Biotechnology is no longer merely a matter of public health or scientific progress. It has become a central arena of global geopolitical competition, positioned precisely at the intersection of radical innovation, national security, and industrial resilience. If the twentieth century was defined by physics and silicon, the twenty-first may well become the age of engineered biology.
The new paradigm: security versus market. For decades, the biotech sector was governed almost exclusively by the logic of capital markets and intellectual property. Today, that paradigm is shifting. The concept of strategic autonomy has transformed pharmaceuticals, genomic sequencing, and biomanufacturing into critical assets.
- The risks are not limited to dependence on supply chains—something dramatically exposed during the pandemic. They are also concerned with control over biological data and technologies with potential dual-use applications.
- Techniques such as CRISPR gene editing and synthetic biology could revolutionise medicine. Yet they also carry implications for bioinformatics security and defence that states can no longer entirely delegate to the private sector.
Competing models: the return of the entrepreneurial state. While the United States retains leadership thanks to an aggressive venture capital ecosystem and longstanding support from agencies such as DARPA, the Asian model — led by China — demonstrates an unprecedented level of public-private coordination. Beijing has placed biotechnology among the pillars of its “Made in China 2025” strategy, treating it as a national security priority alongside artificial intelligence.
- In this context, Europe faces a strategic crossroads. The continent boasts undeniable academic excellence but continues to suffer from fragmented capital markets and regulatory frameworks often perceived as obstacles to innovation.
- The challenge for the European Union is to define a common industrial policy that goes beyond simple protectionism and instead fosters industrial champions capable of scaling globally.
Italy: strengthening the value chain and Golden Power protections. For Italy, biotechnology represents a crucial lever for economic growth, with production value already contributing significantly to national GDP. However, protecting strategic assets requires a change of pace.
- First, the Golden Power framework must be updated. Scrutiny of foreign investments should not be limited to traditional defence sectors but must extend with precision to biotech start-ups holding critical patents or sensitive genomic databases.
- Second, public-private partnerships should be strengthened. When market dynamics fail to guarantee resilience—for instance, in the production of essential antibiotics or vaccines—the state should step in as a “buyer of last resort” or co-investor.
- Third, data infrastructure must become a priority. The creation of a national bio-cloud infrastructure is essential to prevent Italy’s digital and biological sovereignty from drifting into the hands of non-EU players.
Towards a biotechnology diplomacy. Ultimately, the future of Italian and European industry will depend on the ability to integrate foreign policy with industrial strategy.
- Biotech competition will not be won solely in laboratories, but through international standard-setting, the protection of intellectual property, and the creation of secure supply corridors for critical raw materials.
- Today, national security is also—perhaps above all—about the capacity to read and write the code of life
