Building Asia’s Synthetic Biology and Bioeconomy Ecosystem
Matthew Chang is Executive Director of the National Centre for Engineering Biology, Singapore (NCEB) and Director of the SINERGY, Singapore Consortium for Synthetic Biology. He is Provost’s Chair Professor at the National University of Singapore (NUS), co-founded the Asian Synthetic Biology Association ASBA and the Global Biofoundry Alliance (GBA), and co-chairs the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Global Future Council on Generative Biology.
From national bioeconomy strategies and dedicated legislation to growing investment in biomanufacturing, Asia is home to some of the most significant developments in engineering biology today. Ahead of his keynote talk at SynbiTECH 2026, we spoke with Matthew about the region’s progress, priorities and future direction.
How would you describe Asia’s synthetic biology landscape today?
Asia’s synthetic biology landscape has expanded and become more connected in recent years. But it isn’t one uniform ecosystem. A significant shift is that engineering biology is now being treated not only as a research field, but also as part of industrial and economic strategy. Each country has approached that differently.
China has identified biomanufacturing as an important future growth area in its 15th Five-Year Plan, alongside fields such as quantum technology and 6G. City-level initiatives have followed, including Special Economic Zone provisions for the synthetic biology industry in Shenzhen.
Japan has taken the strategy route. Its 2024 Bioeconomy Strategy covers five market areas and sets ambitious market and investment goals for 2030, including substantial support for biomanufacturing and related areas.
South Korea has taken a distinctive legislative route. Its Synthetic Biology Promotion Act is now in place, making South Korea the first country to enact national legislation specifically dedicated to synthetic biology. It provides for five-year national plans, research and development hubs, a public biofoundry, and safety oversight.
Singapore has built something more compact, over a longer period than people sometimes assume. NUS established SynCTI as a synthetic biology centre in 2015, and it hosts the Singapore BioFoundry. SINERGY was launched in 2016 to strengthen connections between research and industry. These efforts now sit alongside NCEB, which is scheduled for its official launch later this year. A*STAR and NUS have also launched a joint synthetic biology laboratory aimed at moving research towards industrial application.
So: an industrial designation, an economy-wide strategy, a dedicated law, and a coordinated platform. Four different instruments. Working out what each one makes possible is among the most useful things we can do as a region.
The regional networks have grown too. ASBA started in 2018 with members from Singapore, China, South Korea and Japan, and now extends across South and Southeast Asia. Partners from across the region bring important strengths in research, biodiversity, agriculture, fermentation and manufacturing. A genuinely regional ecosystem should recognise and connect all of these capabilities.
What have been the biggest successes?
The most visible successes are institutional. The ones that matter most are human.
Talent development is another important gain. Graduate programmes, biofoundry training and industry placements have created more pathways within Asia, while opportunities for international exchange have also expanded.
Biofoundries are also becoming more connected through international networks. The GBA, formally launched in Kobe in 2019, enables members to share experience and resources and work on common challenges.
Then there are the companies: precision fermentation, specialty chemicals, agriculture and therapeutics. Many are still early-stage. In parts of the region, the ecosystem around them has also matured, including investors who understand bioprocess timelines, contract manufacturers and regulatory advisers with relevant experience.
I wouldn’t overstate any of it. Capability and capacity aren’t the same thing. Production and scale-up capacity remains uneven across the region and, in many places, has not yet caught up with the level of scientific and policy ambition. That is true here as much as anywhere. The gap is an important counterweight to the progress.
If I had to name one measure of progress, it’s that the conversation has shifted. The question is less often whether engineering biology matters, and more often how to scale it responsibly.
What’s stopping that capability becoming products at scale?
Not a shortage of ideas. It’s everything that sits between a demonstration and a manufacturing line.
Translation is the first problem. Getting from an engineered organism to a product involves strain development, process optimisation, pilot production, downstream processing, safety assessment, regulation and financing. Few institutions bring all of those capabilities together, which makes coordination the second problem. No single organisation can build the whole ecosystem alone.
The third is talent, and it isn’t only scientists. We need bioprocess specialists, regulatory scientists, and people who can manage translation across disciplines.
The fourth is standards. I took part in a global standards initiative coordinated by Imperial College London, EBRC, NIST and NUS, which identified ten priority areas. Data standards and metrology were among them. Without comparable measurements, results don’t travel between labs and regulators can’t assess what they’re looking at.
And there’s governance. As biology converges with AI, capability is moving quickly. In the WEF Global Future Council on Generative Biology, which I co-chair, the recurring point is that innovation, safety, security and access have to be considered together rather than in sequence.
What role can Singapore play, and where does international collaboration fit?
Connector, demonstrator, effective convenor — that’s how I’d put it.
Singapore’s role will not be defined primarily by scale. Its strengths are research quality, institutional connectivity, and the ability to bring universities, agencies and industry together quickly. A small country can test models efficiently and share what works.
International collaboration matters because the hardest problems aren’t national. Standards, reproducibility and regulatory clarity can’t be solved inside one country. Neither can talent development or biosecurity.
For partners across Asia, the UK and Europe, the practical openings are joint translation projects, shared standards work, and exchanges of early-career researchers. Singapore’s role isn’t to prescribe a model for Asia. It’s to help different models connect.
What capability does Asia still need to strengthen by 2030?
A more fully connected platform for bioeconomy translation. Not necessarily a new building — a working network linking biofoundries, pilot facilities, standards and data initiatives, talent programmes, investors and industry.
Most of the pieces already exist nationally. What’s missing is interoperability between them. A network like that would let a researcher or a company work out where a technology is best designed, tested, scaled and brought to market, and would let us share what we learn about standards, sustainability, biosafety and workforce development.
Asia’s diversity should be seen as an advantage. China, Japan, South Korea, Singapore and partners across South and Southeast Asia bring different scientific, manufacturing and market strengths. The opportunity is to connect them without expecting every country to build the same model.
Scientific capability alone won’t create a bioeconomy. It depends on what we build around the science. Asia has the pieces. The next phase is connecting them deliberately, and that’s where I think the real opportunity lies.
Join us at SynbiTECH 2026
The conversations shaping the future of engineering biology continue at SynbiTECH 2026. Bringing together leaders from industry, academia, investment and policymaking, the conference will explore the latest developments in engineering biology and the opportunities ahead for the global bioeconomy.
Returning for its seventh year, SynbiTECH will welcome more than 400 delegates and speakers to discuss the themes defining the sector, from AI and biosecurity to scale-up, finance, commercialisation and policy.
Early bird tickets are available for £350 until 30 September, offering a £100 saving on the standard registration fee.
Secure your early bird ticket for SynbiTECH
Don’t miss the next SynbiCITE Industry Club
We’re also looking forward to welcoming members of the engineering biology community to the next SynbiCITE Industry Club meeting. The event will bring together companies from across the ecosystem to exchange ideas, share experiences and explore opportunities for collaboration.
Selected companies will also give short presentations about building their businesses and the challenges they have encountered along the way.
📅 17 September 2026 – 17:00–19:00
📍 170 Queen’s Gate, South Kensington, London SW7 5HF
Places are limited. To RSVP, please contact Laura McKay at l.mckay@imperial.ac.uk.
