bg-image

Human Practices

Real Time Technology Assessment (RTTA) Tool

What is it?

The Real Time Technology Assessment (RTTA) tool was created to mandate the integration of research on societal, environmental, legal, and ethical concerns with new emerging technology research and development. Adapted by Concordia University’s Dr. Brandiff Caron, this framework was originally designed for engineering students and later employed by Concordia’s iGEM teams.

How is it relevant to our project?

The RTTA is an investigative tool that engages with past and contemporary technologies analogous to our project. It consists of a series of questions and four distinct phases. Each phase involves extensive research, followed by a brief summary of the findings. At the end of the RTTA, we have a detailed document to defend our project’s development.

To effectively use this rigorous tool, we reviewed media publications, industrial guidelines, and research papers, and revisited previous iGEM projects for public opinions surrounding the implications of our technology. Each phase of the RTTA and the associated guiding questions encouraged us to take human practices into consideration throughout the development of our project. It taught us to make precise design choices based on social, ethical, and environmental implications.

What did we learn from the first phase?

The first phase of the RTTA consisted of comparing our project with an analogical case study. This step allowed us to gain knowledge on what was previously done and helped us build our current project. We were able to compare and contrast the various methods in which cyanobacteria can be implemented towards pesticide degradation. The research in this phase helped us design and optimize our plasmid construct and killswitch system.

What did we learn from the second phase?

The second phase involved researching and evaluating current Research & Development (R&D) activities within the area of bioremediation and wastewater treatment in Canada. This step helped us draw appropriate links between contemporary practices and our project. Moreover, it helped us assess the novelty and desirability of our project. Our findings show that there are currently no biological systems like ours being used in wastewater treatment.

What did we learn from the third phase?

The third phase required researching and acknowledging the general public’s perspective on our project, in order to address their possible concerns. Through our research, we found out that there is a lack of public education towards GMOs, resulting in constrained support of their use for bioremediation purposes. We uncovered that the reason behind the misconceptions around GMOs and their possible beneficial application arise from the type of outlets that people use as their source of information. The masses most commonly rely on non-scientific resources and databases such as social media or the internet as their main source of information. This explains the inaccuracy around their beliefs on GMOs. We concluded that certain measures need to be acquired in order to gain the public’s trust. One way that we believe this could be achieved is through promoting scientific educational material.

What did we learn from the fourth phase?

The final step of the RTTA consisted of reflecting upon the choices we made throughout the project. The framework of this last step is a sort of comparative analysis between the before and after of our project. It ensured that we shaped our project in relevance to the different kinds of implications we took into consideration. In our case, our research showed that Fenitrothion has been banned in Canada. But given its widely common use in other parts of the globe, we decided to include it in our research and project development. However, we expanded our focus to other organophosphorus pesticides like Malathion.

View the Real Time Technology Assessment for CyanoClean: