsAltmetric
Grieger, K., Bourne, K., Deviney, A., & Barry, N. (2025, December 9). Six key steps for stakeholder engagement. i2Insights. https://i2insights.org/2025/12/09/six-steps-for-stakeholder-engagementSix key steps for stakeholder engagementKhara Grieger, Nourou Barry202512/9/2025How can you systematically plan stakeholder engagement? What are the key issues that need to be considered? What guiding questions can help?In a piece for i2Insights, the authors outline a six-step framework developed at the STEPS Center for designing and carrying out stakeholder engagement—from clarifying goals and recruiting participants to synthesizing results and improving future practice. Their approach, grounded in research on phosphorus sustainability, highlights practical questions that teams can use to guide each stage of the process. It also raises an invitation to others working in different domains: Which steps resonate with your own experience? What additional issues or tools shape your engagement planning?Stakeholder engagement, phosphorus, sustainability, wicked problemshttps://i2insights.org/2025/12/09/six-steps-for-stakeholder-engagementIntegration and Implementation Insights
Koivusaari, K., Aimutis, W.R., Sanders, K., Schroeder-Moreno, M., Hill, D., Consavage Stanley, K., Shirwaiker, R., Grieger, K. (2025). An Extension Guide to Alternative Proteins. NC State Extension. Retrieved from https://content.ces.ncsu.edu/an-extension-guide-to-alternative-proteins. PDF. GraphicAn Extension Guide to Alternative ProteinsKhara Grieger, Katie Sanders202510/8/2025Alternative proteins offer a promising way to meet rising global demand for protein as the population grows and natural resources become increasingly strained. Produced through plants, fermentation, or cell cultivation, these protein options may reduce environmental impacts such as land use, water consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions. They also provide nutritious, cholesterol-free, and fiber-rich choices that appeal to a range of dietary preferences, from vegetarian to flexitarian. By diversifying food systems, alternative proteins can contribute to both food security and sustainable agriculture.Alternative proteins, Sustainability, Food systems, Food manufacturing, Genetic engineeringhttps://content.ces.ncsu.edu/an-extension-guide-to-alternative-proteinshttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/An-Extension-Guide-to-Alternative-Proteins_NCSU_2025.pdfhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Extension-Guide-to-Alt-Proteins_NCSU_2025_full.jpgNC State University Extension Services
Loschin, N., Kuzma, J., Barrangou, R., & Grieger, K. (2025). Environmental assessment and regulatory oversight of genetically engineered crops in the United States. Environmental Science & Policy, 173, 104237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104237. PDF. Graphic. PodcastEnvironmental assessment and regulatory oversight of genetically engineered crops in the United StatesNick Loschin, Jennifer Kuzma, Rodolphe Barrangou, Khara Grieger202510/7/2025Biotechnology advancements are rapidly shaping the future of food and agriculture with genetic engineering tools utilizing both classical transgenic methods and cutting-edge genome editing techniques such as CRISPR. These advancements have expanded the development of crops with novel traits, with a wide range of applications. At the same time, the regulatory system and assessment processes have struggled to keep pace with these rapid innovations and techniques. Notably, this can be an issue when investigating the potential environmental impacts in the development and production of these crops due to the complexity and temporal nature of potential risks. This study explores how environmental assessments for genetically engineered crops have been and are currently being conducted in the United States. This was done by outlining the regulatory framework and environmental assessment processes across federal agencies and then examining five case studies that reflect both incumbent and rising genetic engineering techniques. The robustness of the environmental assessment was evaluated for each case based on the submitted information and the depth of analysis conducted. Conclusions from this study gleaned three major recommendations: (1) the need for governance systems keeping pace with novel innovations, (2) an overall strengthening of environmental oversight for genetically engineered crops, and (3) the need for transparency throughout the assessment processes. This research aims to foster improved environmental assessment and governance practices for novel applications of genetic engineering in food and agriculture systems.This study aimed to clarify and evaluate the environmental oversight process for GE crops in the U.S. by analyzing publicly available information and literature on governance and regulatory responsibilities, particularly those of the EPA and USDA. We examined five case studies to assess the robustness of environmental evaluations as GE crops moved through the U.S. regulatory system. Our analysis revealed three key takeaways about the governance of GE crops that should be considered to strengthen environmental assessment and oversight practices. First, regulatory frameworks must keep pace with advances in biotechnology. Second, environmental oversight of GE crops should be strengthened by expanding assessment parameters beyond traditional evaluations and strengthening environmental monitoring. Third, transparency and engagement in the oversight process must be strengthened. As GE technologies and applications continue to evolve and expand (e.g., sprayable RNAi and spray-on genome editing), and regulators decide what is needed in their oversight, this study offers insights into improving environmental assessment procedures. By illustrating both strengths and limitations in the current system, this research aims to foster more effective and adaptive regulatory practices for GE crops in a globally integrated food and agriculture supply chain. It may also be applicable to a global geopolitical context as countries across the world continue to adapt their regulations and oversight with novel biotechnology innovations.Biotechnology Regulation, Genetic Engineering, Genome Editing, Environmental Assessment, Regulatory Oversight, Biotechnology Governance, Emerging Technologieshttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104237https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901125002539https://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Loschin-et-al-Env-assess-reg-oversight-GE-crops_ESD_2025.pdfhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Loschin-et-al-Env-assess-reg-oversight-GE-crops_ESP_2025_full.jpg10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104237Environmental Science & Policy
Grieger, K., Barry, N., Bourne, K., Deviney, A., Elser, J. J., Scholz, M., & Jones, J. L. (2025). Engaging stakeholders in phosphorus sustainability: Challenges, lessons learned, and implications for addressing other wicked problems. Elementa, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2024.00060. PDF. Graphic. PodcastEngaging stakeholders in phosphorus sustainability: Challenges, lessons learned, and implications for addressing other wicked problemsKhara Grieger, Nourou Barry20259/16/2025To address wicked problems, particularly in sustainability, interdisciplinary solutions that bridge science and society are essential. These solutions inevitably require the involvement of diverse stakeholders. However, the field of stakeholder engagement includes a wide range of approaches, and there is no universally agreed-upon set of standard practices for engagement, particularly in wicked problem contexts. This article addresses this gap by connecting scientific knowledge on stakeholder engagement with an exploration of its challenges, drawing from both the broader literature and the authors’ own experiences in sustainability contexts. In particular, this article first identifies and briefly reviews 6 key steps and best practices for stakeholder engagement, and then discusses challenges and lessons learned from engaging stakeholders in the context of phosphorus sustainability largely within U.S. contexts. Phosphorus sustainability is a valuable case study due to its vital role in supporting global agriculture and societal functioning, while also contributing to environmental challenges caused by excess runoff, among other issues. Reflecting on both best practices and our own experiences, we identify 3 key challenges to engaging stakeholders in phosphorus sustainability: (i) managing the inherent tensions between breadth and depth of engagement, (ii) difficulties in evaluating the collective impact of engagement, and (iii) building sufficient capacity in carrying out engagement. To address these limitations, we highlight lessons we have learned in our own engagement efforts and provide recommendations for future research on stakeholder engagement, particularly in the context of wicked sustainability problems.This article by Grieger et al. (2025) shows how structured stakeholder engagement can advance phosphorus sustainability and other complex environmental challenges. Drawing on the STEPS Center’s work, it highlights best practices across engagement stages and identifies persistent hurdles like balancing breadth and depth, measuring impact, and building institutional support. The piece offers a practical framework for aligning science, policy, and communities in tackling “wicked” sustainability problems.Stakeholder engagement, phosphorus, sustainability, wicked problemshttps://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2024.00060https://online.ucpress.edu/elementa/article/13/1/00060/213265/Engaging-stakeholders-in-phosphorus-sustainabilityhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/Grieger-et-al_Engaging-stakeholders-P-Sust_Elementa_2025.pdfhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/POD_S1E5_Grieger_Engaging-stakeholders-P-Sustainability.jpg10.1525/elementa.2024.00060Elementa
Horgan, M. D., Cummings, C. L., Kuzma, J., Dahlstrom, M., Cimadori, I., Cuchiara, M., Larter, C., Loschin, N., & Grieger, K. D. (2025). Beyond the Hype: Stakeholder Perceptions of Nanotechnology and Genetic Engineering for Sustainable Food Production. Sustainability, 17(15), 6795. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17156795. PDF. Graphic. PodcastBeyond the Hype: Stakeholder Perceptions of Nanotechnology and Genetic Engineering for Sustainable Food ProductionChristopher L. Cummings, Jennifer Kuzma, Ilaria Cimadori, Nick Loschin, Khara Grieger20257/25/2025Ensuring sustainable food systems is an urgent global priority as populations grow and environmental pressures mount. Technological innovations such as genetic engineering (GE) and nanotechnology (nano) have been promoted as promising pathways for achieving greater sustainability in agriculture and food production. Yet, the sustainability of these technologies is not defined by technical performance alone; it hinges on how they are perceived by key stakeholders and how well they align with broader societal values. This study addresses the critical question of how expert stakeholders evaluate the sustainability of GE and nano-based food and agriculture (agrifood) products. Using a multi-method online platform, we engaged 42 experts across academia, government, industry, and NGOs in the United States to assess six real-world case studies—three using GE and three using nano—across ten different dimensions of sustainability. We show that nano-based products were consistently rated more favorably than their GE counterparts in terms of environmental, economic, and social sustainability, as well as across ethical and societal dimensions. Like prior studies, our results reveal that stakeholders see meaningful distinctions between nanotechnology and biotechnology, likely due to underlying value-based concerns about animal welfare, perceived naturalness, or corporate control of agrifood systems. The fruit coating and flu vaccine—both nano-enabled—received the most positive ratings, while GE mustard greens and salmon were the most polarizing. These results underscore the importance of incorporating stakeholder perspectives in technology assessment and innovation governance. These results also suggest that responsible innovation efforts in agrifood systems should prioritize communication, addressing meaningful societal needs, and the contextual understanding of societal values to build trust and legitimacy.Technological innovations such as genetic engineering (GE) and nanotechnology (nano) have been promoted as promising pathways for achieving greater sustainability in agriculture and food production. Yet, the sustainability of these technologies is not defined by technical performance alone; it hinges on how they are perceived by key stakeholders and how well they align with broader societal values. This study addresses the critical question of how expert stakeholders evaluate the sustainability of GE and nano-based food and agriculture (agrifood) products.Agrifood technologies; Genetic engineering; Nanotechnology; Perceptions of sustainability; Stakeholder engagement; Responsible innovation; Technology governancehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su17156795https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/15/6795https://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/sustainability-17-06795.pdfhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/Horgan-et-al_Stakeholder-perceptions-of-nano-and-ge-in-food_Sustainability_2025_full.jpg10.3390/su17156795Sustainability
Oates, C. C., Grieger, K., Emanuel, R., & Nelson, N. G. (2025). Surface waters in socially vulnerable areas are disproportionately under-monitored for nutrients in the US South Atlantic-Gulf region. Nature Water, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44221-025-00460-5.Surface waters in socially vulnerable areas are disproportionately under-monitored for nutrients in the US South Atlantic-Gulf regionKhara Grieger20257/15/2025This study investigates whether active water quality monitoring stations are proportionately distributed across communities of varying social vulnerability. We specifically focus on nutrient monitoring of surface waters in the South Atlantic-Gulf region, a water-rich area with wide-ranging land uses and communities that span the social vulnerability spectrum. We used 2018–2022 data from the US Water Quality Portal to compare station locations to metrics from the US Centers for Disease Control Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) and hydrography from the US Geological Survey. Statistical analyses revealed a substantial imbalance in the distribution of active monitoring station placements, with more monitoring stations in lower vulnerability areas and fewer in high vulnerability areas, and patterns that vary by state. Stations were clustered in areas of similar SVI values; areas were less likely to be monitored if they were near tracts with differing SVI values.Water quality, Nutrient monitoring, Social vulnerability, Hydrographyhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s44221-025-00460-5https://www.nature.com/articles/s44221-025-00460-510.1038/s44221-025-00460-5Nature Water
Bacheva, V., Madison, I., Baldwin, M., Baker, J., Beilstein, M., Call, D. F., Deaver, J. A., Efimenko, K., Genzer, J., Grieger, K., . . . Stroock, A. D. (2025). Transdisciplinary Collaborations for Advancing Sustainable and Resilient Agricultural Systems. Global Change Biology, 31(4), e70142. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.70142. PDFTransdisciplinary Collaborations for Advancing Sustainable and Resilient Agricultural SystemsKhara Grieger20254/8/2025Feeding the growing human population sustainably amidst climate change is one of the most important challenges in the 21st century. Current practices often lead to the overuse of agronomic inputs, such as synthetic fertilizers and water, resulting in environmental contamination and diminishing returns on crop productivity. The complexity of agricultural systems, involving plant-environment interactions and human management, presents significant scientific and technical challenges for developing sustainable practices. Addressing these challenges necessitates transdisciplinary research, involving intense collaboration among fields such as plant science, engineering, computer science, and social sciences. Five case studies are presented here demonstrating successful transdisciplinary approaches toward more sustainable water and fertilizer use. These case studies span multiple scales. By leveraging whole-plant signaling, reporter plants can transform our understanding of plant communication and enable efficient application of water and fertilizers. The use of new fertilizer technologies could increase the availability of phosphorus in the soil. To accelerate advancements in breeding new cultivars, robotic technologies for high-throughput plant screening in different environments at a population scale are discussed. At the ecosystem scale, phosphorus recovery from aquatic systems and methods to minimize phosphorus leaching are described. Finally, as agricultural outputs affect all people, integration of stakeholder perspectives and needs into research is outlined. These case studies highlight how transdisciplinary research and cross-training among biologists, engineers, and social scientists bring diverse expertise to tackling grand challenges in sustainable agriculture, driving discovery and innovation.These case studies highlight how transdisciplinary research and cross-training among biologists, engineers, and social scientists bring diverse expertise to tackling grand challenges in sustainable agriculture, driving discovery and innovation.Phosphorus, Sustainable food and agriculturehttps://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.70142https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gcb.70142https://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Bacheva.Grieger_et-al.-Global-Change-Biology_2025.pdf10.1111/gcb.70142Global Change Biology
Grieger, K., Scholz, M., Cummings, C.L. et al. Exploring awareness, implementation, and future use of urine diversion systems in U.S. university buildings. Environ Syst Decis 45, 17 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-025-10011-8. PDFExploring awareness, implementation, and future use of urine diversion systems in U.S. university buildingsKhara Grieger, Christopher L. Cummings20254/5/2025Urine diversion systems, which include waterless urinals and urine-diverting flush toilets, offer opportunities to conserve water, recover nutrients, promote circular economies, and improve sustainability. While technical development of these systems is critical, understanding stakeholder perceptions is equally important for their successful innovation, implementation, and adoption. This study conducts an exploratory analysis of stakeholder perceptions at U.S. academic institutions regarding how urine diversion technologies fit within the broader array of water conservation technologies and factors that influence decision-making related to urine diversion in buildings. We surveyed 65 stakeholders, including executive leaders, administrators, facilities managers, building managers, and sustainability professionals—key groups responsible for the adoption and maintenance of such systems but underrepresented in prior research. Participants reported a high level of awareness of water conservation technologies and varying degrees of implementation. Across all technologies, low-flush fixtures had the highest rate of implementation and waterless urinals had the highest rate of implementation and subsequent removal due to maintenance and infrastructure challenges. Participants also indicated that compliance with plumbing codes was the most critical factor when considering the implementation of urine diversion systems, followed by efficacy and cost-savings, and water conservation and nutrient recovery were among the least important factors. Future studies should focus on aligning urine diversion systems with building codes and regulations, mitigating clogging and odors to improve acceptance and adoption, and estimating costs and benefits when deciding on their implementation.Urine diversion systems, which include waterless urinals and urine-diverting flush toilets, offer opportunities to conserve water, recover nutrients, promote circular economies, and improve sustainability. While technical development of these systems is critical, understanding stakeholder perceptions is equally important for their successful innovation, implementation, and adoption. We surveyed 65 stakeholders, including executive leaders, administrators, facilities managers, building managers, and sustainability professionals—key groups responsible for the adoption and maintenance of such systems but underrepresented in prior research.Urine diversion, Phosphorus sustainability, Stakeholder perceptionshttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-025-10011-8https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10669-025-10011-8https://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Grieger-et-al.-ESD_2025.pdf10.1007/s10669-025-10011-8 Environment Systems and Decisions
Cimadori I, Di Concetto A, Grieger K. The Protection of Selectively Bred and Gene Edited Farm Animals under EU Law. European Journal of Risk Regulation. (2025) 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2025.12. PDF. GraphicThe Protection of Selectively Bred and Gene Edited Farm Animals under EU LawKhara Grieger20253/17/2025Since the eighteenth century, animal breeding has significantly evolved, culminating in the use of gene editing (GE) technologies like CRISPR-Cas9. These technologies offer unprecedented capabilities to modify animal genomes, potentially revolutionising breeding practices by achieving desired traits much faster compared to traditional selective breeding (SB). Because breeding programmes focussed on productivity traits have often compromised animal welfare, this article provides an analysis of the ethical issues underpinning the use of GE in animal breeding, and the current laws regulating such practices. In doing so, this article critically examines the European Union (EU)’s regulatory framework for SB and GE in farm animals, highlighting significant gaps and inconsistencies. Specifically, the use of GE animals is currently regulated under the EU’s GMO legislation, while SB is more loosely regulated, posing substantial risks to animal welfare. The authors advocate for a regulatory framework that prioritises animal welfare goals and proposes reforms to enhance animal protection objectives by ensuring a more consistent and humane approach to farm animal breeding.This article provides an analysis of the ethical issues underpinning the use of gene editing in animal breeding, and the current laws regulating such practices. In doing so, this article critically examines the European Union (EU)’s regulatory framework for selective breeding and gene editing in farm animals, highlighting significant gaps and inconsistencies.Animal welfare, Gene editing, Selective breedinghttps://doi.org/10.1017/err.2025.12https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-journal-of-risk-regulation/article/protection-of-selectively-bred-and-gene-edited-farm-animals-under-eu-law/44FC16317466A65A655C352A0226544Dhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Cimadori-et-al.-Gene-edited-animals-2025.pdfhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Cimadori-et-al.-Gene-edited-animals-2025_full.jpg10.1017/err.2025.12European Journal of Risk Regulation
Brannon A. and Grieger K. “Addressing PFAS Biosolid Contamination on Farmland.” Southern Ag Today 5(9.5). February 28, 2025. Permalink https://southernagtoday.org/2025/02/07/addressing-pfas-biosolid-contamination-on-farmland/.Addressing PFAS Biosolid Contamination on FarmlandKhara Grieger20252/28/2025Johnson County, Texas, recently requested federal disaster relief over PFAS contamination from biosolid applications on farmland, adding perhaps another theory of redress for such contamination of soils and water. PFAS, which stands for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are man-made chemicals applied in various consumer and industrial uses. PFAS do not easily degrade in the environment and are often referred to as “forever chemicals.” While scientists are early in understanding PFAS’ full range of health and environmental effects, studies indicate links to adverse health outcomes, including cancer and liver and thyroid functioning. PFAS have been released across the county in the air, into water, and onto land. The federal disaster request supplements Johnson County residents’ 2024 federal environmental lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state tort claim against a fertilizer manufacturer.PFAS is an emerging risk that many North Carolinians face, including farmers. While there have been regulations set on levels of PFAS in public drinking water, there are no safety standards for PFAS in soil. A lawsuit in Texas brings to the forefront some of the litigation issues surrounding PFAS in agricultural lands, particularly if they arise from biosolid applications.PFAS, biosolidshttps://southernagtoday.org/2025/02/07/addressing-pfas-biosolid-contamination-on-farmland/
Oates C., Fajardo H., Grieger K., Obenour D., Muenich R. L., & Nelson N. G. (2024) Effective Nutrient Management of Surface Waters in the United States Requires Expanded Water Quality Monitoring in Agriculturally Intensive Areas. ACS Environ Au.5(1):1-11. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsenvironau.4c00060. PDF. GraphicEffective Nutrient Management of Surface Waters in the United States Requires Expanded Water Quality Monitoring in Agriculturally Intensive AreasKhara Grieger202411/28/2024The U.S. Clean Water Act is believed to have driven widespread decreases in pollutants from point sources and developed areas, but has not substantially affected nutrient pollution from agriculture. Today, the highest nutrient concentrations in surface waters are often associated with agricultural production. In this Perspective, we explore whether challenges stemming from the Clean Water Act’s inability to mitigate agricultural nutrient pollution are also exacerbated by coarse nutrient monitoring. We evaluate the current state of nutrient monitoring in surface waters of the contiguous U.S. relative to agricultural nutrient inputs to assess how monitoring effort varies across agriculturally intensive areas. The locations of nutrient monitoring stations with approximately seasonal sampling frequency (4 samples per year, on average) from 2012 to 2021 were compiled from the U.S. Water Quality Portal. Monitoring station locations were then compared to watershed-scale (HUC-8) nutrient inventory estimates for agricultural fertilizer and livestock manure inputs. From this assessment, we found that many, but not all, of the nation’s most agriculturally intensive areas are under-monitored, and often unmonitored. While it is well-known that the Midwest is the epicenter of agricultural production in the U.S., our results reveal it is poorly monitored relative to its agricultural nutrient inputs. Other regions, like the California Central Valley and parts of the southeastern Coastal Plain were also coarsely monitored relative to nutrient inputs. Conversely, some agriculturally intensive watersheds were moderately-to-well monitored (e.g., western Lake Erie basin, eastern North Carolina, and the Delmarva Peninsula), with these basins largely having established Total Maximum Daily Loads and discharging to prominent waterways. In closing, we argue that sparse monitoring across many of the nation’s most agriculturally intensive areas motivate a need to re-envision nutrient monitoring networks, and that increased resources and advanced technologies are likely required to enable effective nutrient source identification throughout the nation.We argue that sparse monitoring across many of the nation’s most agriculturally intensive areas motivate a need to re-envision nutrient monitoring networks, and that increased resources and advanced technologies are likely required to enable effective nutrient source identification throughout the nation.Phosphorus, Nitrogen, Clean Water Act, Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Nutrient Inventoryhttps://doi.org/10.1021/acsenvironau.4c00060https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsenvironau.4c00060https://pubs.acs.org/doi/epdf/10.1021/acsenvironau.4c00060?ref=article_openPDFhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Oates-Grieger-et-al-Nutrient-Mgmt-Surface-Waters-ACS-Env-2024.jpg10.1021/acsenvironau.4c00060ACS Environmental Au
Jones, J.L., Berube, D., Cuchiara, M., Grieger, K. et al. (2024) Positioning nanotechnology to address climate change. Environment Systems and Decisions. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-024-09991-w. PDF. Graphic.Positioning nanotechnology to address climate changeKhara Grieger, David Berube202410/9/2024One of society’s most pressing challenges in the twenty-first century is that of climate change. In fact, climate change is seen as the most defining issue of our time as we are witness to an anthropogenic perturbation in geology and earth sciences of global scale. To move forward in this new era, solutions will be sought to both mitigate the effects of climate change (e.g., reduce greenhouse gasses) as well as adapt and build resilience (e.g., improve infrastructure and agriculture to resist damage from extreme weather or floods). The immediacy of the needed solutions dictates that the response must use the full force of society’s current knowledge base, science, technology, and innovation. Nanotechnology, an enabling technology that has matured over the past few decades and now considered for general-purpose and mass use, is ideal for addressing climate change and its impacts. To position nanotechnology to address such complex challenges, this Perspective integrates collective insights from a broad range of viewpoints and presents recommendations for how research can be motivated and scoped, organized, and implemented to achieve beneficial outcomes and innovations in the most efficient ways. While this Perspective was created with a focus on the research landscape within the United States, the findings are also relevant in other international contexts. Research that can effectively advance nanotechnology solutions will be use-inspired basic research, incorporate systems-level thinking, apply a convergence research approach, engage stakeholders, and require advanced nanotechnology infrastructure. By illuminating this compelling and complex research topic, this Perspective aims to direct, inform, and accelerate needed actions in the research community to advance nanotechnology solutions for addressing climate change.This article examines how the advancement of nanotechnology can be harnessed to address the urgent challenge of climate change. It outlines strategies for integrating use-inspired basic research, systems-level thinking, and convergence research approaches to accelerate innovations in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, strengthening infrastructure resilience, and adapting agriculture to extreme weather events. By offering a comprehensive roadmap, the authors aim to guide research efforts and highlight the global potential of nanotechnology in developing impactful climate solutions.Nanotechnology, Convergence research, Climate change, Infrastructurehttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10669-024-09991-whttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Jones_Nano-for-climate-change-Grieger-2024-s10669-024-09991-w.pdfhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Grieger-et-al_Nano-for-climate_Env-Sys-Des_2024_1920x1080.jpg10.1007/s10669-024-09991-wEnvironmental Systems and Decisions
Grieger, K.D., Loschin, N., Barnhill, K., Gould, F. (2024). Let’s Talk about Genetic Engineering: A Guide to Understanding Genetic Engineering and Its Applications in Food, Agriculture, and the Environment. NC State Extension. Retrieved from https://content.ces.ncsu.edu/lets-talk-about-genetic-engineering. PDF. GraphicLet’s Talk about Genetic Engineering: A Guide to Understanding Genetic Engineering and Its Applications in Food, Agriculture, and the EnvironmentKhara Grieger, Nick Loschin, Katie Barnhill, Fred Gould20248/6/2024Biotechnology refers to the field of science where genetic material, living organisms, cells, and biological systems can be studied or used to create products and technologies. For instance, genetic engineering refers to a powerful set of tools within the field of biotechnology. By using genetic engineering in food, agricultural, and environmental contexts, scientists have been able to develop new food products, crop varieties, and approaches to potentially restore ecosystems, among other examples. Many of these applications aim to improve or enhance food production, quality, and environmental conditions. At the same time, there have been significant discussions and public debates over the past few decades about the role of genetic engineering and its use in different fields. Today, scientists and regulatory officials continue to work together with other stakeholders from industry, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and members of the public to understand and address these concerns. This work also aims to refine approaches to evaluate safety and ensure sufficient regulatory oversight of genetic engineering and its use in various products and within different contexts. This publication outlines and describes core concepts related to genetic engineering and its use in food, agriculture, and the environment. This information may be particularly helpful for Extension agents, researchers, community members, government officials, and others who wish to better understand genetic engineering and the role it plays in our society.This publication outlines and describes core concepts related to genetic engineering and its use in food, agriculture, and the environment. This information may be particularly helpful for Extension agents, researchers, community members, government officials, and others who wish to better understand genetic engineering and the role it plays in our society.Genetic Engineering, Food, Agriculture, Environmenthttps://content.ces.ncsu.edu/lets-talk-about-genetic-engineeringhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Grieger-et-al-About-GE-2024.pdfhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Grieger-et-al-About-GE_2024_full.jpgNC State Extension
Merck, A., Grieger, K., Crane, L., Boyer, T. 2024. Researchers must address regulatory regimes to scale up adoption of urine diversion systems in the U.S. Environ. Res.: Infrastruct. Sustain. 4 023001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2634-4505/ad59c3. PDFResearchers must address regulatory regimes to scale up adoption of urine diversion systems in the U.S.Khara Grieger, Ashton Merck20247/1/2024Urine diversion (UD) is a system-of-systems that involves source separation of waste to maximize recovery of valuable nutrients, including phosphorus. Recent research shows how UD systems offer valuable ecological benefits and can aid in water conservation efforts, and public perception studies suggest that UD systems are generally viewed positively by end-users and the general public. Nevertheless, adoption and implementation of this promising sustainability solution remains limited in many countries, including the United States (U.S.). In this perspective, we argue that in order to scale up adoption in the U.S., UD researchers and innovators must do more to address regulatory barriers. We draw on insights from political science research on 'regulatory regimes' to introduce the array of regulations that apply to UD systems, with a focus on commercial and institutional buildings. We examine regulatory regimes all along the UD system-of-systems, beginning at the point of collection and ending at the point of beneficial reuse. We then propose next steps to address current regulatory challenges that impact adoption, with an emphasis on the importance of stakeholder coordination. Throughout, we argue that law and regulation plays a critical role in shaping adoption of UD technologies because: (1) different regulatory regimes will be important at different points in the system-of-systems, (2) there may be multiple regulatory regimes that apply to a single subsystem, and (3) it is important to consider that legal and regulatory definitions of a technology may not match scientific understanding.Urine diversion (UD) is a system-of-systems that involves source separation of waste to maximize recovery of valuable nutrients, including phosphorus. Recent research shows how UD systems offer valuable ecological benefits and can aid in water conservation efforts, and public perception studies suggest that UD systems are generally viewed positively by end-users and the general public. Nevertheless, adoption and implementation of this promising sustainability solution remains limited in many countries, including the United States (U.S.). In this perspective, we argue that in order to scale up adoption in the U.S., UD researchers and innovators must do more to address regulatory barriers.Urine diversion, Phosphorus, Regulationhttps://doi.org/10.1088/2634-4505/ad59c3https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2634-4505/ad59c3https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2634-4505/ad59c3/pdf10.1088/2634-4505/ad59c3Environ. Res.: Infrastruct. Sustain.
Lowry, G.V., Giraldo, J.P., Steinmetz, N.F.,... Grieger, K., et al. Towards realizing nano-enabled precision delivery in plants. Nat. Nanotechnol. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-024-01667-5. PDF. GraphicTowards realizing nano-enabled precision delivery in plantsKhara Grieger20246/6/2024Nanocarriers (NCs) that can precisely deliver active agents, nutrients and genetic materials into plants will make crop agriculture more resilient to climate change and sustainable. As a research field, nano-agriculture is still developing, with significant scientific and societal barriers to overcome. In this Review, we argue that lessons can be learned from mammalian nanomedicine. In particular, it may be possible to enhance efficiency and efficacy by improving our understanding of how NC properties affect their interactions with plant surfaces and biomolecules, and their ability to carry and deliver cargo to specific locations. New tools are required to rapidly assess NC–plant interactions and to explore and verify the range of viable targeting approaches in plants. Elucidating these interactions can lead to the creation of computer-generated in silico models (digital twins) to predict the impact of different NC and plant properties, biological responses, and environmental conditions on the efficiency and efficacy of nanotechnology approaches. Finally, we highlight the need for nano-agriculture researchers and social scientists to converge in order to develop sustainable, safe and socially acceptable NCs.This Review discussed the development of digital plants from the scale of molecules to organisms. A digital plant model at this level of organization could potentially be incorporated into already existing crop or ecosystem models205 to simulate NC and environmental interactions at a larger scale. Overcoming these scientific challenges to develop globally sustainable nano-enabled precision delivery approaches will require convergence across both scientific and societal boundaries.Nanotechnology, Nano-carriers, Sustainabilityhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-024-01667-5https://link.springer.com/article/10.1038/s41565-024-01667-5https://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Lowry-et-al.-NN-2024_In-print.pdf10.1038/s41565-024-01667-5Nat. Nanotechnol.
Grieger, K. , Wiener, J., Kuzma, J. Improving risk governance strategies via learning: a comparative analysis of solar radiation modification and gene drives. Environment Systems and Decisions. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-024-09979-6. PDF. Graphic.Improving risk governance strategies via learning: a comparative analysis of solar radiation modification and gene drivesKhara Grieger, Jennifer Kuzma20246/4/2024Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) and gene drive organisms (GDOs) have been proposed as technological responses to complex entrenched environmental challenges. They also share several characteristics of emerging risks, including extensive uncertainties, systemic interdependencies, and risk profiles intertwined with societal contexts. This Perspective conducts a comparative analysis of the two technologies, and identifies ways in which their research and policy communities may learn from each other to inform future risk governance strategies. We find that SAI and GDOs share common features of aiming to improve or restore a public good, are characterized by numerous potential ecological, societal, and ethical risks associated with deep uncertainty, and are challenged by how best to coordinate behavior of different actors. Meanwhile, SAI and GDOs differ in their temporal and spatial mode of deployment, spread, degree and type of reversibility, and potential for environmental monitoring. Based on this analysis, we find the field of SAI may learn from GDOs by enhancing its international collaborations for governance and oversight, while the field of GDOs may learn from SAI by investing in research focused on economics and decision-modeling. Additionally, given the relatively early development stages of SAI and GDOs, there may be ample opportunities to learn from risk governance efforts of other emerging technologies, including the need for improved monitoring and incorporating aspects of responsible innovation in research and any deployment.By comparing and contrasting the technical and risk governance features of SAI and GDOs, this Perspective identifies ways in which research and policy communities may learn from each other to inform future risk governance strategies. Key findings include similarities and differences between the two emerging technologies, as well as opportunities for learning across these two domains and from other emerging technologies. We further suggest challenges and opportunities for SAI and GDOs on issues including international cooperative governance, economics and decision research, reversibility, adaptive learning, and monitoring. Overall, these suggestions may be useful for researchers, scholars, and decision-makers involved in the risk governance of SAI, GDOs, and other emerging technologies that are being investigated or considered as technological responses to complex environmental challenges.Gene drives, Risk governance, Stratospheric aerosol injectionhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-024-09979-6https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10669-024-09979-6https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10669-024-09979-6.pdfhttps://ges.research.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Grieger-SGI-and-GDOs-RRI_2024_1500x844.jpg10.1007/s10669-024-09979-6Environment Systems and Decisions.
Grieger, K. & May, K. (2024). Guide to Understanding and Addressing PFAS in our Communities. NC State Extension. Retrieved from https://content.ces.ncsu.edu/Guide-to-Understanding-and-Addressing-PFAS-in-our-communities. PDFGuide to Understanding and Addressing PFAS in our CommunitiesKhara Grieger20241/18/2024This publication addresses the following questions:
  • What are per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)?
  • How could I be exposed?
  • What are the possible health effects from exposures?
  • Can I have my water or soil tested for PFAS?
  • Is it safe to eat from a home garden affected by PFAS?
  • Is it safe for my livestock to graze on land affected by PFAS?
  • How can we reduce our exposure?
  • How are regulatory agencies addressing PFAS?
While this does not relate to genetic engineering, PFAS continues to be a major risk to the state of North Carolina and our inhabitants. Stakeholders, citizens, and the public are increasingly requesting more information about PFAS and ways to reduce potential risks. This is the first NC State Extension publication (peer-reviewed) published on PFAS.PFAS, Water, Agriculture, Riskhttps://content.ces.ncsu.edu/Guide-to-Understanding-and-Addressing-PFAS-in-our-communities0NC State Extension
Grieger, K. and Kuzma, J. (2023) Ensuring Sustainable Novel Plant Biotechnologies Requires Formalized Research and Assessment Programs. ACS Agric. Sci. Technol. Article ASAP. doi: 10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00380. PDF. Graphical abstract. Supplementary cover artEnsuring Sustainable Novel Plant Biotechnologies Requires Formalized Research and Assessment ProgramsKhara Grieger, Jennifer Kuzma202310/19/2023To ensure sustainable food systems that rely on novel plant biotechnologies, sustainability must be assessed through formalized research programs with fit-for-purpose tools and approaches. This Viewpoint puts forward one approach for establishing such research programs for evaluating the sustainability of novel plant biotechnologies befitting the 21st century.Published as part of the ACS Agricultural Science & Technology virtual special issue “Plant Biotechnology, Molecular Breeding, and Food Security," this article highlights the pressing need for formalized research and assessment tools to evaluate the sustainability of new plant biotechnologies. Current oversight processes fall short by primarily focusing on safety and environmental concerns. To address this gap, the authors propose a federal office that coordinates research and standardizes assessment parameters. This approach ensures that emerging biotechnologies align with sustainability goals, provide broader benefits, and gain public trust, ultimately promoting sustainable food systems.Plant biotechnologies, Sustainability assessment, Genetic engineering, Federal oversight, Sustainable food systems10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00380https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00380#https://research.ncsu.edu/ges/files/2023/10/grieger-kuzma-2023-ensuring-sustainable-novel-plant-biotechnologies-requires-formalized-research-and-assessment-programs.pdfhttps://research.ncsu.edu/ges/files/2023/10/grieger-and-kuzma-sustainbility-assess.-of-novel-plant-biotech_acsagscitech_2023.jpeg10.1021/acsagscitech.3c00380ACS Agric. Sci. Technol.
Kuzma, J., Grieger, K., Cimadori, I., Cummings, C. L., Loschin, N., & Wei, W. (2023). Parameters, practices, and preferences for regulatory review of emerging biotechnology products in food and agriculture. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 11, 1256388. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1256388. PDFParameters, practices, and preferences for regulatory review of emerging biotechnology products in food and agricultureJennifer Kuzma, Khara Grieger, Ilaria Cimadori, Christopher L. Cummings, Nick Loschin, Wei Wei20239/28/2023This paper evaluates the U.S. regulatory review of three emerging biotechnology products according to parameters, practices, and endpoints of assessments that are important to stakeholders and publics. First, we present a summary of the literature on variables that are important to non-expert publics in governing biotech products, including ethical, social, policy process, and risk and benefit parameters. Second, we draw from our USDA-funded project results that surveyed stakeholders with subject matter expertise about their attitudes towards important risk, benefit, sustainability, and societal impact parameters for assessing novel agrifood technologies, including biotech. Third, we evaluate the regulatory assessments of three food and agricultural biotechnology case studies that have been reviewed under U.S. regulatory agencies and laws of the Coordinated Framework for the Regulation of Biotechnology, including gene-edited soybeans, beef cattle, and mustard greens. Evaluation of the regulatory review process was based on parameters identified in steps 1 and 2 which were deemed important to both publics and stakeholders. Based on this review, we then propose several policy options for U.S. federal agencies to strengthen their oversight processes to better align with a broader range of parameters to support sustainable agrifood products that rely on novel technologies. These policy options include 1) those that would not require new institutions or legal foundations (such as conducting Environmental Impact Statements and/or requiring a minimal level of safety data), 2) those that would require a novel institutional or cross-institutional framework (such as developing a publicly-available website and/or performing holistic sustainability assessments), and 3) those that would require the agencies to have additional legal authorities (such as requiring agencies to review biotech products according to a minimal set of health, environmental, and socio-economic parameters). Overall, the results of this analysis will be important for guiding policy practice and formulation in the regulatory assessment of emerging biotechnology products that challenge existing legal and institutional frameworks.This article reviews the U.S. regulatory process for gene-edited foods and finds that it does not adequately consider public concerns about transparency, trust, choice, equity, animal welfare, and longer-term ecosystem consequences. The authors propose policy changes to make the review process more holistic and transparent, and to give consumers more choice. These findings highlight the need for a more robust regulatory framework for gene-edited foods that reflects the concerns of the public.Regulation, Risk assessment, Governance, Biotechnology, Gene editing10.3389/fbioe.2023.1256388https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2023.1256388https://research.ncsu.edu/ges/files/2023/09/Kuzma-et-al_PPP-reg-review-of-emerging-biotech-in-food-and-ag_2023_fbioe-11-1256388.pdf10.3389/fbioe.2023.1256388Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Nelson, N., Harris, A., Anarde, K., Hino, M., Grieger, K. 2023. Exercise Caution: Tidal Floods May Contain Pollutants. North Carolina Sea Grant. Available: https://ncseagrant.ncsu.edu/quick-links/tidalfloods/Exercise Caution: Tidal Floods May Contain PollutantsKhara Grieger20238/25/2023Coastal communities in North Carolina and other states are increasingly dealing with tidal floods. “Tidal floods” refers to the overflowing of saltwater from the ocean and other marine water bodies (sounds, estuaries) onto land. During these events, tidal floodwaters can become contaminated with various biological and chemical substances. For these reasons, it is recommended to minimize or avoid contact with floodwater to protect our health and the health of our communities.A multidisciplinary team is trying to better understand the water quality of tidal floodwaters, and ways in which we can protect our health. While the research is ongoing, this fact sheet may be helpful for government officials, researchers, advisory boards, local extension agents, and community outreach teams to better understand the potential health impacts of tidal floodwaters on coastal communities. Specific topics covered in this fact sheet include:● What is tidal flooding?● What do we know about the water quality of tidal floods?● What should I do if I encounter tidal floodwaters?● Can we predict when tidal flooding may occur?● How can I learn more about tidal flooding?Currently, we know very little about the water quality of tidal floods. Water quality refers to a range of chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of water (USGS 2019). Floodwaters may have poor water quality, as various biological and chemical contaminants may be introduced into the floodwaters from different sources, including yards, urban areas, or wastewater systems (e.g., sewage or septic). Biological contaminants can include bacterial, viral, or protozoan pathogens (e.g., E. coli, Vibrio), and chemical contaminants may include heavy metals (e.g., lead, mercury), pesticides, and industrial chemicals.While there have been very few published studies that have measured the water quality of tidal floods, it is important to consider the potential impact of water quality on public health in flooded areas. This is because people may walk or bicycle through tidal floodwaters and therefore come into contact with the floodwaters. If the water has poor quality, it may pose a health risk. Even after tidal floodwaters recede, contaminants can remain in the soil of yards, green areas (e.g., playgrounds), or in surrounding wetlands for months (CDC 2021a). More research is needed to better understand the water quality and public health impacts of tidal floods.Tidal floods, safety, risk, public healthhttps://ncseagrant.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Tidal-Floods-Fact-Sheet-NC-Sea-Grant-1-1.pdfhttps://ncseagrant.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Tidal-Floods-Fact-Sheet-NC-Sea-Grant-1-1.pdf0North Carolina Sea Grant
Merck, A.W., Grieger, K.D., Deviney, A., Marshall, A.-M. Using a Phosphorus Flow Diagram as a Boundary Object to Inform Stakeholder Engagement. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11496. doi: 10.3390/su151511496Using a Phosphorus Flow Diagram as a Boundary Object to Inform Stakeholder EngagementAshton Merck, Khara Grieger20237/25/2023Phosphorus (P) is essential for life on Earth, yet its current management is unsustainable. Stakeholder engagement is urgently needed to help ensure that scientific and technical solutions to improve P sustainability meet the needs of diverse groups, yet there are comparatively few studies that provide insights into stakeholder views, perceptions, or concerns. In this opinion, we use a mass flow diagram of P as a boundary object to understand the complex challenges of sustainable P management. In particular, we map US stakeholder groups onto the mass flow diagram to incorporate human factors into mass flows at a national scale. Our approach is grounded in well-established social–scientific methodologies, such as stakeholder mapping and social network analysis, but is applied in a novel way that can be generalized to other mass flows and geographic areas. We then suggest ways that researchers can use the annotated flow diagram to identify both knowledge gaps and research gaps in stakeholder engagement, especially in interdisciplinary or convergence research contexts.In this opinion, we used the P flow diagram as a boundary object to identify and organize potential US stakeholders in P sustainability, grounded in existing knowledge from literature on stakeholder engagement in P sustainability. The process outlined here reflects existing best practices in stakeholder research to define stakeholders as those who can influence, as well as those who are influenced by, decisions about the environment, subject to pragmatic constraints on participation. Furthermore, the approach proposed here responds to calls by other researchers to employ inclusive practices to involve previously overlooked stakeholders rather than relying on the “usual suspects” already known to decision makers and researchers.Stakeholder engagement, Phosphorus, Sustainability,Bboundary object10.3390/su151511496https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511496https://research.ncsu.edu/ges/files/2023/07/Greiger_P-flow-as-boundry-object-rt-engagement_Sustainability-15-11496-with-cover.pdfhttps://research.ncsu.edu/ges/files/2023/07/Greiger_P-as-boundary-object-Sustainability-graphic.jpg10.3390/su151511496Sustainability
Wei, W., Grieger, K., Cummings, C. L., Loschin, N., & Kuzma, J. (2023) Identifying sustainability assessment parameters for genetically engineered agrifoods. Plants, People, Planet. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10411PDFIdentifying sustainability assessment parameters for genetically engineered agrifoodsWei Wei, Khara Grieger, Christopher L. Cummings, Nick Loschin, Jennifer Kuzma20237/22/2023To achieve international sustainable development goals, food and agricultural production need to rely on sustainable and resilient practices. Traditional breeding as well as the use of new agricultural technologies, including genetic engineering and gene editing, have the potential to help achieve sustainable agrifood production. Although numerous oversight mechanisms exist to guarantee the secure and sustainable advancement and utilization of genetically engineered agrifoods, the majority of these mechanisms heavily depend on a narrow set of parameters to assess risks and safety concerning human health and nontarget organisms. However, a more comprehensive range of parameters should be considered to promote environmental and social sustainability in a more holistic manner. This Opinion article argues that to achieve a more sustainable agrifood production that relies on genetic engineering, governance systems related to new agrifood biotechnologies should incorporate a broader array of environmental, health, ethical, and societal factors to ensure their sustainability in the long-term. To facilitate this process, we propose a set of parameters to help evaluate the sustainability of agrifoods that rely on genetic engineering. We then discuss major challenges and opportunities for formalizing sustainability parameters in US governance policy and decision-making systems. Overall, this work contributes to further developing a more comprehensive assessment framework that aims to minimize potential risks and maximize potential benefits of agrifood biotechnology while also fostering sustainability.This Opinion article argues that to achieve a more sustainable agrifood production that relies on genetic engineering, governance systems related to new agrifood biotechnologies should incorporate a broader array of environmental, health, ethical, and societal factors to ensure their sustainability in the long-term. To facilitate this process, we propose a set of parameters to help evaluate the sustainability of agrifoods that rely on genetic engineering. We then discuss major challenges and opportunities for formalizing sustainability parameters in US governance policy and decision-making systems. Overall, this work contributes to further developing a more comprehensive assessment framework that aims to minimize potential risks and maximize potential benefits of agrifood biotechnology while also fostering sustainability.Agriculture, Benefits, Genetic engineering, Risks, Sustainability10.1002/ppp3.10411https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ppp3.1041110.1002/ppp3.10411Plants, People, Planet
Ethridge, S., Grieger, K., Locke, A., Everman, W., Jordan, D., & Leon, R. (2023). Views of RNAi approaches for weed management in turfgrass systems. Weed Science, 1-33. doi: 10.1017/wsc.2023.37Views of RNAi approaches for weed management in turfgrass systemsSandy Ethridge, Khara Grieger, Ramon Leon20237/10/2023Public concern regarding the use of herbicides in urban areas (e.g., golf courses, parks, lawns) is increasing. Thus, there is a need for alternative methods for weed control that are safe for the public, effective against weeds, and yet selective to turfgrass and other desirable species. New molecular tools such as RNAi have a potential to meet all those requirements, but before these technologies can be implemented, it is critical to understand the perceptions of key stakeholders to facilitate adoption as well as regulatory processes. With this in mind, turfgrass system managers, such as golf course superintendents and lawn care providers, were surveyed to gain insight to the perception and potential adoption of RNAi technology for weed management. Based on survey results, turfgrass managers believe that cost of weed management and time spent managing weeds are the main challenges faced in their fields. When considering new weed management tools, survey respondents were most concerned about cost, efficacy, and efficiency of a new product. Survey respondents were also optimistic toward RNAi for weed management and would either use this technology in their own fields or be willing to conduct research to develop RNAi herbicides. Although respondents believed that the general public would have some concerns about this technology, they did not believe this to be the most important factor for them when choosing new weed management tools. The need for new herbicides to balance weed control challenges and public demands is a central factor for turfgrass managers’ willingness to use RNAi-based weed control in turfgrass systems. They believe their clientele will be accepting of RNAi tools, although further research is needed to investigate how a wider range of stakeholders perceive RNAi tools for turfgrass management more broadly.The need for new herbicides to balance weed control challenges and public demands is a central factor for turfgrass managers’ willingness to use RNAi-based weed control in turfgrass systems. They believe their clientele will be accepting of RNAi tools, although further research is needed to investigate how a wider range of stakeholders perceive RNAi tools for turfgrass management more broadly.Biotechnology, Perceptions, Acceptance, Turfgrass10.1017/wsc.2023.37https://doi.org/10.1017/wsc.2023.37https://research.ncsu.edu/ges/files/2023/07/Ethridge-et-al.-RNAi-turfgrass-2023.pdf10.1017/wsc.2023.37Weed Science
Grieger, K., Merck, A., Deviney, A. et al. What are stakeholder views and needs for achieving phosphorus sustainability?. Environ Syst Decis (2023). DOI: 10.1007/s10669-023-09917-y. PDFWhat are Stakeholder Views and Needs for Achieving Phosphorus Sustainability?Khara Grieger, Ashton Merck20235/23/2023Our society depends on the effective management of phosphorus (P). Phosphorus is a key component of agricultural fertilizers to improve crop yields, and also plays a critical role in many industrial processes and consumer products. In the past decade, there have been numerous calls for innovative approaches to manage P more sustainably, as it is a nonrenewable resource that can adversely impact aquatic ecosystems from runoff and inefficiencies in P use. To develop more sustainable solutions that will ultimately be adopted, diverse stakeholder perspectives must be recognized, including those in industry, government, academia, non-governmental organizations, and other civil groups. This study responds to this need by identifying stakeholder views, needs, concerns, and challenges regarding P sustainability. An online survey was developed and deployed to individuals identified as P sustainability experts and professionals in the U.S. and abroad. Based on responses from 96 stakeholder participants from a range of sectors, areas of expertise, and geographies, we found that the vast majority of stakeholders considered current P use to be unsustainable and were very concerned about the ability to manage P sustainably. Stakeholder participants did not distinguish between urgent and long-term challenges, and perceived financial and regulatory issues to be of greatest importance. Stakeholder participants expressed a range of needs to improve P management systems, including improved management practices, new technologies, enhanced regulations, and better approaches for engagement. Outcomes from this work can help inform future research, engagement, and policy priorities to ensure sustainable P management solutions based on stakeholder-identified perspectives and needs.Overall, results from this study may help inform future research, engagement, and policy priorities to ensure sustainable P management solutions based on stakeholder-identified perspectives and needs.Sustainability, Stakeholders, Phosphorus10.1007/s10669-023-09917-yhttps://rdcu.be/ddlwg10.1007/s10669-023-09917-yEnviron Syst Decis
He, Q.,... Grieger, K. et al. (2023). Phytoextraction of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) by Weeds: Effect of Pfas Physicochemical Properties and Plant Physiological Traits. Journal of Hazardous Materials, vol. 454, 28 Apr. 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.131492. PDFPhytoextraction of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) by weeds: Effect of PFAS physicochemical properties and plant physiological traits.Khara Grieger20234/28/2023Phytoextraction is a promising technology that uses plants to remediate contaminated soil. However, its feasibility for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and the impact of PFAS properties and plant traits on phytoextraction efficacy remains unknown. In this study, we conducted greenhouse experiment and evaluated the potential of weeds for phytoextraction of PFAS from soil and assessed the effects of PFAS properties and plant traits on PFAS uptake via systematic correlation analyses and electron probe microanalyzer with energy dispersive spectroscopy (FE-EPMA-EDS) imaging. The results showed that 1) phytoextraction can remove 0.04%− 41.4%wt of PFAS from soil, with extracted PFAS primarily stored in plant shoots; 2) Weeds preferentially extracted short-chain PFAS over long-chain homologues from soil. 3) PFAS molecular size and hydrophilicity determined plant uptake behavior, while plant morphological traits, particularly root protein and lipid content, influenced PFAS accumulation and translocation. Although plants with thin roots and small leaf areas exhibited greater PFAS uptake and storage ability, the impact of PFAS physicochemical properties was more significant. 4) Finally, short-chain PFAS were transported quickly upwards in the plant, while uptake of long-chain PFOS was restricted.Exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) is an emerging issue of concern. PFAS are a large group of chemicals that have been manufactured by people for several decades, and are now considered among the most important contaminants to address in our society. This study investigates the role of plants, specifically weeds, to uptake PFAS as a way to remove PFAS in contaminated soils. Our study explored the rates of PFAS uptake by weeds and also investigated the rate of uptake based on different types of PFAS. It sheds light on the use of phytoremediation to remove PFAS in contaminated soils.PFAS, Phytoextraction, Environmental Remediation, Emerging Contaminants10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.131492https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.13149210.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.131492Journal of Hazardous Materials

Assessing the Impacts of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystem Functioning: Litter Decomposition and Nutrient Uptake in Forest and Hyper-Eutrophic Stream

Gao, J., …, Grieger, K. 2022. Assessing the Impacts of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystem Functioning: Litter Decomposition and Nutrient Uptake in Forest and Hyper-Eutrophic Stream. Ecological Indicators, 138: 108859. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108859. PDF		Assessing the Impacts of Urbanization on Stream Ecosystem Functioning: Litter Decomposition and Nutrient Uptake in Forest and Hyper-Eutrophic StreamKhara Grieger20234/12/2023Rapid urbanization significantly affects freshwater systems by interfering with important ecological functions. The responses of different ecosystem functions in urban streams and their potential ecological effects remain largely unknown, impeding their management and restoration in many cases. In this study, we simultaneously assessed two important ecosystem functions, litter decomposition and nutrient uptake, and investigated the associated microbial and benthic macroinvertebrate communities in two subtropical streams (i.e., a forest headwater stream as a reference and an urban stream that was hyper-eutrophic). Litter decomposition was estimated using litter bags with two mesh sizes (i.e., 50 μm and 2 mm) and two leaf species with different qualities (i.e., Alangium chinense and Machilus leptophylla), with a total of 96 litter bags. Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) uptake rates were measured in situ based on the spiraling model. We found that the decomposition rate of A.chinense was approximately seven times that of M. leptophylla in both streams. Moreover, in the urban stream, the litter decomposition rate (0.004 day−1) was one-third that of the forest stream (0.013 day−1), regardless of the litter species. Macroinvertebrates strongly contributed to litter decomposition in the forest stream, where decomposition rates were 1.8-fold higher in the coarse mesh compared to the fine mesh bags, while they had a negligible role in the urban stream (no significant difference between the two mesh bags). P uptake was higher (85-fold) and N uptake was lower (0.13-fold) in the urban compared to forest stream. Litter decomposition and nutrient uptake exhibit decoupled response. These findings show that litter decomposition by kcoarse/kfine metrics and the uptake of N and P are complementary and should be considered in the management and restoration of urban stream ecosystems.This study examines the effects of urbanization on the functioning of stream ecosystems, specifically focusing on litter decomposition and nutrient uptake. The researchers find that urbanization significantly reduces litter decomposition rates, macroinvertebrate diversity, and nitrogen uptake, while increasing phosphorus uptake in streams. These findings provide valuable insights for the management and restoration of urban streams, highlighting the need to consider both litter decomposition and nutrient uptake in these efforts.Urbanization, Ecosystem function, Litter decomposition, Nutrient uptake, Macroinvertebrates, Microbes10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108859https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X22003302?via%3Dihub10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108859Ecological Indicators
Deviney A., Grieger K., Merck A., Classen J., Marshall A.M. (2023), Phosphorus sustainability through coordinated stakeholder engagement: a perspective. Environment Systems and Decisions. doi: 10.1007/s10669-023-09896-0. PDFPhosphorus sustainability through coordinated stakeholder engagement: a perspectiveKhara Grieger, Ashton Merck, John Classen20232/13/2023In this Perspective we take an in-depth look at what coordinated stakeholder engagement could entail for phosphorus sustainability. The element phosphorus is critical to life on Earth and to the continued functioning of society as we know it. Yet, how society uses phosphorus is currently unsustainable, both as a resource in support of global food production where inequitable distribution creates food security challenges, but also from an environmental aspect, where mismanagement has led to negative impacts on the quality of agricultural soils, human health, and freshwater and marine ecosystems. A number of initiatives and cross-sector consortia have come together to address sustainable phosphorus management at either global or regional scales. However, these efforts could benefit from a more coordinated approach to stakeholder engagement to identify the diversity of needs and perspectives involved in this complex challenge. Herein we examine some examples of different approaches to developing such coordinated stakeholder engagement in other areas of environmental sustainability. We consider how to apply the lessons learned from those efforts toward stakeholder coordination in the realm of phosphorus sustainability. Particularly, we discuss the value of a coordinating body to manage the communications and knowledge sharing necessary to develop trust and cooperation among diverse stakeholder groups and to transition society to more sustainable phosphorus use.Stakeholder, Phosphorus, Sustainability10.1007/s10669-023-09896-0https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10669-023-09896-010.1007/s10669-023-09896-0Environment Systems and Decisions
Ahmad J, Baltzegar J, Brown ZS, Delborne JA, Dhole S, Elsensohn J, Gould F, Grieger K, Hardwick A, Kuzma J, Lorenzen M, Loschin N, Medina R, Mostert B, Mulligan P, Pepin K, Spangle D, Stauffer S, Stokes R, Wei W, and Barnhill SK. (2022) Gene Drives in Agriculture: Risk Assessment and Research Prioritization. Genetic Engineering and Society Center, NC State University Online at: go.ncsu.edu/ges-gene-drive-workshop-white-paperGene Drives in Agriculture: Risk Assessment and Research PrioritizationJabeen Ahmad, Jennifer Baltzegar, Zack Brown, Jason Delborne, Sumit Dhole, Fred Gould, Khara Grieger, Andrew Hardwick, Jennifer Kuzma, Marce Lorenzen, Nick Loschin, Bethany Mosert, Patti Mulligan, Sharon Stauffer, Dylan Spangle, Willy Wei, Katie Barnhill202212/16/2022The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Center at North Carolina State University (NC State) hosted an online workshop entitled “Gene Drives in Agriculture: Workshop on Risk Assessment and Research Prioritization” on June 2, 3, and 17, 2022. The workshop was funded by the USDA-NIFA Biotechnology Risk Assessment Grant program (grant number 2020-33522-32269; PI = Barnhill), with additional support from and partnership with the NC State Center for Excellence in Regulatory Science for Agriculture (CERSA). The workshop included an interdisciplinary lineup of speakers brought together in an effort to review and develop risk assessment methodology associated with gene drives for agriculture pest control. This report was generated to inform and summarize foreseen risks associated with gene drive technology for agriculture pest control to identify data needs for gene drive technology. The workshop featured panelist experts in multiple disciplines specializing in gene drives, risk assessment, policy, and agricultural pests. By use of presentations and breakout sessions, many ideas were presented regarding the risk assessment and risk governance of gene drives in agriculture. This workshop report does not represent the opinion of all the participants in the workshop but serves as a bridge to cover multiple perspectives from interdisciplinary efforts.A comprehensive examination of the application, risks, and regulatory aspects of gene drives for agricultural pest control. Written by attendees of our June 2022 workshop, it underscores the potential of gene drives while acknowledging significant gaps in governance systems and risk assessment data. Key concerns include effectiveness, ecological impacts, and human health effects, and calls for ongoing stakeholder dialogues and integration of social science data into gene drive models.Gene Drive, Agricultural Biotechnology, Risk Assessment, USDA, NIFA, Workshop Reporthttps://research.ncsu.edu/ges/files/2022/11/Gene-Drives-in-Agriculture-Workshop-on-Risk-Assessment-and-Research-Prioritization-2022.pdf0Genetic Engineering and Society Center, NC State University
Horgan, M.D., Hsain, H.A., Jones, J.L. Grieger, K.D. (2023) Development and application of screening-level risk analysis for emerging materials, Sustainable Materials and Technologies, 35. Graphical abstract (Figure 4)Development and application of screening-level risk analysis for emerging materialsKhara Grieger202211/25/2022Analysis of a material's impact on society is increasingly recognized as a necessary step in materials development, especially in the area of lead-free piezoelectrics. Evaluations of the environmental, health, and societal impacts that occur throughout the material's life cycle are critical for determining the viability of lead-free alternatives. Risk screening approaches, such as the screening-level Emerging Materials Risk Analysis (EMRA) proposed in this work, may help researchers compare materials or material production routes to determine more sustainable solutions. As a first demonstration of its utility in the development of lead-free piezoelectrics, the approach introduced in this paper is applied to piezoelectric HfO2 (hafnia) to compare mining and processing routes and to elucidate the more sustainable route for HfO2 production. This paper aims to exemplify how the EMRA risk screening approach incorporates perspectives on environmental, health, and societal impacts into the materials research process by providing a relative risk screening evaluation of different material processing routes and/or different materials. Results from applying EMRA to hafnia show that the major known environmental impacts of hafnia mining and processing involve ecosystem destruction and heavy use of fossil fuels and electricity; health impacts related to potentially unsafe working conditions and potential exposure to radioactive elements; and societal impacts including land disputes and supply concerns. Results also demonstrate that the more sustainable production route currently available includes commercial wet mining with land rehabilitation followed by beneficiation via wet processes with consistent personal protective equipment use and water recycling. Almost all of the previously-mentioned impacts are avoided in this life cycle route. Outcomes from this analysis identify hafnia as a potentially sustainable replacement for certain applications of PZT and therefore encourage continued development of the material. Future efforts will test EMRA on a wide variety of other materials and revise the approach accordingly.Risk Screening, Life Cycle, Material Development, Hafnia, Piezoelectrics10.1016/j.susmat.2022.e00524https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S221499372200138510.1016/j.susmat.2022.e00524Sustainable Materials and Technologies
Merck, A. W., Grieger, K. D., and Kuzma, J.. How can we promote the responsible innovation of nano-agrifood research? Environmental Science & Policy 137, 2022. 10.1016/j.envsci.2022.08.027 PDF. Graphical AbstractHow can we promote the responsible innovation of nano-agrifood research?Ashton Merck, Khara Grieger, Jennifer Kuzma20229/12/2022The use of nanotechnology and engineered nanomaterials in food and agriculture (nano-agrifoods) may provide numerous benefits to society. At the same time, there is also a chance that nano-agrifood innovations may pose new or unknown risks to human or environmental health and safety. To understand these issues and be more responsive to public concerns, researchers are beginning to discuss and adopt an emerging best practice in science and technology communities known as “responsible innovation� (RI). Originally developed by researchers over ten years ago, RI is now a well-established framework that is already a part of science policymaking in the European Union (as “responsible research and innovation�). In the United States, however, there are numerous structural and institutional barriers for scientists to align their research with RI principles and goals. This perspective briefly reviews RI, why it is needed for nano-agrifoods, and how it could be institutionalized more effectively in the U.S. to ensure that future nano-agrifood research is better aligned with societal needs, expectations, and concerns. This work also identifies several pathways to institutionalize RI in nano-agrifoods, ranging from a public legal mandate to privately enforced organizational norms. Further, a set of strategies and/or best practices for implementing RI in the U.S. context is presented that are applicable to both public and private organizations. While key findings from this work are focused on the need for RI of nano-agrifoods in the U.S., implementation of these best practices could have positive benefits for other emerging technologies and in other national contexts as well.Nanotechnology, Nano-Agrifoods, Responsible Innovation, Policy10.1016/j.envsci.2022.08.027https://authors.elsevier.com/a/1fknS5Ce0rj~zN10.1016/j.envsci.2022.08.027Environmental Science & Policy
Grieger, K. (2022). STEPS to Tackle Our Phosphorus Paradox. Wicked Problems, Wolfpack Solutions. DOI: 10.52750/331886STEPS to Tackle Our Phosphorus ParadoxKhara Grieger20228/22/2022Phosphorus is an essential nutrient for animals, plants and microbes. The current system to manage phosphorus is extremely inefficient. One major reason relates to the loss of phosphorus from the food chain, where it can bind to soils and transfer to animal wastes and run-off, which can lead to water pollution, algal blooms, eutrophication and even fish kills. Khara Grieger, Ph.D., argues that overall, our society needs more sustainable solutions to solve our global phosphorus paradox. The Science and Technologies for Phosphorus Sustainability (STEPS) Center, led by researchers at NC State and in partnership with several other institutions, aims to facilitate these solutions through combining science, technology and innovation together with social sciences, communication and stakeholder engagement.The current system to manage phosphorus is extremely inefficient. One major reason relates to the loss of phosphorus from the food chain, where it can transfer to animal wastes and run-off, which can lead to water pollution, algal blooms, eutrophication and fish kills.STEPS, Phosphorus, Food Supply, Agriculture, Wolpack Solutions10.52750/331886https://doi.org/10.52750/33188610.52750/331886Wicked Problems, Wolfpack Solutions
Grieger, K., Cummings, C.L. 2022. Informing Environmental Health and Risk Priorities through Local Outreach and Extension. Environment Systems and Decisions doi: 10.1007/s10669-022-09864-0 PDFInforming Environmental Health and Risk Priorities through Local Outreach and ExtensionKhara Grieger, Christopher L. Cummings20226/2/2022Our society is currently facing an unprecedented number of environmental and societal challenges. Stakeholder and community engagement can help identify priority issues and needs at local levels. One approach to engage stakeholders and communities in the contexts of environmental, health, and societal challenges is to leverage outreach and extension programs. Within this context, and to help identify priority issues to focus subsequent research and extension programs in North Carolina (NC), a survey was conducted with extension agents to identify priority issues as they relate to environmental health and risks and related needs. Based on responses from 66 study participants that represented half of the 100 NC counties, we found that Water pollution, Flooding, Natural resources management, and Engaging stakeholders were top priority issues across all environmental health and risk topics. Participants also identified that practices of Engaging stakeholders as well as Assessing, Managing, and Communicating risks were increasingly important. Participants indicated they needed a moderate-to-significant amount of guidance across a range of areas related to assessing, managing, communicating, andmaking decisions regarding environmental health and risk topics, as well as engaging with local communities. Outcomes from this work can not only help inform subsequent research and outreach efforts at local scales, but this work demonstrates a simple, low-cost approach to elicit perspectives and priorities can be leveraged in other states and regions with established stakeholder and community outreach programs more broadlyEnvironmental Health, Risks, Priorities, North Carolina, Extension10.1007/s10669-022-09864-0https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-022-09864-010.1007/s10669-022-09864-0Environment Systems and Decisions
Merck, A. W., Grieger, K. D., Cuchiara, M., & Kuzma, J. (2022). What Role Does Regulation Play in Responsible Innovation of Nanotechnology in Food and Agriculture? Insights and Framings from U.S. Stakeholders. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society. doi: 10.1177/02704676221102066. PDFWhat Role Does Regulation Play in Responsible Innovation of Nanotechnology in Food and Agriculture? Insights and Framings from U.S. StakeholdersAshton Merck, Khara Grieger, Jennifer Kuzma20226/2/2022Historically, market regulation has played an important role in shaping the trajectory of scientific and technological innovation in food and agriculture. However, regulators’ traditional focus on safety and efficacy may be insufficient to address more complex ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of novel products, such as the use of nanotechnology and nanomaterials in food and agriculture (nano-agrifoods). One solution might be to implement the principles of responsible innovation (RI) to challenge innovators and policymakers to better anticipate risks further upstream and be responsive to societal desires and concerns, although substantial barriers to implementation persist. This paper presents stakeholder views on the relationship between regulation and RI in nano-agrifoods based on a broader U.S. stakeholder engagement study conducted in the fall of 2020. We found that participants raised key issues that incorporated all 4 pillars of RI (anticipation, inclusion, reflexivity, responsiveness). We also found that participants’ attitudes about the relationship between regulation and innovation informed their recommendations about the relationship between regulation and RI. These attitudes are represented in a spectrum of views, ranging from “regulation as barrier� to “regulation as driver� of innovation. We further identified implications for how each attitude might be used to operationalize RI in regulatory systems. Overall, these results suggest that just as regulation drove key innovations in the twentieth century, regulation may still have a role to play in helping to promote RI of nano-agrifoods in the twenty-first.Responsible Innovation, Stakeholder Engagement, Nanotechnology, Food & Agriculture, Regulation10.1177/02704676221102066https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467622110206610.1177/02704676221102066Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society
Zhi Y., Lu H., Grieger K.D., et al. Bioaccumulation and Translocation of 6:2 Fluorotelomer Sulfonate, GenX, and Perfluoroalkyl Acids by Urban Spontaneous Plants. ACS ES&T Engineering Article. April 18, 2022. DOI: 10.1021/acsestengg.1c00423. PDFBioaccumulation and Translocation of 6:2 Fluorotelomer Sulfonate, GenX, and Perfluoroalkyl Acids by Urban Spontaneous PlantsKhara Grieger20224/18/2022There is limited information available regarding the bioaccumulation potential of polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in urban vegetation. Using a controlled greenhouse exposure setting, we investigated the bioaccumulation and translocation of select PFAS in four common urban spontaneous plants. Target compounds included legacy PFAS (perfluoroalkyl carboxylic and sulfonic acids, PFCA/PFSA), a fluorotelomer sulfonate (6:2 FTS), and an emerging fluorinated ether (i.e., hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA), or GenX). Results from this study showed that bioaccumulation factors in root and shoot (BCFroot and BCFshoot) ranged from 0.7 to 83.6 and 0.95 to 26.9, respectively. Phyllanthus urinaria harbored the highest PFAS bioaccumulation capacity among the four urban weed species. The log BCFroot of PFCA homologues showed a concave shape as a function of chain length, while log BCFroot of PFSA increased with chain length. The BCFroot of GenX was lower than that of PFOA; likewise, 6:2 FTS bioaccumulated to a less extent than PFOS. Root uptake seemed to be the dominant accumulation mechanism for the shorter-chain compounds, whereas adsorption was the dominant mechanism for longer-chain compounds such as PFOA. BCFroot and BCFshoot showed consistent trends in response to foliar and root characteristics. Leaf area and average root diameter were the most correlated traits with PFAS bioaccumulation factors, with higher BCF values for plants with smaller leaves and finer roots. This study also provides an important basis for the role and selection of urban weeds in future PFAS bioaccumulation and translocation studies within urban settings.GenX (HFPO-DA), 6:2 FTS, Urban Spontaneous Plants, Bioaccumulation, Phytoremediation10.1021/acsestengg.1c00423https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acsestengg.1c0042310.1021/acsestengg.1c00423ACS ES&T Engineering Article
Grieger K., Merck A., Kuzma K. (2022) Formulating best practices for responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods through stakeholder insights and reflection. Journal of Responsible Technology 10. doi: 10.1016/j.jrt.2022.100030. PDF Graphical abstractFormulating best practices for responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods through stakeholder insights and reflectionKhara Grieger, Ashton Merck, Jennifer Kuzma20224/5/2022Nanotechnology in food and agriculture (nano-agrifoods) may provide numerous benefits to society. At the same time, previous experiences have demonstrated the importance of innovating responsibly. This study reports on stakeholder-identified actions to address concerns about nano-agrifoods and actions to ensure their responsible innovation (RI). We find stakeholders largely supported actions to address risk and safety, followed by governance actions, the examination of ‘need,’ and identification of clear benefits. Participants also indicated no actions would address their concerns in several cases, largely for nano-in food products without a clear ‘need’ and risk/benefit comparisons. We conclude by highlighting four best practices to foster RI of nano-agrifoods, with relevancy for other novel agrifood technologies, including the institutionalization of RI, education and training next generation of researchers and innovators, use of tiered approaches to implement RI principles at different levels and degrees, and incorporation of monitoring and learning systems to improve RI practicesDiscusses stakeholder-identified actions for responsible innovation (RI) in nano-agrifoods, a field with potential benefits and risks. The research highlights four best practices: institutionalizing RI, training future researchers and innovators, implementing RI principles at different levels using a tiered approach, and introducing monitoring and learning systems to improve RI practices. These insights are relevant not just for nano-agrifoods, but for other novel agrifood technologies as well.Nanotechnology, Food, Agriculture, Stakeholders, Responsible Innovation10.1016/j.jrt.2022.100030https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S266665962200007510.1016/j.jrt.2022.100030Journal of Responsible Technology
Baun A., Grieger K. (2022) Environmental Risk Assessment of Emerging Contaminants—The Case of Nanomaterials. In: Guo LH., Mortimer M. (eds) Advances in Toxicology and Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials and Emerging Contaminants. Springer, Singapore. doi: 10.1007/978-981-16-9116-4_15. PDFEnvironmental Risk Assessment of Emerging Contaminants—The Case of NanomaterialsKhara Grieger20223/12/2022Risk assessment is a powerful tool to help evaluate potential environmental and health risks of novel materials. However, traditional risk assessment frameworks and methods often face significant challenges when evaluating novel materials due to uncertainties and data gaps. Engineered nanomaterials is one prominent example of new, advanced materials whereby scientists, researchers and decision-makers are still discussing best practices to modify and update risk assessment frameworks after nearly two decades of research. This chapter focuses on how early warning signs within the environmental risk assessment development process for nanomaterials were addressed with a focus on characterizing uncertainty. We shed light on how environmental risk assessment of nanomaterials transitioned from a state of “known unknowns� to data-driven inputs to conducting risk assessments. We also discuss ecotoxicological testing considerations, and in particular how methodological and technical challenges were addressed. Finally, we provide recommendations on how best to transfer identified best practices and knowledge to other emerging technologies and advanced materials.Risk Assessment, Nanomaterials, Uncertainty, Hazard, Exposure10.1007/978-981-16-9116-4_15https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-16-9116-4_15 "_blank">Environmental Risk Assessment of Emerging Contaminants—The Case of Nanomaterials10.1007/978-981-16-9116-4_15Advances in Toxicology and Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials and Emerging Contaminants
Grieger, K., Zarate, S., Barnhill, S.K., Hunt, S., Jones, D., Kuzma, J. 2022. Fostering Responsible Innovation through Stakeholder Engagement: Case Study of North Carolina Sweetpotato Stakeholders. Sustainability, 14, 2274. doi: 10.3390/su14042274 PDFFostering Responsible Innovation through Stakeholder Engagement: Case Study of North Carolina Sweetpotato StakeholdersKhara Grieger, Sebastian Zarate, Katie Barnhill, Daniela Jones, Jennifer Kuzma20222/17/2022Stakeholder and community engagement are critical for the successful development of new technologies that aim to be integrated into sustainable agriculture systems. This study reports on an approach used to engage stakeholders within the sweetpotato community in North Carolina to understand their preferences, needs, and concerns as they relate to a new sensing and diagnostic platform. This work also demonstrates an example of real-time technology assessment that also fosters responsible innovation through inclusivity and responsiveness. Through the conduction of 29 interviews with sweetpotato stakeholders in North Carolina, we found that participants found the most value in detecting external sweetpotato characteristics, as well as the ability to use or connect to a smartphone that can be used in field. They also found value in including environmental parameters and having a Spanish language module. Most participants indicated that they were comfortable with sharing data as long as it benefited the greater North Carolina sweetpotato industry, and were concerned with sharing these data with “outside� competitors. We also observed differences and variations between stakeholder groups. Overall, this work demonstrates a relatively simple, low-cost approach to eliciting stakeholder needs within a local agricultural context to improve sustainability, an approach that could be leveraged and transferred to other local agrifood systems.Responsible Innovation, Stakeholder Engagement, Sustainability, Sweetpotatoes10.3390/su14042274https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/4/227410.3390/su14042274Sustainability
Ruzante, J. M., Shumaker, E. T., Holt, S., Mayer, S., Kokotovich, A., Cuchiara, M., Binder, A. R., Kuzma, J., & Grieger, K. (2022). Eliciting stakeholder perceptions using a novel online engagement platform: A case study on nano-agrifoods. RTI Press. RTI Press Occasional Paper No. OP-0071-2201. doi: 10.3768/rtipress.2022.op.0071.2201 PDFEliciting stakeholder perceptions using a novel online engagement platform: A case study on nano-agrifoodsAdam Kokotovich, Andrew Binder, Jennifer Kuzma, Khara Grieger20221/31/2022Stakeholder engagement is an important component in developing policies on critical issues such as the use and development of novel methods and technologies, including biotechnologies and nanotechnologies. Understanding the perspectives, needs, and concerns of stakeholder groups can facilitate the development of transparent and trusted policy recommendations. Innovative online research platforms have been developed as alternatives to typical stakeholder engagement methods such as in-person focus groups, interviews, and online and paper surveys. These platforms facilitate the engagement of geographically and linguistically (i.e., individuals who speak different languages) diverse stakeholders using a wide range of methods, from virtual focus groups to surveys. Stakeholders can participate at their own leisure and anonymously, which can facilitate more open interactions on issues where viewpoints may differ. In this work, we used an online stakeholder engagement platform (OSEP) to engage stakeholders and capture their perceptions and views about the application of nanotechnology in food and agriculture (nano-agrifood) and the role of responsible innovation in the development of nano-agrifood products. The OSEP provided a reliable and interactive environment for stakeholders to share their views and exchange ideas. Such OSEPs should be further explored as novel tools for engaging stakeholders on a range of issues from emerging technologies to public health.Stakeholder Engagement, Nanotechnology, Governance, Responsible Innovation, Food, Agriculture10.3768/rtipress.2022.op.0071.2201https://www.rti.org/rti-press-publication/nanotechnology-in-food10.3768/rtipress.2022.op.0071.2201RTI Press
Kokotovich, A.E., Kuzma, J., Cummings, C.L., Grieger, K.. Responsible Innovation Definitions, Practices, and Motivations from Nanotechnology Researchers in Food and Agriculture. Nanoethics (2021). doi: 10.1007/s11569-021-00404-9 PDFResponsible Innovation Definitions, Practices, and Motivations from Nanotechnology Researchers in Food and AgricultureAdam Kokotovich, Jennifer Kuzma, Christopher L. Cummings, Khara Grieger202112/18/2021The growth of responsible innovation (RI) scholarship has been mirrored by a proliferation of RI definitions and practices, as well as a recognition of the importance of context for RI. This study investigates how researchers in the field of nanotechnology for food and agriculture (nano-agrifoods) define and practice RI, as well as what motivations they see for pursuing RI. We conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with nano-agrifood researchers from industry and academia in the USA, where we asked them to describe their RI definitions, practices, and motivations. We analyzed the emergent themes from these interviews, including how the themes aligned with four prominent RI principles (anticipation, inclusion, reflexivity, responsiveness). We found that nano-agrifood researchers largely focused their descriptions of RI definitions, practices, and motivations around a narrow envisioning of the RI principle of anticipation — emphasizing product safety, efficacy, and efficiency. We also found noteworthy tensions surrounding the less frequently mentioned RI principles. For example, some researchers envisioned inclusion as a way to align products with industry interests while others saw it as a way to align products with the public good. Concerning motivations for RI, some researchers viewed RI as a way to protect one’s reputation and avoid lawsuits while others viewed it as a way to improve human well-being and solve societal problems. Given these findings, future efforts to foster RI within nano-agrifoods should promote discussions among researchers concerning what it means to responsibly innovate and what practices this could entail, particularly beyond ensuring product safety, efficacy, and efficiency.Responsible Innovation, Nanotechnology, Food, Agriculture, Governance, Qualitative Research10.1007/s11569-021-00404-9https://rdcu.be/cEHOW10.1007/s11569-021-00404-9Nanoethics
Grieger, K.D, Merck, A.W., Cuchiara, M., Binder, A.R., Kokotovich, A., Cummings, C.L., Kuzma, J. Responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods: Insights and views from U.S. stakeholders. NanoImpact, Volume 24, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.impact.2021.100365. PDFResponsible innovation of nano-agrifoods: Insights and views from U.S. stakeholdersKhara Grieger, Ashton Merck, Andrew Binder, Adam Kokotovich, Christopher L. Cummings, Jennifer Kuzma202111/17/2021To date, there has been little published work that has elicited diverse stakeholder views of nano-agrifoods and of how nano-agrifoods align with the goals of responsible innovation. This paper aims to fill this research gap by investigating views of nano-agrifoods, how well their development adheres to principles of responsible innovation, and potential challenges for achieving responsible nano-agrifood innovation. Using an online engagement platform, we find that U.S. stakeholder views of responsible innovation were dominated by environmental, health, and safety (EHS) contexts, considerations of societal impacts, opportunities for stakeholder engagement, and responding to societal needs. These views overlap with scholarly definitions of responsible innovation, albeit stakeholders were more focused on impacts of products, while the field of responsible innovation strives for more “upstream� considerations of the process of innovation. We also find that views of nano-agrifoods differed across applications with dietary supplements and improved whitening of infant formula viewed least favorably, and environmental health or food safety applications viewed most favorably. These findings align with the larger body of literature, whereby stakeholders are expected to be more supportive of nanotechnology used in agricultural applications compared to directly within food and food supplements. Overall, participants indicated they held relatively neutral views on research and innovation for nano-agrifoods being conducted responsibly, and they identified key challenges to ensuring their responsible innovation that were related to uncertainties in EHS studies, the need for public understanding and acceptance, and adequate regulation. In light of these results, we recommend future research efforts on EHS impacts and risk-benefit frameworks for nano-agrifoods, better understanding stakeholder views on what constitutes effective regulation, and addressing challenges with effective regulation and responsible innovation practices. Graphical abstractFood And Agriculture, Nanotechnology, Responsible Innovation, Stakeholder Engagement10.1016/j.impact.2021.100365https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452074821000744?via=ihub10.1016/j.impact.2021.100365
Grieger, K., Isigonis, P., Franken, R., Wigger, H., Bossa, N., Janer, G., Rycroft, T., Kennedy, A., Hansen, S.F. 2021. Chapter 5: Risk Screening Tools for Engineering Nanomaterials. IN: Ethics in Nanotechnology: Social Sciences and Philosophical Aspects, edited by Marcel Van de Voorde and Gunjan Jeswani, Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter, 2021, pp. 89-108. doi: 10.1515/9783110719932-005Risk Screening Tools for Engineering NanomaterialsKhara Grieger20218/27/2021It has now been more than 15 years since scientists, researchers, risk analyzers, policymakers, and other decision-makers initiated comprehensive investigations into the potential environmental, health, and safety risks of engineered nanomaterials. During this time, various tools have been proposed and/or developed to screen potential environmental, health, and safety risks of engineered nanomaterials. Risk screening tools provide a first-tiered, screening-level evaluation to better understand risks without significant time and resource investments. Stakeholders interested in obtaining an initial screen of potential environmental, health, and safety risks of a nanomaterial or product may find risk screening tools particularly useful to formulate decisions, and/or communicate potential risks to stakeholders. This chapter overviews five leading risk screening tools developed specifically for nanomaterials: NanoRiskCat, Swiss Precautionary Matrix, LICARA nanoSCAN, NanoGRID, and GUIDEnano. The selected tools differ in scope, aims, underlying methodologies, and generated output. These tools were selected for further exploration due to the maturity of their development, application in multiple case studies, projects, and initiatives. After highlighting the main features of each of the risk screening tools, we provide brief guidance on their use and formulate broad recommendations for the field of nanomaterial risk screening tool development.Environmental Health And Safety, Nanotechnology, Nanomaterials, Risk Screening10.1515/9783110719932-005https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110719932-005/html10.1515/9783110719932-005
Zhi, Y., Call, D., Grieger, K., Duckworth, O., Jones, J.L., Knappe, D. 2021. Influence of Natural Organic Matter and pH on Phosphate Removal by and Lanthanum Release from Lanthanum-Modified Bentonite. Water Research; doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2021.117399. PDFInfluence of Natural Organic Matter and pH on Phosphate Removal by and Lanthanum Release from Lanthanum-Modified BentoniteKhara Grieger20216/28/2021Lanthanum modified bentonite (LMB) has been applied to eutrophic lakes to reduce phosphorus (P) concentrations in the water column and mitigate P release from sediments. Previous experiments suggest that natural organic matter (NOM) can interfere with phosphate (PO4)-binding to LMB and exacerbate lanthanum (La)-release from bentonite. This evidence served as motivation for this study to systematically determine the effects of NOM, solution pH, and bentonite as a La carrier on P removal. We conducted both geochemical modeling and controlled-laboratory batch kinetic experiments to understand the pH-dependent impacts of humic and fulvic acids on PO4-binding to LMB and La release from LMB. The role of bentonite was studied by comparing PO4 removal obtained by LMB and La3+ (added as LaCl3 salt to represent the La-containing component of LMB). Our results from both geochemical modeling and batch experiments indicate that the PO4-binding ability of LMB is decreased in the presence of NOM, and the decrease is more pronounced at pH 8.5 than at 6. At the highest evaluated NOM concentration (28 mg C L−1), PO4-removal by La3+ was substantially lower than that by LMB, implying that bentonite clay in LMB shielded La from interactions with NOM, while still allowing PO4capture by La. Finally, the presence of NOM promoted La-release from LMB, and the amount of La released depended on solution pH and both the type (i.e., fulvic/humic acid ratio) and concentration of NOM. Overall, these results provide an important basis for management of P in lakes and eutrophication control that relies on LMB applications.Eutrophication, Lake Restoration, Lanthanum Release, Humic And Fulvic Acid, Phosphate Management10.1016/j.watres.2021.117399https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2021.11739910.1016/j.watres.2021.117399
Cummings Christopher L., Kuzma Jennifer, Kokotovich Adam, Glas David, Grieger Khara (2021). Barriers to responsible innovation of nanotechnology applications in food and agriculture: A study of US experts and developers. NanoImpact, 100326, ISSN 2452-0748. doi:10.1016/j.impact.2021.100326. PDFBarriers to responsible innovation of nanotechnology applications in food and agriculture: A study of US experts and developersChristopher L. Cummings, Jennifer Kuzma, Adam Kokotovich, Khara Grieger20215/23/2021The use of nanotechnology and engineered nanomaterials in food and agriculture (nano-agrifood) sectors is intended to provide several potential benefits to consumers and society, such as the provision of more nutritious processed foods, edible food coatings to extend shelf lives of fresh cut produce, and more sustainable alternatives to traditional agrochemicals. The responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods may be particularly important to pursue given previous case studies involving other agrifood technologies that experienced significant public consternation. Here, we define responsible innovation following Stilgoej et al. (2013) that establishes processes to iteratively review and reflect upon one's innovation, engage stakeholders in dialogue, and to be open and transparent throughout innovation stages – processes that go beyond primary focuses of understanding environmental, health, and safety impacts of nano-enabled products and implementing safe-by-design principles. Despite calls for responsible nano-innovation across diverse sectors, it has not yet been clear what types of barriers are faced by nano-agrifood researchers and innovators in particular. This study therefore identifies and builds the first typology of barriers to responsible innovation as perceived by researchers and product developers working in nano-agrifood sectors in the United States. Our findings report 5 key barriers to responsible innovation of nano-agrifoods: Lack of Data (reported by 70% of all interview participants, and represented 34.6% of all barrier-related excerpts), Lack of Product Oversight (reported by 60% of participants, and represented 28.7% of excerpts), Need for Ensuring Marketability & Use (reported by 70% of participants, and represented 21.3% of all barrier-related excerpts), Need for Increased Collaboration (reported by 40% of participants, and represented 10.3% of excerpts), and finally Lack of Adequate Training & Workforce (reported by 30% of participants, and represented by 5.1% of excerpts). We also relate these key barriers across three main nano-innovation phases, including 1) Scientific and Technical R&D, 2) Product Oversight, and 3) Post-commercialization Marketability & Use, and discuss how these barriers may impact stakeholders as well as present opportunities to align with principles of responsible innovation. Overall, these findings may help illuminate challenges that researchers and innovators face in the pursuit of responsible innovation relevant for the field of nanotechnology with relevancy for other emerging food and agricultural technologies more broadly.Responsible Innovation, Nanotechnology, Nano-Agrifood10.1016/j.impact.2021.100326https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S245207482100035510.1016/j.impact.2021.100326
Kuiken T, Barrangou R, Grieger K. (Broken) Promises of Sustainable Food and Agriculture through New Biotechnologies: The CRISPR Case. CRISPR J. 2021 Feb 10:1-7. doi: 10.1089/crispr.2020.0098.PDF(Broken) Promises of Sustainable Food and Agriculture through New Biotechnologies: The CRISPR CaseTodd Kuiken, Rodolphe Barrangou, Khara Grieger20212/10/2021In recent years, the development of diverse CRISPR-based technologies has revolutionized genome manipulation and enabled a broad scientific community in industry, academia, and beyond to redefine research and development for biotechnology products encompassing food, agriculture, and medicine. CRISPR-based genome editing affords tremendous opportunities in agriculture for the breeding of crops and livestock across the food supply chain that could benefit larger portions of the population compared to CRISPR applications in medicine, for example by helping to feed a growing global population, reach sustainability goals, and possibly mitigate the effects of climate change. These promises come alongside concerns of risks and adverse impacts associated with CRISPR-based genome editing and concerns that governance systems that are ill equipped or not well suited to evaluate these risks. The international community will continue to gather, in multiple venues, in the coming years to discuss these concerns. At the same time, responsible research and innovation paradigms also promise to evaluate the risks and benefits better while incorporating broad stakeholder engagement across the research and development process. The CRISPR community therefore must actively engage with these international deliberations, society, and national governance systems that have promised to build better agricultural systems and provide better food products to achieve equitable outcomes while protecting the environment. Without this active engagement, the promises discussed in this paper are sure to be broken.CRISPR, Stakeholder Engagement, Responsible Research And Innovation10.1089/crispr.2020.0098https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33570455/10.1089/crispr.2020.0098
Kuzma, J. and Grieger, K. 2020. Community-led governance for gene-edited crops. Science, Vol. 370, Issue 6519. doi: 10.1126/science.abd1512Community-led governance for gene-edited cropsJennifer Kuzma, Khara Grieger202011/20/2020New government regulations for biotechnology will create gaps in oversight of gene-edited crops and the provision of information to consumers. With this lack of transparency, gene-edited crop developers may be reconstituting the same conditions that led to public rejection and mistrust of the 1st generation of GM foods. Based on our decades of experience and the literature on risk governance and GM crops, we propose a “Community-Led Responsible Governance� (CLEAR-GOV) coalition and certification process for biotech crops based on information-sharing about the host plants, traits, environment, and current and anticipated market uses of gene-edited and other GM crops. CLEAR-GOV would be led by an independent non-profit coalition, a stakeholder advisory group, and a public advisory group that is diverse in representation of viewpoints and interests. Commitment to CLEAR-GOV will enable the agricultural biotechnology community to earn greater public trust through the open, inclusive, and transparent monitoring of biotech crop use.Responsible Innovation, Biotechnology, Governance, CRISPR, Gene-Editing10.1126/science.abd1512https://science.sciencemag.org/content/370/6519/91610.1126/science.abd1512
Doydora, S., Gatiboni, L., Grieger, K., Hesterberg, D., Jones, J., McLamore, E., Peters, R., Sozzani, R., Van den Broeck, L., Duckworth O. Accessing Legacy Phosphorus in Soil. Soil Systems, 4(74): doi:10.3390/soilsystems4040074 PDFAccessing Legacy Phosphorus in SoilKhara Grieger202012/18/2020Repeated applications of phosphorus (P) fertilizers result in the buildup of P in soil (commonly known as legacy P), a large fraction of which is not immediately available for plant use. Long-term applications and accumulations of soil P is an inefficient use of dwindling P supplies and can result in nutrient runoff, often leading to eutrophication of water bodies. Although soil legacy P is problematic in some regards, it conversely may serve as a source of P for crop use and could potentially decrease dependence on external P fertilizer inputs. This paper reviews the (1) current knowledge on the occurrence and bioaccessibility of different chemical forms of P in soil, (2) legacy P transformations with mineral and organic fertilizer applications in relation to their potential bioaccessibility, and (3) approaches and associated challenges for accessing native soil P that could be used to harness soil legacy P for crop production. We highlight how the occurrence and potential bioaccessibility of different forms of soil inorganic and organic P vary depending on soil properties, such as soil pH and organic matter content. We also found that accumulation of inorganic legacy P forms changes more than organic P species with fertilizer applications and cessations. We also discuss progress and challenges with current approaches for accessing native soil P that could be used for accessing legacy P, including natural and genetically modified plant-based strategies, the use of P-solubilizing microorganisms, and immobilized organic P-hydrolyzing enzymes. It is foreseeable that accessing legacy P will require multidisciplinary approaches to address these limitations.Legacy Phosphorus, Speciation, Transformation, Accessibility10.3390/soilsystems4040074https://www.mdpi.com/2571-8789/4/4/74/htm10.3390/soilsystems4040074
Zhi, Y., Zhang, C., Hjorth, R., Baun, A., Duckworth, O.W., Call, D.F., Knappe, D.R.U., Jones, J.L., Grieger, K. (2020) Emerging lanthanum (III)-containing materials for phosphate removal from water: A review towards future developments. Environment International, 435: 109257. DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2020.106115 PDFEmerging lanthanum (III)-containing materials for phosphate removal from water: A review towards future developmentsKhara Grieger20209/21/2020The last two decades have seen a rise in the development of lanthanum (III)-containing materials (LM) for controlling phosphate in the aquatic environment. >70 papers have been published on this topic in the peer-reviewed literature, but mechanisms of phosphate removal by LM as well as potential environmental impacts of LM remain unclear. In this review, we summarize peer-reviewed scientific articles on the development and use of 80 different types of LM in terms of prospective benefits, potential ecological impacts, and research needs. We find that the main benefits of LM for phosphate removal are their ability to strongly bind phosphate under diverse environmental conditions (e.g., over a wide pH range, in the presence of diverse aqueous constituents). The maximum phosphate uptake capacity of LM correlates primarily with the La content of LM, whereas reaction kinetics are influenced by LM formulation and ambient environmental conditions (e.g., pH, presence of co-existing ions, ligands, organic matter). Increased La solubilization can occur under some environmental conditions, including at moderately acidic pH values (i.e., 7 and moderate-to-high bicarbonate alkalinity, although caution should be applied when considering LM use in aquatic systems with acidic pH values and low bicarbonate alkalinity. Moving forward, we recommend additional research dedicated to understanding La release from LM under diverse environmental conditions as well as long-term exposures on ecological organisms, particularly primary producers and benthic organisms. Further, site-specific monitoring could be useful for evaluating potential impacts of LM on both biotic and abiotic systems post-application.Lanthanum, Phosphate, Surface Water Restoration, Eutrophication Control, Phosphorus Inactivation10.1016/j.envint.2020.106115https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.10611510.1016/j.envint.2020.106115
Huang, Y., Li, W., Gao, J., Wang, F., Yang, W., Han, L., Lin, D., Min, B., Zhi, Y., Grieger, K., Yao, J. Effect of microplastics on ecosystem function: Microbial nitrogen removal mediated by benthic macroinvertebrates. Science of the Total Environment, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142133.Effect of microplastics on ecosystem function: Microbial nitrogen removal mediated by benthic macroinvertebratesKhara Grieger20209/7/2020While ecotoxicological impacts of microplastics on aquatic organisms have started to be investigated recently, impacts on ecosystem functions mediated by benthic biota remain largely unknown. We investigated the effect of microplastics on nitrogen removal in freshwater sediments where microorganisms and benthic invertebrates (i.e., chironomid larvae) co-existed. Using microcosm experiments, sediments with and without invertebrate chironomid larvae were exposed to microplastics (polyethylene) at concentrations of 0, 0.1, and 1 wt%. After 28 days of exposure, the addition of microplastics or chironomid larvae promoted the growth of denitrifying and anammox bacteria, leading to increased total nitrogen removal, in both cases. However, in microcosms with chironomid larvae and microplastics co-existing, nitrogen removal was less than the sum of their individual effects, especially at microplastics concentration of 1 wt%, indicating an adverse effect on microbial nitrogen removal mediated by macroinvertebrates. This study reveals that the increasing concentration of microplastics entangled the nitrogen cycling mediated by benthic invertebrates in freshwater ecosystems. These findings highlight the pursuit of a comprehensive understanding of the impacts of microplastics on the functioning in freshwater ecosystems.Microplastics, Nitrogen Removal Function, Denitrification, Anammox, Chironomids, Microorganisms10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142133https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S004896972035662X10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142133
Saia, S., Nelson, N., Huseth, A., Grieger, K., Reich, B., Transitioning Machine Learning from Theory to Practice in Natural Resource Management. Ecological Modelling, 435: 109257. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109257 PDFTransitioning Machine Learning from Theory to Practice in Natural Resource ManagementKhara Grieger20209/2/2020Advances in sensing and computation have accelerated at unprecedented rates and scales, in turn creating new opportunities for natural resources managers to improve adaptive and predictive management practices by coupling large environmental datasets with machine learning (ML). Yet, to date, ML models often remain inaccessible to managers working outside of academic research. To identify challenges preventing natural resources managers from putting ML into practice more broadly, we convened a group of 23 stakeholders (i.e., applied researchers and practitioners) who model and analyze data collected from environmental and agricultural systems. Workshop participants shared many barriers regarding their perceptions of, and experiences with, ML modeling. These barriers emphasized three main areas of concern: ML model transparency, availability of educational resources, and the role of process-based understanding in ML model development. Informed by workshop participant input, we offer recommendations on how the ecological modelling community canovercome key barriers preventing ML model use in natural resources management and advance the profession towards data-driven decision-making.Machine Learning, Natural Resources Management, Stakeholders, Decision-Support Tools, Decision-Making, Process-Based Modeling10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109257https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304380020303276?via=ihub10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2020.109257
Kuzma, Jennifer, Khara D. Grieger, Zachary S. Brown, and Christopher L. Cummings. “Pandemics Call for Systems Approaches to Research and Funding.� Issues in Science and Technology (May 4, 2020) Download PDFPandemics Call for Systems Approaches to Research and FundingJennifer Kuzma, Khara Grieger, Christopher L. Cummings, Zack Brown20205/4/2020National strategies must incorporate social as well as natural sciences.Coronavirus, COVID-19, Governance, Social Scienceshttps://issues.org/pandemics-call-for-systems-approaches/0
Porcari, A., Borsella, E., Benighaus, C., Grieger, K. et al. From risk perception to risk governance in nanotechnology: a multi-stakeholder study. Journal of Nanoparticle Research (2019) 21: 245. doi: 10.1007/s11051-019-4689-9. Published: 21 November 2019. Download PDFFrom risk perception to risk governance in nanotechnology: a multi-stakeholder study.Khara Grieger201911/21/2019Nanotechnology is widely used in several industrial and consumer sectors and has the potential to grow further and expand globally. An exploration of stakeholder (SH)’s perceptions is essential to ensuring that robust risk governance processes are in place for nanotechnology and nano-related products. In response, numerous studies have been conducted to investigate SH’s perceptions of nanotechnology and nano-related products over the past 15 years. To build on this work and to capture current perceptions across a wide panel of SHs, we conducted a multi-national and cross-sectoral SH study of awareness, perceptions and opinions regarding the use and potential impact on society and the environment of nanomaterials (NMs) and nano-related products, and SH’s expectations about risk governance. The study was conducted using both quantitative and qualitative inquiries and targeted more than 3000 SHs across different sectors in a total of 15 countries. Results showed a tendency towards more convergence of opinions amongst all the relevant SHs and the public respondents than in past studies. There was consensus on the crucial importance of having unbiased, scientific and trustable information regarding the potential impacts of NMs and nano-related products on the environment, health and safety. SHs were interested in having more internationally harmonised and robust regulation for NMs and nano-related products; improved scientific evidence on nanomaterial hazards, exposures and effects; as well as specific guidance on the safe use of NMs. Overall, this work provides an updated scenario of SHs’ perceptions regarding nanotechnology and nano-related products, underscoring the importance of including SH needs in effective risk governance strategies.Nanomaterials, Nano-Related Products, Risk Assessment, Risk Management, Risk Communication, Decision Analysis, Risk-Benefit Of Nanomaterials, Societal Implications10.1007/s11051-019-4689-9https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11051-019-4689-910.1007/s11051-019-4689-9
Khara Grieger, Jacob L. Jones, Steffen Foss Hansen, Christine Ogilvie Hendren, Keld Alstrup Jensen, Jennifer Kuzma & Anders Baun . Best practices from nano-risk analysis relevant for other emerging technologies. Nature Nanotechnology, 14, pages 998–1001(2019) doi: 10.1038/s41565-019-0572-1. Published: 06 November 2019. Download PDFBest practices from nano-risk analysis relevant for other emerging technologiesKhara Grieger201911/6/2019The experiences gained from the past 15 years of nanomaterial risk analysis may be useful for the risk analysis efforts of other emerging technologies.Environmental Health And Safety Issues, Research Management10.1038/s41565-019-0572-1https://rdcu.be/bWvQE10.1038/s41565-019-0572-1
Ninell P. Mortensen, Leah M. Johnson, Khara D. Grieger, Jeffrey L. Ambroso, Timothy R. Fennell. Biological Interactions between Nanomaterials and Placental Development and Function Following Oral Exposure. Reproductive Toxicology - Published Online August 2019. ISSN 0890-6238, doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2019.08.016.Biological Interactions between Nanomaterials and Placental Development and Function Following Oral ExposureKhara Grieger20198/30/2019We summarize the literature involving the deposition of nanomaterials within the placenta following oral exposure and the biological interactions between nanomaterials and placental development and function. The review focuses on the oral exposure of metal and metal oxide engineered nanomaterials (ENMs), carbon-based ENMs, and nanoplastics in animal models, with a minor discussion of intravenous injections. Although the literature suggests that the placenta is an efficient barrier in preventing nanomaterials from reaching the fetus, nanomaterials that accumulate in the placenta may interfere with its development and function. Furthermore, some studies have demonstrated a decrease in placental weight and association with adverse fetal health outcomes following oral exposure to nanomaterials. Since nanomaterials are increasingly used in food, food packaging, and have been discovered in drinking water, the risk for adverse impacts on placental development and functions, with secondary effects on embryo-fetal development, following unintentional maternal ingestion of nanomaterials requires further investigation.Nanoparticles, Nano-Toxicology, Placental Function10.1016/j.reprotox.2019.08.016http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089062381830670110.1016/j.reprotox.2019.08.016
Isigonis P, Hristozov D, Benighaus C, Giubilato E, Grieger K, Pizzol L, Semenzin E, Linkov I, Zabeo A, Marcomini A. Risk Governance of Nanomaterials: Review of Criteria and Tools for Risk Communication, Evaluation, and Mitigation. Nanomaterials. 2019; 9(5):696. doi: 10.3390/nano9050696 Download PDFRisk Governance of Nanomaterials: Review of Criteria and Tools for Risk Communication, Evaluation, and MitigationKhara Grieger20195/4/2019Nanotechnologies have been increasingly used in industrial applications and consumer products across several sectors, including construction, transportation, energy, and healthcare. The widespread application of these technologies has raised concerns regarding their environmental, health, societal, and economic impacts. This has led to the investment of enormous resources in Europe and beyond into the development of tools to facilitate the risk assessment and management of nanomaterials, and to inform more robust risk governance process. In this context, several risk governance frameworks have been developed. In our study, we present and review those, and identify a set of criteria and tools for risk evaluation, mitigation, and communication, the implementation of which can inform better risk management decision-making by various stakeholders from e.g., industry, regulators, and the civil society. Based on our analysis, we recommend specific methods from decision science and information technologies that can improve the existing risk governance tools so that they can communicate, evaluate, and mitigate risks more transparently, taking stakeholder perspectives and expert opinion into account, and considering all relevant criteria in establishing the risk-benefit balance of these emerging technologies to enable more robust decisions about the governance of their risks.Nanomaterials, Nanotechnology, Risk Analysis, Tools, Communication, Stakeholders10.3390/nano9050696https://www.mdpi.com/2079-4991/9/5/69610.3390/nano9050696
Khara D. Grieger, Tyler Felgenhauer, Ortwin Renn, Jonathan Wiener, Mark Borsuk (2019). Emerging risk governance for stratospheric aerosol injection as a climate management technology. Environment Systems and Decisions. doi: 10.1007/s10669-019-09730-6. DownloadEmerging risk governance for stratospheric aerosol injection as a climate management technologyKhara Grieger20195/1/2019Stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) as a solar radiation management (SRM) technology may provide a cost-effective means of avoiding some of the worst impacts of climate change, being perhaps orders of magnitude less expensive than greenhouse gas emissions mitigation. At the same time, SAI technologies have deeply uncertain economic and environmental impacts and complex ethical, legal, political, and international relations ramifications. Robust governance strategies are needed to manage the many potential benefits, risks, and uncertainties related to SAI. This perspective reviews the International Risk Governance Council (IRGC)’s guidelines for emerging risk governance (ERG) as an approach for responsible consideration of SAI, given the IRGC’s experience in governing other more conventional risks. We examine how the five steps of the IRGC’s ERG guidelines would address the complex, uncertain, and ambiguous risks presented by SAI. Diverse risks are identified in Step 1, scenarios to amplify or dissipate the risks are identified in Step 2, and applicable risk management options identified in Step 3. Steps 4 and 5 involve implementation and review by risk managers within an established organization. For full adoption and promulgation of the IRGC’s ERG guidelines, an international consortium or governing body (or set of bodies) should be tasked with governance and oversight. This Perspective provides a first step at reviewing the risk governance tasks that such a body would undertake and contributes to the growing literature on best practices for SRM governance.Risk Governance, Climate Engineering, Stratospheric Aerosols10.1007/s10669-019-09730-6.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23299460.2019.159114510.1007/s10669-019-09730-6.

Ever wish academic papers sounded more like podcasts? 🎙️
We did too—so we made it happen. The GES Publications Podcast – go.ncsu.edu/ges-pubs-podcast– uses Google Gemini’s NotebookLM to transform GES Center research into natural, discussion-style episodes unpacking the ethical, social, and policy sides of biotech. Listen and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.

 

Back to top

Journals and Workshop Reports

Gene Drives in Agriculture: Risk Assessment and Research Prioritization

Authors: Jabeen Ahmad, Jennifer Baltzegar, Zachary Brown, Jason Delborne, Sumit Dhole, Johanna Elsensohn, Fred Gould, Khara Grieger, Andrew Hardwick, Jennifer Kuzma, Marce Lorenzen, Nick Loschin, Raul Medina, Bethany Mostert, Patti Mulligan, Kim Pepin, Dylan Spangle, Sharon Stauffer, Ruthie Stokes, Willy Wei, and Katie Barnhill (2022)

The Gene Drives in Agriculture workshop, held via Zoom in June 2022, featured seven speakers on various aspects of risk assessment in the context of gene drives for agricultural pests. The purpose of the workshop was to foster deliberative discussions among participants, resulting in the production of a white paper on research priorities for these technologies.

This workshop was hosted by the Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Center at NC State University and funded by the USDA-NIFA Biotechnology Risk Assessment Grant program (grant number 2020-33522-32269).

Exploring Stakeholder Perspectives on the Development of a Gene Drive Mouse for Biodiversity Protection on Islands: Landscape Analysis and Workshop Report 

Authors: Jason Delborne, Julie Shapiro, Mahmud Farroque, S. Kathleen Barnhill-Dilling, Tyler Ford, Dalton George, and Sonia Dermer (2019)

Mice offer an ideal genetic model for exploring the possibility of developing a synthetic gene drive in mammals. As pests, they pose challenges to human health (through disease transmission), agricultural yields and storage, and biodiversity, especially on islands where they are not native. In line with the guidance of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report on gene drive research (NASEM, 2016), if research on gene drives in mice were to progress to a field trial, an island ecosystem would offer an additional level of physical containment. Thus, the focal application for the stakeholder landscape analysis and this workshop is the potential for developing and releasing a gene drive mouse on an island to suppress an invasive mouse population that poses a threat to biodiversity endemic to that island (e.g., nesting seabirds).

Biotechnology, the American Chestnut Tree, and Public Engagement: Workshop Report

Authors: Jason Delborne, Andrew Binder, Louie Rivers, Jessica Cavin Barnes, S. Kathleen Barnhill-Dilling, Dalton George, Adam Kokotovich, and Jayce Sudweeks (2018)

In April 2018, a team of NC State faculty and students convened a stakeholder workshop to explore opportunities for public engagement surrounding the development, regulatory review, and potential deployment of a genetically engineered American chestnut tree. As perhaps the first GMO designed to spread and persist in the wild, the tree has the potential to restore a functionally extinct species but also raises important ethical, political, ecological, and cultural questions. This report describes the workshop and its purpose, details the substance of the discussions, and offers the research team’s perspective on lessons learned and ways forward.

Journal of Responsible Innovation: Roadmap to Gene Drives – Research and Governance Needs in Social, Political, and Ecological Context

Edited by: Jason Delborne, Jennifer Kuzma, Fred Gould, Emma Frow, Caroline Leitschuh, and Jayce Sudweeks (2018)

The Genetic Engineering and Society Center at hosted a workshop in February of 2016, supported in part by the National Science Foundation, entitled ‘A Roadmap to Gene Drives: A Deliberative Workshop to Develop Frameworks for Research and Governance.’ (see workshop site)

In order to examine core governance issues and research needs in an anticipatory way, this 3-day workshop brought together over 70 subject matter experts from academia, business, government, and non-profit organizations from 10 different countries in Europe, Australia, and North and South America. Those experts were invited to submit papers for this special issue of the Journal of Responsible Innovation. In total, 13 peer-reviewed papers are included in the special Gene Drive issue of the Journal.

BMC Proceedings: Environmental Release of Engineered Pests: Building an International Governance Framework

Edited by Lucy Carter, Zachary Brown and Fred Gould (2018)

In October 2016, a two-day meeting of 65 academic, government and industry professionals was held at North Carolina State University for early-stage discussions about the international governance of gene drives: potentially powerful new technologies that can be used for the control of pests, invasive species, and disease vectors. (see workshop site)

Presenters at the meeting prepared seven manuscripts elaborating on the ideas raised. This BMC Proceedings issue presents the collection of these peer-reviewed manuscripts.

Synthetic Biology Governance: Delphi Study Workshop Report

Authors: Pat Roberts, Sharon Stauffer, Christopher Cummings, and Jennifer Kuzma (2015)

In order to explore risk governance data needs, opportunities, and challenges for SynBio, we initiated a research project funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation in 2013. This project had the overarching goals to “unpack” the broad field of SynBio for more nuanced and productive policy discussions and help set priorities for risk-relevant data collection, organizational and/or legislative readiness for oversight, and public and stakeholder engagement. In doing so, the project chose four case studies of potential applications of SynBio that are not yet in the final stages of research and development. We employed a four-round policy Delphi study to anticipate governance needs upstream of technology development and consumer use. (see Synthetic Biology Sloan Foundation Grant site)

Back to top

Issue Briefs

GES Blog

GES Blog

Read blog articles from GES faculty and students

Presentations
  • Slide decks
  • Webinars

Back to top

Statement on Productive, Inclusive, and Ethical Communication

Adopted June 28, 2013

Genetic engineering encompasses technologies, practices, and policies that can affect all of society and must be informed by substantial, rigorous, open, and inclusive civic deliberation. The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Center at North Carolina State University has adopted the following guidelines to promote productive, inclusive, and ethical communication. Download