<p>The identified/relevant values were food security, accessibility, social/environmental sustainability, safety. The value hierarchy of the two most important values safety and accessibility can be seen in Figure 4 and Figure 5 as an example.</p>
<p>The identified/relevant values were food security, accessibility, social/environmental sustainability, safety. The value hierarchy of the two most important values safety and accessibility can be seen in Figure 4 and Figure 5 as an example.</p>
<divclass="h3">Safety</div>
<divclass="h3">Safety</div>
<p>Safety was found to be an important value for the European Union but also to the Dutch Government and the public. Safety can be divided into environmental and food safety. During our HP work we mostly dived deeper into the question of environmental safety related to our idea. Figure 3 shows how norms such as ‘No risk for the environment derives from the value safety and what are the certain design requirements such as ‘the genetically modified (GM) plant shouldn’t outcompete native species’ to satisfy those norms in our design. We later rediscussed these design requirements and modified them according to the information we gathered from interviews we conducted. Making design choices related to safety were difficult. The design requirements for safety often clashed with the ones derived from accessibility. This is discussed later.</p>
<divclass="h3">Accessibility</div>
<divclass="h3">Accessibility</div>
</div>
<p>Accessibility was an important value identified related to farmers and NGOs. NGOs like Greenpeace argue that the Agro and Seed industries main priority is profit (by patents and seeds that need to be rebought every year) rather than to make their technology and products accessible for all farmers and serve their local needs.[8] The design requirements shown in Figure 4 are interesting ones related to patenting and ownership, but also touching the core of our whole design. Other important questions for farmers are how expensive the GM seeds are. Is it affordable or cheaper compared to the non-GM type that needs fertilizer? Will the farmers have to buy the seeds every year? These questions related to accessibility touch the question of ownership and safety which are discussed in the IHP part.</p>
<p>See what design adjustments we made regarding these questions after interviews.</p>
</div>
<!-- 4 -->
<!-- 4 -->
<divclass="h"id="four">
<divclass="h"id="four">
<divclass="h1">Stakeholders we Talked to</div>
<divclass="h1">Stakeholders we Talked to</div>
<p> Through Instagram, our most frequently used social media platform, we have promoted science education in various ways. Not only through our posts and stories that promote iGEM and explain our project, but also through a collaboration with the Dutch science museum NEMO. This collaboration allowed us to distribute a selected few of our followers free museum ticket. Through this, they had the opportunity to continue learning by visiting the museum. The lucky winners were selected through a giveaway on an Instagram post and a cellular biology quiz in our stories, which featured 10 questions of varying difficulty levels. The winner was chosen for being the first person to correctly answer all ten questions. After announcing the winner, we also shared the correct answers, providing brief explanations for each one. For questions where the majority chose an incorrect answer, we explained why that option was incorrect and clarified the differences with the correct answer.
<p>When our team came up with our initial approach and design, it was very exciting and seemed like a great solution that the Netherlands and the world could hugely benefit from. Talking with Tyler Coal and Jonathan P. Zehr helped us with our first design idea. First a big question was the feasibility of the project. Therefore, we thought of a roadmap what essential steps would be needed to make a crop plant successfully incorporate the nitroplast organelle and fix nitrogen from the air. To discuss our approach and receive a critical view we talked with scientists from seed companies like KWS seeds. Then our concern became that we are creating a GM plant by means of synthetic biology, and whether that would really be a great solution or a techno fix? (see the teams view on this at <strong>Our responsible innovation approach </strong>) To answer this question, first, we talked to Martijn Schaap from TNO to learn more about the nitrogen problem/pollution in the Netherlands. Then we contacted RIVM and Max van Hooren from COGEM to talk about environmental safety and what measures could be applied to our project. We also discussed aspects of risk assessment. Then we had a discussion with Amrit Nanda, who is the Executive Manager of Plants for the Future ETP on how our idea could be applied in Europe and how to communicate our project since GMOs are not popular in Europe currently. Meanwhile with talked with dr. Zoë Robaey (WUR) about responsible innovation and the social impact of our project.</p>
<p> In June, our team attended the SynBIONL event in Wageningen. This event, aimed at fostering synthetic biology collaborations in the Netherlands, provided us with a platform to pitch our project to a panel of experts, and listen to insightful talks about various synthetic biology initiatives in the Netherlands. This was followed by an engaging networking session</p>
<divclass="h2">Dutch iGEM Meetup</div>
<p> In July, we attended the Dutch iGEM meetup hosted by Utrecht University. Here, we got a chance to present our own project as well as listen to the presentation of the projects of all other teams in the Netherlands as well as Belgium. This was a good opportunity for all the teams to meet each other, connect, and share our experiences working on our respective iGEM projects. Finally we also listened to talks from the Dutch Patent office on Intellectual Property, as well as from one of our own supervisors for Human Practices, Britte Bouchaut, on responsible innovation. </p>
<divclass="h2">OWee/IP</div>
<p> In late August, we also attended the Activity Market organized by the Opening Week (OWee) and Introduction Programme (IP), the introductory week for new students at TU Delft. This Activity market allowed a lot of TU Delft Student Teams, DreamTeams, sports and student associations to advertise their team or association to invite interested students to join them. Through our stand at this market, we were able to gather the interest of several freshers from different studies, ranging from Aerospace Engineering, Industrial Design, Life Sciences and Technology, Molecular Sciences and Technology, Nanobiology, and others. We explained the concept of the iGEM competition, and a bit about our own project, and past projects in the TU Delft. Several interested students shared their e-mail IDs, through which we will contact them during recruitment for the next iGEM season.</p>
<li><strong>3D Printed Animal Cell Puzzle:</strong> A fun and educational puzzle that allowed kids to assemble and learn about the different parts of an animal cell.</li>
<li><strong>3D Printed Animal Cell Puzzle:</strong> A fun and educational puzzle that allowed kids to assemble and learn about the different parts of an animal cell.</li>
<li><strong>Candy DNA Models:</strong> Children crafted their own double-stranded DNA molecules using candy, making biology both fun and delicious.</li>
<li><strong>Candy DNA Models:</strong> Children crafted their own double-stranded DNA molecules using candy, making biology both fun and delicious.</li>
