The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI)
Much life sciences research is dual use: knowledge, materials and technologies developed for beneficial purposes could also be misused to cause harm. This topic, studied at Biotechnology and Biosecurity, a platform of The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI), examines how research of concern is identified, how responsibility is shared between researchers, institutions, funders and publishers, and how concerns are escalated, alongside the wider ethical questions biotechnology raises.
GCRI · In development · service level R0
Dual use in the life sciences is the potential for research intended to benefit people to be misapplied to cause harm. This page covers the oversight that manages it: review of research of concern by institutions and funders, codes of conduct, information hazard management, ethics review and escalation routes, in line with WHO's global guidance framework for the responsible use of the life sciences.
For dual use and ethics, in GCRI's spatial-intelligence reading, the map opens on crop greenness, population density, daytime surface heat and true-colour imagery, framed on West Africa; 2 further NASA layers wait in the list.
The interactive map needs JavaScript; the layer list and sources are below.
Layers 4
Environmental exposure, for this page
Keyboard, with the map focused
Hold Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom
Latest available
NASA GIBS / EOSDIS · ASTER GDEM (METI, NASA) · Blue Marble (NASA) · © OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL) · Natural Earth
Loading the latest NASA imagery.
Drag to move. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll, pinch or the buttons to zoom; hover for the values under the pointer; reset returns to the region.
For dual use and ethics, in GCRI's spatial-intelligence reading, the map opens on crop greenness, population density, daytime surface heat and true-colour imagery, framed on West Africa; 2 further NASA layers wait in the list.Satellite and model products as NASA publishes them, each with its own date; indicators, not assessments of any place; claim ceiling INTEGRATED.
Layers and dates
The working screen behind this subject: its structure, terms and states. Names are placeholders and values illustrative.
Dual use and ethics · National committee · Review year 2
| Institution A | Active | Q4 | 87 | Current |
| Research campus | Active | Q4 | 82 | Audit due |
| Biomanufacturing site | Forming | none | 46 | Support |
| Diagnostic network | Active | Q3 | 81 | Current |
Dual-use concerns arise because the same experiments that reveal how biological systems work can, in rare cases, produce knowledge or materials that could be misused. Policies in several countries define categories of research that require additional review, and funders and journals have developed processes for assessing sensitive work. These processes depend heavily on the judgement and awareness of researchers themselves.
Ethics in biotechnology extends beyond misuse: consent for the use of genetic data, equitable access to benefits, fair sharing of benefits from genetic resources, and respect for communities and ecosystems. A culture of responsibility, in which researchers consider consequences and feel able to raise concerns, is widely regarded as the foundation of effective governance. The platform works at the level of governance, evaluation and risk methods. It publishes no protocols, techniques or information that would increase anyone's capacity to cause harm.
Comparative studies of dual-use review policies, funder conditions and publication practices.
Structured approaches for weighing benefits, risks and responsibilities in research decisions.
Studies of how training and culture influence awareness and reporting.
Misuse potential is hard to judge in advance, review processes vary in rigour, and discussions of risk must avoid creating the hazards they seek to prevent.
Each term as this page uses it. Where a standard-setting body defines the term, the wording follows that body.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Dual-use research of concern | Life sciences research that could be directly misapplied to threaten health, agriculture, the environment or security. |
| Information hazard | A risk that arises from disseminating true information that could enable harm. |
| Ethics committee | A body that reviews research proposals to protect participants' rights and welfare. |
| Responsible innovation | Anticipating and governing the effects of new technology together with society. |
This evidence informs institutional review processes, funder and publisher policies, training and national oversight frameworks. Researchers, institutional review committees, funders, publishers and regulators decide within their roles. Governance dialogue is convened by Health and Biosecurity Governance at The Global Risks Forum (GRF). Concerns can be raised through corrections and concerns. Related topics are laboratory biosafety and biosecurity, synthetic biology and biological threats; methods sit on molecular and life sciences.
Published analysis on this topic is designed to carry a named subject reviewer, its references and the views of independent specialists, including biosafety professionals and those who disagree.
The current service level is R0: information and enquiries. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.