12.4: Synthetic biology methods can be developed to ensure that the production process is environmentally sound, minimizing the release of harmful chemicals and waste. The controlled environment of synthetic production allows for better management of resources and waste products.

Here’s how we’re addressing this target today and the work we’ve done so far:

We have begun incorporating synthetic biology methods to ensure environmentally sound production. Our team is using pathways in Lactococcus to produce synthetic chocolate, which reduces the reliance on resource-intensive cacao farming. These controlled production processes ensure fewer harmful chemicals and waste while providing a reliable, scalable alternative.

Here’s how we will address the target long-term if our project is implemented:

Upon full implementation, we plan to scale up the use of synthetic biology across the industry. By replacing traditional cacao farming with synthetic alternatives, we can drastically reduce the environmental footprint of chocolate production. This includes reducing deforestation, pesticide use, and greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, by offering a more sustainable production method, we can influence other industries to adopt similar practices.

12.8: Educational campaigns and transparent information about the benefits of synthetic chocolate can help raise awareness among consumers about the importance of sustainable consumption. This can lead to a greater shift towards products that are better for the environment.

Here’s how we’re addressing this target today and the work we’ve done so far:

Our team has launched educational campaigns to raise awareness about the benefits of synthetic chocolate. We have discussed with Slave Free Chocolate and other organizations to educate us on the current chocolate crisis allowing us to hold informative seminars that tell consumers about the environmental and ethical implications of traditional cacao farming. These campaigns are aimed at encouraging a shift toward more sustainable alternatives.

Here’s how we will address the target long-term if our project is implemented:

With full implementation, we plan to expand these educational efforts, targeting a global audience. We will partner with schools, NGOs, and governments to incorporate our findings and products into sustainability education curricula. By providing transparent information about the environmental impact of chocolate production, we aim to drive consumer demand for synthetic, sustainable alternatives.

Relevant Stakeholders:

• SynBio4All Africa: An organization focused on promoting sustainable production techniques in Africa, working with us to bring synthetic biology solutions to regions that need sustainable production infrastructure. We were able to learn the progress of synthetic biology education in Africa and seek advice on the risks and benefits of implementing a synthetically produced chocolate.
• Irvin Seo: As a scientist at McCormick, he gave insightful advice in scaling up the synthetic production of chocolate and ensuring its integration into the flavoring industry.
• Slave Free Chocolate: A nonprofit organization that raises awareness about child labor and unethical practices in the cacao industry. They have helped us shape our educational campaigns around the importance of fair, sustainable production.
• Dr. Mark Guiltinan: A key expert in cacao farming who has offered crucial insights into the future of sustainable cacao alternatives. His advice on the challenges facing cacao farmers has influenced our development of the Cacao Alternative Report (CAR).

This goal aims to protect and promote sustainable management of Earth’s vast ecosystems. Cote d'Ivoire and Ghana produce 70% of the world’s cocoa [5] and are dealing with massive deforestation problems throughout the region. Cocoa farming is extremely resource-intensive and is not a sustainable agricultural practice in the long term. Our project addresses this by seeking to reform the farming industry.

Traditional cocoa farming is an extremely wasteful process. More than 70% of the pod is discarded through the various stages of cultivation and processing [6]. Additionally, most of this waste isn’t properly disposed of and is typically left on the ground to rot. This leads to soil damage, plant disease, and foodborne disease.

When optimized, synthetic chocolate flavoring is far more efficient. This process eliminates all the hurdles that come from dealing with cocoa plants, protects the environment, and is better able to meet demand without damaging the environment.

Below are the specific subgoal targets addressed in our project:

15. Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss

Our work currently and how this target is addressed long-term by our project:

As we worked on our project, we spoke to a variety of stakeholders to strengthen our knowledge and approach towards this issue. While speaking to Mark Guiltinan from Penn State (Guiltinan spoke at a Cacao Farming Seminar at BUGSS), we learned about and isolated the key areas of environmental failure in modern cocoa farming. There are two major issues. Plant yields are often low, as African farmers have less access to modern agricultural tools. Furthermore, climate change has played a massive role in the decline of cocoa farming. The Ivory Coast has intense monsoon seasons, and rainforests have thus protected the land and civilizations from flooding. However, rampant deforestation caused by cocoa plantation clearings has intensified the impact of the monsoons and has led to severe flooding [7]. The flooding impacts not only cocoa farms but also surrounding villages and civilizations.

In speaking with Benjamin Friton, founder and Director of the REED Center for Ecosystem Reintegration, we learned about unsustainable practices in agriculture, such as crop monocultures, which are often practiced in cacao farming [8], and the negative impact they have on soil health and nutrient cycling. We also learned about the burden that crop irrigation can place on an environment, which further highlighted to us the negative effects a high water-demand plant like cacao can have. Our calculations suggest that our approach to chocolate production could have a significant positive effect on the water footprint, where:

This equasion represents each ingredient in the product, standard chocolate flavoring water footprint broken down:

1. Actual cocoa production: 20,000 liters per kilogram of cocoa beans.
2. Alcohol: Roughly 2,400 liters of water per liter of alcohol.
3. Processing and packaging: Minimal water.

When you break down the percentages of ingredient used for a 2 fluid ounce bottle of extract (the standard amount sold in grocery stores), you get about 400-600 liters. We accounted for alcohol used as a base for the extract (where most of the water comes from), and water for processing & production.

1. Bacterial cultures, etc.: 4 liters.
2. Alcohol or Propylene Glycol: 140 liters of water for about 60 mL of alcohol.
3. Processing and Production materials: 5-10 liters.

In total, this is about 150-160 liters per 2 fl. oz. (Sources: Künzle & Nieth, 2020; The Guardian; Doyle, 2007.)

Our project will completely eliminate the need for cocoa farms. Synthetic chocolate is environmentally neutral and does not require nearly as much acreage as a traditional chocolate farm. Furthermore, synthetic chocolate will be able to meet ever-increasing demand for chocolate and quickly outpace the production of real chocolate. Furthermore, the chocolate industry is an oligopoly. Top companies switching to synthetic chocolate would have a massive impact on deforestation and the associated environmental issues.

Despite this, one has to make sure that proper practices are being adhered to by manufacturers of synthetic chocolate. During our interview with Irvin Seo, who is an associate scientist at McCormick, we learned that the food industry often has issues with the disposal of harmful compounds. Furthermore, there have been multiple cases of companies dumping waste into rivers and waterways. One needs to ensure that waste compounds are non-toxic to the environment and are properly disposed of. Otherwise, this is just substituting one problem for another.

As stated before, companies engaging in “facade sustainability” as discussed by Slave Free Chocolate will be able to improve their profits and actually achieve the sustainability they advertise. Furthermore, there is another element to this. Companies engaging in reforestation and infrastructure efforts like Nestle’s Global Reforestation Program [9] or Cargill’s Protecting Forests Initiative [10] will have more resources (as a result of profits from synthetic chocolate) to make good on these programs. Aggressive reforestation and sustainability practices will have strong effects towards curbing the current ecological damage caused by cocoa farming.

In addition to company efforts, governmental regulation will have more incentive to monitor and stop deforestation. At the moment, 40% of cocoa production in the Ivory Coast is sourced from illegal plantations [11]. Despite protections and laws being in place to guard against this, governments can’t enforce them and partially ignore the issue [12]. Cocoa production is a massive source of economic stability for these countries, and it benefits the government to produce as much as possible [13]. With synthetic chocolate, it would be possible for producer countries to legally meet demand and crack down on illegal plantations.

15.6 Promote fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and promote appropriate access to such resources, as internationally agreed

Our work currently and how this target is addressed long-term by our project:

We spoke with Emmanuel Sebunya Kato the founder of SynBio4All Africa and the iGEM Ambassador for Africa, who discussed some of the current issues with the current biosynthetic scene in West Africa. One of the major issues is that of current resources and infrastructure. Scientists across the continent are well educated but often lack the resources to run and set up labs. Power and internet issues are also prominent. However, Africa is ripe for development and would be a strong hub for scientific developments. Africa’s naturally high level of biodiversity and natural resources combined with a variety of opportunities for scientific innovation make the continent a prime destination for rapid scientific development.

While considering the impacts of synthetic chocolate upon cocoa farmers, we learned more from SynBio4All Africa. We learned that a majority of the African agricultural population practices subsistence farming and that only a small percentage practice economic farming [14]. By partnering with organizations like SynBio4All Africa, African governments, and companies, synthetic chocolate can be a huge success. Incentives and opportunities to innovate or adopt new technology are likely possibilities among those farming. As we learned from SynBio4All Africa, this would cause less harm to livelihoods than one might anticipate. The technology being utilized by our team is not difficult to replicate and can be expanded to be set up in Africa. The goal is to ensure that this market stays in producer countries so that worker livelihoods and the economy improve. We want this product to be a core technology that is easy to access.

Relevant Stakeholders

• Dr. Mark Guiltinan was an essential stakeholder we connected and hosted a hybrid seminar on cacao farming with. Dr. Mark Guiltinan is a botanist, horticulturist, professor and researcher at Pennsylvania State University who specializes in Theobroma cacao (the Cacao plant). He has directed numerous research and biotechnology projects on potential solutions to common problems faced by cacao plants and cacao farming. He gave us insights on the environmental impacts upon cocoa farming/crop cultivation and equipped us with possible solutions to the issues.
• Slave Free Chocolate was another organization we spoke with, which focuses on education and advocacy around the complicated topic of child slavery. As we spoke to them, we learned about the actual truth behind chocolate company “sustainability” programs and the loopholes around them. This gave us a unique perspective which enabled us to understand how we could compel companies and farmers to use sustainable chocolate.
• SynBio4All Africa was a key stakeholder that we interviewed. Their goal is to address educational gaps in Africa and expand access to biosynthetic resources and programs throughout the region. They gave us a unique perspective on the issues of access and how our technology could impact the region. This was integral to understanding the way farmers and the cocoa industry intersect. Rather than pushing farmers out of business, we found that it could actually help people wake up and modernize.
• Irvin Seo was another important contact. He is an associate food scientist at the major spice/seasoning manufacturer and distributor, McCormick & Company, who is also well known for his “pop-up Korean restaurants”. He gave us insight into the food industry and also explained some of the logistical processes of food companies. Furthermore, we also learned about the safety protocols that companies must follow in order to ensure product quality and safety.
• We also spoke with Benjamin Friton, founder and Director of the REED Center for Ecosystem Reintegration to gain a deeper understanding of interactions between climate and agriculture. The REED Center models approach to developing agricultural systems that both benefit local ecosystems and meet production needs. From Mr. Friton, we learned about ways in which better agricultural practices can reverse negative environmental trends and promote a better connection between people and their land.

Given the intersectional nature of the SDGs, we recognized that while our work most directly interacts with the above 3 goals, there will also be positive and negative interactions with others. We gave particular thought to potential negative interactions of our idea with our and other SDGs and possible ways to mitigate them.

1. SDG 1: No Poverty
   • Potential impact: By reducing the demand for natural cocoa, our project could negatively affect millions of small-scale farmers in West Africa, especially those who depend on cocoa farming as their primary source of income.
   • Mitigation: Implement transition plans, such as providing alternative livelihoods for these farmers, or incorporating them into your synthetic cocoa supply chain.
2. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
   • Potential impact: While aiming to eliminate unethical labor practices like child labor, synthetic chocolate production might displace workers involved in cocoa farming, leading to unemployment and economic instability in regions reliant on cocoa.
   • Mitigation: Work with governments or non-profits to reskill or employ former cocoa workers in ethical, sustainable jobs, perhaps in the synthetic food industry.
3. SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
   • Potential impact: Transitioning from traditional cocoa production to synthetic processes may require significant infrastructural changes that could exclude developing countries, where technological gaps exist.
   • Mitigation: Promote equitable access to biotechnology infrastructure and ensure low- and middle-income countries can participate in and benefit from the synthetic food economy.
4. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • Potential impact: The transition to synthetic chocolate production could increase inequalities between wealthier countries that have access to advanced biotechnology and poorer cocoa-producing nations that may struggle to compete.
   • Mitigation: Ensure technology transfer and capacity-building programs that empower cocoa-producing nations to benefit from synthetic alternatives.
5. SDG 2: Zero Hunger
   • Potential impact: Cocoa farming contributes to local food security by supporting farmers' livelihoods. Reducing cocoa demand could potentially affect food access in regions that rely heavily on the income it provides.
   • Mitigation: Collaborate with local governments and international organizations to create sustainable alternative food sources and ensure the affected communities have access to essential resources.

1. “17 Goals to Transform our World.” United Nations
2. “Chocolate Market Report - Industry Analysis, Size & Forecast up to 2030.” Mordor Intelligence
3. “SynBio4All: Promoting Synthetic Biology Among African Students.” SynBio4All
4. Bueso, Yensi and Tangney, Mark. “Seeding Sustainable Education in Developing Countries.” Embo Press
5. “Where Does Cocoa Grow?.” World Wide Chocolate
6. “Alleviating Cocoa Waste.” Meridian Cacao
7. Basilio, Humberto. “Deforestation is Flooding West African Coasts.” Eos
8. “Understanding the Basics: The Environmental Impact of Cacao.” Inoqo
9. “Long-term Forest Conservation and Restoration.” Nestle
10. “Protecting Forests.”, Cargill
11. Ingini, Martina. “How Does Cocoa Farming Cause Deforestation?” Earth.org
12. Trevisani, Matthew. “Cocoa Crisis: Cartelizing West African Cocoa Response to the Persistent Use of Child Labor.” Chicago Journal of International Law, vol. 24, no. 2, 2024
13. “Cote d’Ivoire Wants to Capture Greater Share of Cocoa Value Chain.”, AfricaNews
14. Otepola, Abimbola. “Turning Subsistence Farming into an Investment Opportunity.”, Afex