Explore the vast range of titles available.

The fast‐paced field of synthetic biology is fundamentally changing the global biosecurity framework. Current biosecurity regulations and strategies are based on previous governance paradigms for pathogen‐oriented security, recombinant DNA research, and broader concerns related to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Many scholarly discussions and biosecurity practitioners are therefore concerned that synthetic biology outpaces established biosafety and biosecurity measures to prevent deliberate and malicious or inadvertent and accidental misuse of synthetic biology's processes or products. This commentary proposes three strategies to improve biosecurity: Security must be treated as an investment in the future applicability of the technology; social scientists and policy makers should be engaged early in technology development and forecasting; and coordination among global stakeholders is necessary to ensure acceptable levels of risk. Graphical Abstract Biosecurity policies and practices must be updated to accommodate the novel challenges associated with synthetic biology and to maximize technological benefits while minimizing its dual‐use potential. This Commentary proposes three strategies to improve biosecurity.

PurposeWater is a critical and contentious resource in California, hence any changes in reservoir management requires coordination among many basin stakeholders. The Forecast-Informed Reservoir Operations (FIRO) pilot project at Lake Mendocino, California explored the viability of using weather forecasts to alter the operations of a United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) reservoir. The pilot project demonstrated FIRO's ability to improve water supply reliability, but also revealed the key role of a collaborative Steering Committee. Because Lake Mendocino's Viability Assessment did not explore the features of the Steering Committee, this study aims to examine the relationships and interactions between Steering Committee members that supported FIRO's implementation at Lake Mendocino.Design/methodology/approachThe project identified 17 key project participants who spoke at a FIRO workshop or emerged through chain-referrals. Using semi-structured interviews with these participants, the project examined the dynamics of human interactions that enabled the successful multi-institutional and multi-criteria innovation as analyzed through text-coding.FindingsThe results reveal the importance for FIRO Steering Committee members to understand the limitations and constraints of stakeholder counterparts at other organizations, the importance of building and safeguarding relationships, and the role of trust and belonging between members. The lessons learned suggest several interventions to support successful group collaboration dynamics for future FIRO projects.Originality/valueThis study identifies features of the Steering Committee that contributed to FIRO's success by supporting collaborative negotiations of infrastructure operations within a multi-institutional and multi-criteria context.