Team:TU Delft-Leiden/Project/Appendix

Appendix 1-Desk research: Landmines

WHAT IS A LAND MINE?

A land mine is a bomb that is buried in the ground and that explodes when someone steps on it or drives over it [1]. It can lay dormant for years until a person or animal triggers their detonating mechanism. Land mines cannot be aimed and therefore indiscriminately injure or kill not only their targets but also innocent civilians [2].

TYPES OF LAND MINES

There are two main types of land mines: Anti-personnel (AP) mines and anti-tank (AT) mines. Anti-personnel mines are specifically designed to reroute or push back foot soldiers. These mines carry enough explosive material to kill or disable their victim. They can be activated by pressure, a tripwire or remote detonation.

Additionaly, There are three main types of AP mines that can be divided as following [3]:

• Blast mine: This type of mine is usually buried only a few centimeters beneath the surface and is activated by a pressure plate. It is designed to destroy an object in close proximity and to break it into fragments to cause secondary damage.
• Bounding mine: This type of mine is propelled to a height of approximately one meter when triggered, before the main charge is ignited. In this way, it damages the vital parts of the victim instead of the legs.
• Fragmentation mine: This type of mine releases sharp fragments in all directions when activated. It is able to cause injury at distances up to 200 meters away and kill at closer distances. The fragments used in the mines are either metal or glass. Fragmentation mines can be bounding or ground-based.

Anti-tank mines function in a similaressentially the same way as AP mines, but the pressure needed to detonate them and the amount of explosive material is several times bigger. AT mines are capable of destroying tanks or armored vehicles and kill the people in or around it [3].

USE OF LAND MINES

Land mines as we know them today where first used during the first world warFirst World War as defense against tanks. These mines where very large and easy to detect. Often enemy soldiers would remove the mines for their own use. To prevent this, the first anti-personnel mines were developed[4]. The use of land mines as an important offensive and defensive weapon started in World War II [5]. The use of land mines reached its peak in the Cold War, especially in the conflicts in Vietnam and Afghanistan[6].

The use of land mines provides military strategist with the ability to provide a defensive barrier around vulnerable sites and utilities, channel enemy troops into a unmined area where themselves would be vulnerable to attack, deny the enemy access to utilities they might need, even after those placing the mines have withdrawn, and assist in surprise attacks and ambushes[5]. Originally, land mines were laid in clearly marked fields. However, the use of land mines shifted from use against military targets to use against civilians, in order to terrorize communities and prevent population movement. For this purposecase, mines were placed at random locations without any specific pattern [7].

WHY ARE LAND MINES A PROBLEM?

Since the end of the Cold War and the implementation of the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty, the use of land mines has sharply declined. Also, the production (in almost every country) and trade in land mines has come to a standstill. However, land mines still pose a large humanitarian problem. There are two main reasons for this. First, In some conflicts, land mines are still used in several conflicts. Secondly and eEvven more importantly, large areas of former war zones are contaminated with unexploded land mines, which continue to cause (civilian) casualties on a daily basis [7].

ONGOING USE AND PRODUCTION OF LAND MINES

Due to the Ottawa Convention, most countries have stopped the production and use of landmines. However, there are still eleven countries who continue to produce mines or reserve the right to do so. These countries are: China, Cuba, India, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, South Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Singapore, and Vietnam. Of those, four were actively manufacturing antipersonnel mines in 2012: India, Myanmar, Pakistan, and South Korea. The United States have recently (27 June 2014) declared a change of Mine Ban stance, announcing that they are planning to join the Mine Ban Treaty in the future and that they will not produce antipersonnel mines[7].

New antipersonnel landmines have been laid in recent years in Yemen (a State Party of the Mine Ban Treaty), apparently by government forces. There are also allegations that State Parties South Sudan, Sudan and Turkey have used antipersonnel mines. From the countries who have not signed the treaty, the governments of Syria and Myanmar have made use of landmines in 2012 and 2013. Mines are also placed by non-state armed groups (rebel armies, terrorists) in Afghanistan, Colombia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, and Yemen. In this case, the used devices are usually not “real” landmines, but victim-activated improvised explosive devices [8].

OLD LANDMINES AND EXPLOSIVE REMNANTS OF WAR

Mines emplaced during a conflict can still kill or injure civilians decades later. Next to that, after a conflict, areas remain contaminated with explosive remnants of war (ERW). These are explosive weapons that somehow failed to detonate and are left behind. They pose dangers similar to landmines. These weapons continue to cause casualties long after the conflict has ended, and they hamper development and post-conflict reconstruction. Large stretches of land cannot be cultivated, medical systems are drained of resources by the cost of helping landmine/ERW casualties, and money must be spend on clearing mines instead of, for example education [8].

The amount of mine contamination as of October 2013 is shown in figure 1. As depicted in the figure, the most affected countries are current (Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan,Palestine) or former (Vietnam, Cambodia, the Balkans) war zones[9].

An example of the impact of old landmines and ERW is Vietnam. Although the Vietnam War is already over for decades, Vietnam is still suffering from the large-scale use of landmines during that conflict. In the period 1999-2012, landmines caused 1683 casualties, of which 630 were killed [8]. Another example of this problem can be found in the Balkans. Serbia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina recently (May 2014) suffered major flooding. Due to landslides caused by this flood, landmines from the Bosnian War (1992-1995) resurfaced and dislodged, adding to the dangers of people living in the areas as well as rescuers [10][11].

SURVEY OF CASUALTIES

In 2012, a total of 3628 mine/ERW casualties were recorded; adding up tothis is more than ten casualties per day. At least 1066 people were killed and 2552 people were injured; for 10 casualties it was not known if they survived the incident. However, the true number of casualties is likely to be significantly higher, due to the fact that,because in many areas, plentya lot of casualties go unrecorded. Despite of this alarming factof this, the number of casualties decreased to the lowest level since 1999 (the start of documentation of casualties by the Landmine Monitor). The majority (78%) of the landmine casualties in 2012 were civilians. A substantial amount (47%) of the casualties in 2012 were children [8].

From all the countries affected, Afghanistan is the country with the most landmine casualties:766 killed and injured in 2012. Other countries with an alarming number of large casualties numbers include Cambodia, Colombia and Yemen. Figure 2 shows the amount of casualties in the ten most affected countries for 2011 and 2012[8].

Figure 1 World map indicating mine contamination per country. The contamination is measured as the amount of square kilometers which are SHA or CHA (suspected/confirmed hazardous area, see below)[9].
WHAT IS DONE AGAINST LAND MINES? Introductory part LEGISLATURE The 1997 Mine Ban Treaty (also known as the Ottawa Convention, and officially titled The Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction) [2] provides the main legal framework for governments to take action against land mines . [8]. Governments who join the treaty declare upon signing that they never, under any circumstance, use, produce, stockpile and transfer anti-personnel mines. In additionAlso, they must destroy all stockpiled antipersonnel mines in four years and clear all antipersonnel mines in all mined areas under their jurisdiction or control in ten years. Next to that, States Parties are obliged to provide assistance for the care and treatment of land mine victims and support for educational programs to help prevent mine incidents. [2]. The Mine Ban Treaty is currently signed by 161 countries. Major non-signatories include China, Russia and the United States. Since March 1, 1999, the Mine Ban Treaty is implemented as a binding international law. [7]. The Ottawa Convention is mainly the result of the work of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and to the campaign's coordinatorits spokesman person, Jody Williams. In 1997, they received the Nobel Peace Price "for their work for the banning and clearing of antipersonnel mines". [12]. The ICBL is a global network in around 100 countries, working to eradicate land mines. The ICBL-CMC (a merger between ICBL and the Cluster Munition Coalition) releases the Landmine Monitor, a yearly publication providing a global overview of developments in mine ban policy, use, production, trade, and stockpiling. It also includes information on contamination, clearance, casualties, victim assistance, and support for mine action. [9]. Figure 2 Annual changes (2011-2012) in mine/ERW casualties for the ten countries with the most casualties in 2012. Figure taken from the Landmine Monitor 2013. "Suda" is Sudan. Comment [A8]: Again, nice graph. For the website I would suggest putting some interactive graphs  Comment [A9]: Combating land mines? Comment [A10]: What about a nice intro here. Since…. several legislative measures were taken in order to diminish the negative effects of the lands mines. The most important treaties and laws will be depicted/ addressed in the following part Comment [A11]: They as an organization, or the guy Jody? LAND MINE DETECTION AND CLEARANCE The assessment of land and its categorization as a suspected or confirmed hazardous area (SHA/CHA) is usually performed in two consecutive steps: non-technical survey and technical survey. Non-technical survey involves the use of a wide range of non-technical means, such as desk assessments and analysis of historical records, to identify, access, collect, report and use information to help define where mines/ERW (Explosive Remnants of War) are to be found, as well as where they are not, and to support land cancellation, reduction and clearance decision making processes. [13] This step is usually relatively cheap in comparison to the other steps involved in land clearance. However, as it can exclude large tracts of land from containing explosive material, its impact is large in terms of square meters. Technical survey is applied to further investigate land categorized as SHA or CHA by the nontechnical survey. A wide range of methods and techniques is applied for technical survey. The technical survey can be a separate activity, it can also be integrated in the clearance procedure. Any technical survey methodology should be planned such that it provides a very high level of confidence that if hazard items are present they will be indicated. The goal of a technical survey is to identify, confirm and improve definitions of the boundaries of hazardous areas and the nature and distribution of their contents [14], i.e. locate land mines such that they can be cleared or, when no evidence of mines is found, continue with land release without the application of land mine clearance. The main method of technical survey is manual detection by the use of metal detectors. Most mines have very high metal content can be easily detected in this way. Land mines with low metal content have been developed but these are rarely used. This method is considered relatively save and precise. When, due to magnetic ground or scrap metal contamination, the use of a metal detector is not efficient, manual area excavation may be performed. This process is really slow. [5] Next to these manual methods, which are slow, expensive and dangerous, dogs are used for technical survey. Dogs can be trained to find land mines using their ability to smell TNT. However, it is generally accepted that dogs cannot reliably pinpoint the source of the explosive in a densely mined area where the scent from more than one source may combine. [5] Next to dogs, rats are trained to detect land mines by the company APOPO. [15] Another method in use to detect land mines is the application of mechanical systems that detect and detonate land mines. These machines are usually armored vehicles driving through a SHA/CHA, triggering the mines. These vehicles can be controlled manually or be under remote control. This method is found to be not accurate enough and is therefore only used in combination with manual detection methods. Next to that, this method is extremely expensive and is not suitable for all terrain types. [16] Other, less widely used methods for technical survey include Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR), Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT), X-ray backscatter techniques, infrared/hyperspectral systems, acoustic/seismic methods, chemical methods to detect land mine compounds, Nuclear Quadrupole Resonance (NQR). Also, bacterial methods based on fluorescence have been developed. These methods are dependent on introducing GMOs into the environment and are therefore met with lots of resistance. [17] Comment [A12]: Current methods for the land mine detection and clearance Once a suspicious object is discovered, the ground around the object is carefully excavated and, if it appears to be a mine, it is either blown up in situ or defused and destroyed at the end of day. [18] HOW DOES OUR PROJECT CONTRIBUTE? ENVISIONED USE OF OUR DEVICE  DRONES!! COMPARISON TO CURRENT METHODS SOURCES [1] "Land Mine." Merriam-Webster. Retrieved on 14 July 2014. http://www.merriamwebster. com/dictionary/land%20mine [2] “Convention on the prohibition of the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of antipersonnel mines and on their destruction” Oslo, 18 September 1997. http://www.icbl.org/media/604037/treatyenglish.pdf [3] Kevin Bonsor. "How Landmines Work" 19 June 2001. HowStuffWorks.com. Retrieved on 14 July 2014. http://science.howstuffworks.com/landmine.htm [4] Jody Williams. “Landmines and measures to eliminate them” 31 Augustus 1995. International Review of the Red Cross, No. 307. Retrieved on 14 July 2014. http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/57jmm9.htm [5] Dieter Guelle, Andy Smith, Adam Lewis, Thomas Bloodworth. “Metal Detector Handbook for Humanitarian Demining” 2003 European Communities. Retrieved on 14 July 2014. http://www.nolandmines.com/MetalDetectorHandbook.pdf [6] “Facts on Landmines” 16 October 2003. Care.org Retrieved on 14 July 2014 http://www.care.org/emergencies/facts-about-landmines [7] “The Problem” 2014. Icbl.org. Retrieved on 14 July 2014 http://icbl.org/en-gb/problem.aspx [8] International Campaign to Ban Landmines – Cluster Munition Coalition. “Landmine Monitor 2013” November 2013 ICBL. Retrieved on 14 July 2014. http://www.themonitor. org/index.php/publications/display?url=lm/2013/ [9] “Landmine & Cluster Munition Monitor” the-monitor.org Retrieved on 14 July 2014 http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php [10]Holly Yan, Kisa Mlela Santiago. “Epic flooding in Balkans raises fears about landmines surfacing” 20 May 2014. CNN Retrieved on 14 July 2014 http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/19/world/europe/balkans-flooding/ [11] “Balkan floods – rebuilding lives one month later” 16 June 2014. British Red Cross. Retrieved on 14 July 2014 http://www.redcross.org.uk/About-us/News/2014/June/Balkan-floodsrebuilding- lives-one-month-later [12] “The Nobel Peace Prize 1997” Oslo, October 10, 1997 The Norwegian Nobel Committee. Retrieved on 14 July 2014 http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1997/press.html [13] United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) “International Mine Action Standards 08.10 Non-technical survey” First Edition 10 June 2009 Amendment 2, March 2013 Retrieved on 15 July 2014 http://www.mineactionstandards.org/fileadmin/MAS/documents/imasinternational- standards/english/series-08/IMAS-08.10-Ed.1-Am2.pdf [14] United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) “International Mine Action Standards 08.20 Technical survey” First Edition 10 June 2009 Amendment 2, March 2013 Retrieved on 15 July 2014 http://www.mineactionstandards.org/fileadmin/MAS/documents/imas-internationalstandards/ english/series-08/IMAS-08.20-Ed.1-Am2.pdf [15] “Mine Action” Apopo.org Retrieved on 15 July 2014 http://www.apopo.org/en/mineaction/ about [16] “A Study of Mechanical Application in Demining” May 2004. Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining. Retrieved on 15 July 2014 http://www.gichd.org/fileadmin/GICHD-resources/recdocuments/ Mechanical_study_complete.pdf [17] Jacqueline MacDonald, J. R. Lockwood “Innovative Mine detection systems” in Alternatives for Landmine Detection. 2003 RAND Retrieved on 15 July 2014 http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1608/MR1608.ch2.pdf [18] “Detection and clearance” 2014. Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining Retrieved on 15 July 2014 http://www.gichd.org/mine-action-topics/land-release/detectionand- clearance/#.U8To7fmSyUZ

The proof of principle for our microbial-based system represents landmines detection. In this section we will provide the main arguments why this application was chosen, by looking at the current problems caused by landmines worldwide. Next, we will provide an overview about the application of ELECTRACE for landmines problem. To conclude this section, various ethical considerations arising by using ELECTRACE as a system to detect landmines will be discussed and considered

Global problem -Landmines

Landmines pollution and unwanted explosions represents a major problem nowadays, when several countries are heavily contaminated. In 1996, more than 15000 people were killed or maimed by landmines each year[1] mostly on the developing countries [2]. A more recent study, from 2012, indicates a total number of 3628 mine/ERW casualties. Although the number decreased over the last six years, this still represents an alarming number of over ten casualties per day. Furthermore, at least 1066 people were killed and 2552 people were injured; for 10 casualties it was not known if they survived the incident. Yet, the real number of casualties is likely to be significantly higher, because in many areas, a lot of casualties go unrecorded [4].

Due to the nature of the modern conflicts, the number of civilian casualties caused by mines has heavily increased. As a comparison, during the World War I, 15 % of all fatalities were civilians, and this number increased to 65% in the World War II, including the Holocaust. Nowadays, more than 78% that are injured in hostilities are civilians [1]. A substantial amount (47%) of the casualties in 2012 were children [4]. Currently, all over the world there are ten countries with very heavy contamination (>100 〖km〗^2), including: Chile, Columbia, Iran, Iraq, Turkey and Thailand [3]. More than 350 models of landmines are currently available, not only to official armies, but to all fighting groups.

This scenario is even more dramatic, given the fact that landmines do not differentiate between the foot of a combatant from that of a playing child. They are “weapon of mass destruction in slow motion” that go beyond any peace agreements. Mines placed during a conflict can still kill or injure civilians decades later. Next to that, after a conflict, areas remain contaminated with explosive remnants of war (ERW). These are explosive weapons that somehow failed to detonate and are left behind. They pose dangers similar to landmines. An example of the impact of old landmines and ERW is Vietnam. Although the Vietnam War is already over for decades, Vietnam is still suffering from the large-scale use of landmines during that conflict. In the period 1999-2012, landmines caused 1683 casualties, of which 630 were killed [4]. Another example of this problem can be found in the Balkans. Serbia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina recently (May 2014) suffered major flooding. Due to landslides caused by this flood, landmines from the Bosnian War (1992-1995) resurfaced and dislodged, putting in danger the people living in the areas as well as rescuers [5][6].

Even the purpose of landmines usage has changed. Sometimes they are laid to deprive a location population access to water sources, wood and fuel. New antipersonnel landmines have been laid in recent years in Yemen (a State Party of the Mine Ban Treaty), apparently by government forces. There are also allegations that State Parties South Sudan, Sudan and Turkey have used antipersonnel mines. From the countries who have not signed the treaty, the governments of Syria and Myanmar have made use of landmines in 2012 and 2013. Mines are also placed by non-state armed groups (rebel armies, terrorists) in Afghanistan, Colombia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, and Yemen. In this case, the used devices are usually not “real” landmines, but victim-activated improvised explosive devices [4]. Within mine affected communities, the highest level of danger is faced by the “base of pyramid” people (people from developing countries, that live with 2$ or less/day). They need to ramble widely in search for fresh water, fuel and wood, increasing the danger of entering unmarked minefields [2].

Although several world-wide organizations are trying to change the perception towards landmines, and to diminish the negative effects caused by it, the problem still persists. The number of un-exploded bombs around the globe is unknown. This leads to an opportunity to find a solution a more efficient manner -ELECTRACE.

*More facts and numbers about the global problem posed by landmines, can be found in the Appendix 1, that is a desk research done by our team.

Using ELECTRACE to detect landmines -ethical considerations

The history of synthetic biology goes back in 1979 when the Nobel Prize winning chemist Har Hobinh synthesized a 207 base-pair DNA sequence. Since then, the field has evolved quickly [7] allowing the development of various applications that can improve the quality of our lives and solve real-world problems, as ELECTRACE. Yet, in order to bring the applications of synthetic biology outside the lab, this umbrella term –synthetic biology needs to be accepted by the mass population. In the following part, the main concerns raised against synthetic biology will be discussed along with our proposed ways to mitigate them, focusing on the biosensors as a way to detect landmines.

Nowadays, the importance of monitoring different parameters in fields such as environment has become of at its utmost importance. Although the technology evolved quickly and various kinds of sensors are commercially available, there is still room for innovative ways to detect -such as the biosensor device –ELECTRACE. Using this biosensor that gives an electrical read-out, several areas can be screen for landmines in more cost-effective, efficient and fast manner. Using this device, synthetic biology can impact people’s lives all over the world, offering a safer environment and serving also to the base of pyramid people, overcoming the social injustice problem. ELECTRACE has a multi-dimensional impact on the world. While, the benefits are easily to identify, our iGEM team, as the product owner and main developer of this device, took in consideration also the possible negative implications posed by using ELECTRACE to detect land mines, even from the developing stages. These issues will be further address.

One main concern that may arise against using this device includes the general arguments against synthetic biology and is related to biohackers. Put differently, is the danger that the tools that are generated in the lab will fall into the wrong hands. In this case, if ELECTRACE is a device that can be bought without any restrictions, bombs can be easily tested by their manufactures. The can work on improving their quality and even making them undetectable. This will generate undesirable outcomes that will make the current methods used for screening landmines less efficient.

To mitigate this, strict practices and policies need to be developed for commercializing ELECTRACE. A first step was done by our iGEM team, by discussing with different stakeholders that are active in combating the negative effects of landmines. Next, the governmental agencies play a pivotal role in designing suitable policies that allow safe and ethic commercialization of ELECTRACE. Our team envision this device, serving as a landmines detection application, to be sold only to anti-mining organizations, and by any means should not be available on any retail store. This will reduce greatly the risks of biohakers. Another concern is related to the safety, more specially the danger that synthetically generated organisms will escape from the lab into the environment and the effect on the earth’s ecosystem [8]. All these concerns can be mitigate by ensuring Safety is an element of pivotal importance, not only during the developing phase, where standard measure and procedures are strictly followed, but also for the end product. A key element to mention here is that all the organisms used for the device does not pose any risks to humans or the environment. The is one of the reasons, why the team decided to realize the device using the well known bacterium E. coli. As an additional safety mechanisms, this bacteria is grown in an LD medium. Once the bacteria is out of our device the survival chances are minimum.

To conclude, our iGEM team aimed to develop a microbial based sensor, capable of detecting landmines in a responsible way. We considered transparency as playing an important role. Thus, from then designing stage, different stakeholders that are currently working in these area were involved. This measure is necessary to ensure that all the implications of developing such a device are taken into account. On the other side, responsible innovation goes beyond focusing on the process, but is also focused on the end-product. With this in mine, using landmines as a proof of principle for ELECTRACE , makes it a device that reflects deep values, including human safety, sustainability, justice and integrity.

References

[1] Gino, S. (1996). The Horror of Landmines. Scientific American

[2] Michael, C., John, G., & John, T. (2007). The Value of Statistical Life and the Economics of Landmine Clearance in Developing Countries. World Development, 512-531

[3] he-monitor. (n.d.). Contamination. Retrieved from the-monitor.org: http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?url=lm/2013/maps/minecontamination.html

[4]International Campaign to Ban Landmines – Cluster Munition Coalition. “Landmine Monitor 2013” November 2013 ICBL. Retrieved on 14 July 2014. http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?url=lm/2013/

[5]Holly Yan, Kisa Mlela Santiago. “Epic flooding in Balkans raises fears about landmines surfacing” 20 May 2014. CNN Retrieved on 14 July 2014 http://edition.cnn.com/2014/05/19/world/europe/balkans-flooding/

[6] “Balkan floods – rebuilding lives one month later” 16 June 2014. British Red Cross. Retrieved on 14 July 2014 http://www.redcross.org.uk/About-us/News/2014/June/Balkan-floods-rebuilding-lives-one-month-later

[7] James, A., Natalja, S., Guy-Bart, S., Thomas, D., Julian, S., & Mauricio, B. (2012). Engineering and ethical perspectives . science & society , 584-590.

[8] Synthetic Biology: playing God or just plain odd? Part 2. (2013, July 26). Retrieved August 10, 2014, from allinthegenes.wordpress.com: http://allinthegenes.wordpress.com/2013/07/26/synthetic-biology-playing-god-or-just-plain-odd-part-2/