Ahead of the IUCN World Conservation Congress, over 100 scientists and conservation leaders have issued an open letter. They are urging the global conservation community not to rule out the potential of synthetic biology. Instead of a blanket moratorium, they call for a science-based, case-by-case approach.
The letter points to the alarming scale of biodiversity loss. Habitat destruction, climate change, invasive species, and pollution are pushing one million species toward extinction. The authors argue that traditional conservation methods, although important, are no longer sufficient.
“Existing tools are often limited by high costs and technical challenges, particularly in remote areas,” the letter explains. To address these gaps, the signatories advocate for the responsible exploration of synthetic biology techniques. These include gene editing to increase disease resistance in endangered species, genetically engineered microbes to protect coral reefs, and modified rodents to control invasive populations on islands.
While some of these approaches are still experimental, others are already in use. One example cited is the development of a synthetic alternative to horseshoe crab blood for drug testing, which is now helping to ease pressure on wild crab populations.
The scientists caution against a proposed IUCN moratorium on genetic engineering of wild species and microbiomes, saying it could block promising conservation innovations and discourage the next generation of researchers. “Now is not the time to close the door on bold solutions,” the letter argues, “but to move forward with them—carefully and collaboratively.”
The letter emphasizes that synthetic biology is not a replacement for traditional conservation, but a complementary set of tools. Signatories stress the importance of transparency, ethical standards, public engagement, and strong safety measures, including containment strategies and environmental monitoring.
Seventeen global institutions co-signed the letter, including the Charles Darwin Foundation, Environmental Defense Fund, American Bird Conservancy, and the African Center for Excellence in Molecular Engineering.
The authors conclude with a clear call to IUCN members: reject the moratorium and keep innovation on the agenda. With ecosystems in crisis and time running out, they believe genetic science could help restore biodiversity and protect human and planetary health—if used wisely.
Open Letter – IUCN motion call for moratorium