Risk Assessment and Mitigation Techniques

Public perception of the risks and benefits of biotechnology can play an important role in the industries’ attempts to test and market products. Despite the growing number of tests, the general lack of basic scientific understanding with respect to environmental introductions has fueled the existing feelings of uneasiness with which the public views high technology (Hogan and Kendall, 1994; Office of Technology Assessment, 1987; Zehendorf, 1994). Gene One realized to grow from the private company to becoming a public corporation developing new innovative technology and product was necessary to be competitive.

Chief Technology Officer Teri Robertson sounded confident enough to invent new technologies and products to bring to market. In the meantime, Vice President of Technology Research Angela Thomas has sent CEO Don Ruiz a letter of resignation effective two months from the written date. Even though she has recommended Bill Chang to take her place human resource now has to recruit another scientist to take Bill’s spot. Time has to be factored in when it comes to the development of new technologies and products. Development of agricultural biotechnology products has resulted in the development of U.S. Risk Assessment protocols.

The first field test of an engineered organism was for a bacterium which would protect plants against frost. The successful test was conducted in 1986 (Levin and Strauss, 1993). Since that time over 2000 field tests of plants and microorganisms have been conducted in the U. S. (Geneexchange, 1994b).

In most cases the test (ranging in size from 0. 25 to 10 acres) is designed to demonstrate that a product is efficacious and hence commercially viable. The major issues related to evaluating the risk of environmental application of transgenic products are the type (i. e., what organism and for what purpose) and the scale (i. e. , small scale field trial or commercial application). Releases vary in purpose, and this affects the scale and overall experimental design.

To date, the only large scale, commercial use of an engineered plant or viable microbe has been in China (Chen, 1992). Despite progress made possible through start-up funding, the incremental costs associated with ongoing research and its application are challenging the department regularly to seek additional funds to meet the increasing capacity needs and maximize the application of these tools for sustainable development.

As enabling technologies that are inherently multidisciplinary, biotechnology and genomics may have applications and information to support the aims of many of the other science clusters, including Aquatic Animal Health, Aquatic Invasive Species, Species at Risk, and Aquaculture Production. By increasing the awareness and understanding of the multiple benefits derived from the application of biotechnology tools, senior government officials will be better able to make informed policy decisions and invest in areas where science gaps remain.

Risk assessments and critical decisions need to be made at all levels, reinforcing the need for an integrated approach. Optimal Solution The idea of partnering with another biotechnology company is good strategy for Gene One. An alternative or approach that best fits the situation, employ scientists who are experienced, effective, and efficient. If Gene One decides not to partner this optimum decision might be a costly mistake. Very few optimal solutions can be found by statistical analysis or formulae, most require cut and try experimental approach.

The leadership team has been meeting every Monday to exhaust all information to keep the project on the move. By Gene One being so young and not educated when it come to IPOs, this company’s other choice in going public would be to think about a merger. Implementation Plan On paper, India’s new biotechnology plans for the next millennium seem feasible. However, given the broad coverage that these plans envisage, along with the lack of public-private linkages, questions can be raised about successful implementation.

The plans have been designed by a group of experts, including both scientists and industry representatives, who were appointed by the government. They were published in the Report of the Working Group for the Ninth Five Year Plan (1997 to 2002), and contain both short-term and long-term, i. e. longer than five years, research and production goals. With a proposed expenditure in excess of US$ 255 million over the five year period, the experts have represented the most ambitious plans ever drawn up in India for this technology.

Although, compared to previous years, the absolute budget for biotechnology has increased, in relative figures biotechnology research faces a declining share in the overall scientific research that is carried out in the public domain. While the government’s budget for scientific research has increased by 32 per cent, the share of biotechnology has declined from 11 per cent in 1987-88 to 9 per cent in the current financial year. The basic policy framework for biotechnology has two main dimensions. The first takes into account the priorities of the main sectors in which biotechnology can make a difference.

The second includes the discussion on some of the institutional mechanisms that are crucial to the developments in this sector, for instance the issue of intellectual property rights (IPRs). By accepting membership of the World Trade Organization (WTO), India has committed itself to extending intellectual property protection on living matter, for instance micro-organisms and lant varieties. Another area of institutionalization is to find regulatory mechanisms for bio-safety. When Gene One came into the biotechnology business terminated disease in tomatoes and potatoes.

This innovative discovery caused farmers to stop using pesticides and it made the consumers happy to buy more products with added chemicals. Gene One put in place a plan that will be appealing to investors and customers. Partnering with an experienced biotechnology company would put Gene One even farther than actually planned. Funding coming from eight lending institutions and monies coming from 100 influential private investors will aid Gene One with enough finance to help in the invention of more technology. The plan for Gene One to go public in 36 months was realistic and with the way teamwork as been displayed it go as scheduled.