Overview
In Ecuador, biotechnology and synthetic biology face unique challenges: a fragile scientific culture, limited regulation and incentives, and social barriers that restrict access to knowledge for rural and underrepresented communities. Recognizing these realities, our team decided to go beyond developing a technical project for iGEM.
Through Education & Inclusivity, we created initiatives that democratize science, engage new communities, and strengthen technical training for young Ecuadorians. Our actions range from community workshops with DIY science tools (water testing, microscopy, biosafety) to advanced seminars on sequencing, genetic transformation, and bioinformatics aimed at university students in biotechnology. In this way, we contribute both to broadening access to science and to building human capital capable of driving the country's biotech future.
Most importantly, we see this work as a long-term commitment. Our activities are designed not only for iGEM 2025, but to lay the foundations of a more inclusive, sustainable, and resilient biotech ecosystem in Ecuador.
This section is organized in three parts:
- Challenges: analyzing the barriers that hold back science and biotech in Ecuador.
- Actions: presenting our initiatives, from grassroots education to advanced technical training.
- Beyond iGEM: ensuring sustainability and long-term impact for the future of Ecuadorian biotechnology.
Challenges: Barriers for Biotechnology in Ecuador
In 2008, Ecuador became a global reference point by incorporating into its new Constitution an article that declared the country "free of genetically modified seeds and crops." Article 401 established a nationwide prohibition, with the sole exception that the National Assembly could authorize them only in cases of national interest.
For more than a decade, Ecuador was regarded as unique in Latin America for adopting such a restriction in its constitutional framework. However, the landscape has recently begun to shift. In 2025, Mexico passed a constitutional reform banning the cultivation of genetically modified maize, in defense of its native maize diversity and the cultural heritage tied to this crop.
Reflections and Insights
The 2008 Constitution was drafted in a context where food sovereignty became a guiding principle of the development model. For peasant, Indigenous, and environmental movements, the introduction of GMOs was perceived as a direct threat to the diversity of native seeds, to traditional farming practices, and to the autonomy of local communities in the face of large agro-industrial corporations.
Key Insight
This perspective helps us understand that our educational initiatives must address not only scientific literacy, but also cultural sensitivity and respect for traditional knowledge systems.
And here is where our challenge truly begins
We wanted to understand how civil society in Ecuador perceives GMOs and, more broadly, the genetic modification of living organisms. For this, we designed a very simple survey consisting of just three questions:
The goal was to quickly assess whether the topic of GMOs is present in the public conversation, what ideas people have about them, and—most importantly—whether they consider genetic modification acceptable in the fight against climate change and other local challenges, taking age groups into account.
We collected 3,443 responses through social media, reaching different regions of the country and a wide variety of age groups. In addition, we engaged in short interviews and informal conversations, which provided valuable insights beyond the survey data:
Adults over 40 years old often expressed concerns about the ethics of genetic modification, frequently framed from a religious or moral standpoint.
Young people and adolescents up to 35 years old generally viewed genetic modification as a field that should be developed, but many emphasized the importance of safety when releasing modified organisms. Interestingly, some of their ideas were influenced by science fiction narratives, which shaped both their enthusiasm and their concerns.
Children under 14 years old tended to describe the topic as simply fascinating, often showing curiosity and excitement rather than skepticism.
These results highlight that perceptions of GMOs in Ecuador are not uniform, but rather deeply shaped by generational perspectives, values, and cultural references. While older generations tend to frame the debate in ethical or moral terms, younger ones are more open but demand guarantees of safety, and the youngest see biotechnology as an exciting frontier to explore.
Key Survey Findings
The survey results reveal a complex scenario, deeply shaped by generational and cultural tensions. While 42% of respondents claim to know what GMOs are and 37% have some understanding, perceptions are far from uniform. Younger segments—primarily those aged 18 to 34, representing more than half of the sample—express greater openness toward biotechnology. However, this openness is accompanied by strong demands for safety, regulation, and transparency. In contrast, older groups exhibit ethical and cultural reservations, often linked to religious beliefs or distrust of corporate interests.
The fact that 50% of respondents agree or strongly agree with the acceptance of genetic modification when aimed at addressing global challenges such as hunger or the climate crisis—compared to 32% who oppose it—demonstrates that public debate is neither closed nor settled.
Taking Action
Based on this critical analysis, we decided to focus our efforts along three strategic axes:
Science Communication and Knowledge Democratization
Promote clear, accessible communication to counter misinformation and bring biotechnology closer to the general public.
Strengthening Young Human Capital
Build technical skills and create innovation spaces for synthetic biology projects, particularly in key areas such as environmental sustainability and health.
